Most Versatile Roll Paper Size

[BigBadWolfie]

What's the most versatile roll paper size for cutting into different print sizes? 13x19 is probably the biggest I'll ever print but main prints will likely be 8.5x11 with perhaps some 4x6 or 5x7 prints.

[Ernst Dinkla]

64" wide rolls like possible on the Epson 11880


--
Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst

340+ paper white spectral plots:
http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
update april 2012: Harman by Hahnemühle, Innova IFA45 and more

[BigBadWolfie]

Hmm... I've been looking at Hahnemuhle and Ilford products and I don't think they come in 64" rolls.

[Jim Pascoe]

Perhaps you could clarify your question.  Do you mean that you will be buying rolls to cut into sheets and print on, or that you will print on the roll and then cut?

Jim

[BigBadWolfie]

I plan to buy rolls to cut into sheets to print on. I actually haven't done the math but I was told that buying rolls is cheaper than buying cut sheets?

[Farmer]

It is cheaper per area, but that doesn't take into account labour to cut or the equipment to do it, or the handling difficulties that can arise from needing to flatten the paper and so on.

For the small amount that you save, if that's your margin, then you probably need to consider other aspects of your costs and pricing.

[Jim Pascoe]

Yes - I did once do the exercise and certainly here in the UK with one of the major paper suppliers it did not seem to really make any difference cost wise really - which did surprise me.  I use 24" rolls but on a 24" printer.  Not sure what printer you use but having a larger one works out much cheaper with ink cartridges than the A3 printers.  One other factor if you are going to cut up rolls is not to forget the curl in the paper.  It can get quite severe towards the end of the roll.  And one last point, I can quite readily handle the 24" wide paper for cutting after I have printed on it.  Most of my prints are 6x4 - 12x8 inches and I usually end up with sheets between 16 and 24 inches long.  However to cut up bigger sheets would need a much larger cutter and the risk of kinking the paper would be that much higher.

Jim

[Ernst Dinkla]

Hmm... I've been looking at Hahnemuhle and Ilford products and I don't think they come in 64" rolls.

Then 60".   If I read "versatile" I actually stop reading and switch to the easy answer. Whatever sizes needed the largest roll size will ultimately deliver the best base for different sizes, the ones you specified here and the ones you may want next month. Efficiency/Economy was not mentioned in your request. For loading A3+ and A4+ printers I calculated some time ago that 70x100 or 72x102 cm sheet sizes were very versatile, all sizes fitting and nice panorama sizes possible too. Your sizes will fit too. And not a bad size for my 44" printers for duplex prints. Pity that most inkjet paper qualities do not go beyond A2, with offset papers 70x100 is quite common. And I have a ream cutter that is 105 cm wide :-)

--
Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst

340+ paper white spectral plots:
http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
update april 2012: Harman by Hahnemühle, Innova IFA45 and more

[neile]

None of them, because the minute you buy the "most versatile roll", someone will order a print from you in a size that will result in wasted paper off the roll. 

Plus trimming paper sucks. I save the rolls for big prints, and use cut sheets for everything else. Up to 17x22", if I can print it on cut sheet, I will.

Neil

[Jim Pascoe]

Plus trimming paper sucks. I save the rolls for big prints, and use cut sheets for everything else. Up to 17x22", if I can print it on cut sheet, I will.

Neil

Except if like me you may have to print 60 7x5 prints and 50 6x4 prints it is much easier to print them on a roll and trim them afterwards.  For single or a couple of prints I agree with you.

Jim

[neile]

I once did a job for a buch of 5x7s. Man that was a lot of trimming. Trimming sucks!

Neil

[BigBadWolfie]

I'm not a professional and I don't see myself selling prints any time soon. It's just for prints I plan to frame and put around the house. So I forsee very few 4x6 or 5x7 prints since I plan to use cheaper cut sheets to print those out if they're just going in an album or given to family and friends.

So are you guys saying that buying rolls instead of cut sheets really won't save me much in terms of money? I guess I should decide on print size and buy my papers accordingly then. I just thought that roll sheets would be cheaper and since I can trim the paper it would also be a more versatile option.

[Jim Pascoe]

You can easily work out the economics and cost per square foot or whatever - but it will be in the handling, cutting and curling issues that will probably decide you.  Buy a roll and try it!

Jim

[howardm]

besides handling, waste, decurling and trimming, realize that many (most?) of the nicer papers dont come in 13" rolls minimum; they come in 17" rolls.  So, if 13x19 is your target, then you immediately get to throw away 4" (although that would yield perfect test prints in 4x6.

work out the price per sq. ft and then factor in the other costs/waste.  Also, it's quite likely you're not going to get a nice enough printer that has vacuum hold down so curling and edge curl could cause more waste.

And then there are some paper brands/lines that are more consistently priced than others.

if my calculation is correct, then Canson Baryta in 13x19 is 0.010688 dollars per sq. in but 0.010784 in 17"x50'

You may find it cheaper to buy 17x22 and cut that to sizes like 13x19, 11x17 or 8.5x11 which can also yield a bunch of smaller 4x6 test prints.  That at least bypasses the curling issues.


What's your time worth?