Feeding paper Grain Short thru 3880?

[Pic One]

Does anyone have experience feeding grain short paper thru a 3880 printer?   Any issues (increased problems with head strikes, etc..)?  Ie.  considering cutting 24" width rolls to eg. 17x24, but then obviously grain of paper is going the 17" way;   I assume the grain in most cut-sheet papers runs the long dimension?

[BobShaw]

I have never done it but can't anticipate any more problems than with 17" rolls. Just have an additional 50mm or so at the end of each image so that that the image is clear before the end of the paper.

[Pic One]

I have never done it but can't anticipate any more problems than with 17" rolls. Just have an additional 50mm or so at the end of each image so that that the image is clear before the end of the paper.

Well the difference would be that with a 17" roll, and cutting/printing on an eg. 17x25, the grain would be running the 25" length (ie. the same direction the paper feeds thru the printer).  Cutting off a 17" sheet from a 24" wide roll, it feeds the opposite way.  Ie.. the curl runs the opposite way.  I thought this might yield problems.

50mm = almost 2 inches..  I've printed 16x24" images on 17x25 sheets without a problem (ie. 1/2" (or about 13mm) borders).  Not sure I understand your recommendation?

Rethinking, but brings up its own headaches, is using 24" roll, from which I can get (from each 25" length), 1x a 17x25, plus 5x some 5x7 sheets.  This is attractive in its own right, except for the cutting headaches..

[BobShaw]

When feeding any roll paper you need to put your gloved hand on top of it to feed and once it is in it isn't going anywhere. If it is skewed then bad luck.
If the image is anywhere near the back edge you will get ink marks, hence 50mm saves a lot of paper.
I watch the head from the exit shoot to make sure it is sweeping the whole width of the paper.
If the print goes wrong, (which Epson printers often do), then you can see it is wrong quickly, hit the trash can button and re-feed it the other way.

I suppose you must have a stack of 24" paper to want to do this?

[Pic One]

When feeding any roll paper you need to put your gloved hand on top of it to feed and once it is in it isn't going anywhere. If it is skewed then bad luck.
If the image is anywhere near the back edge you will get ink marks, hence 50mm saves a lot of paper.
I watch the head from the exit shoot to make sure it is sweeping the whole width of the paper.
If the print goes wrong, (which Epson printers often do), then you can see it is wrong quickly, hit the trash can button and re-feed it the other way.

I suppose you must have a stack of 24" paper to want to do this?

Ok, thanks.   I've rarely had/seen a skewing issue.   I suppose there's some risk cutting it close (pun intended), but then there'd be all sorts of sizes that I've printed in the past that wouldn't work any more:  eg. 12x18 on 13x19 sheets, 16x20 and 15x21s on 17x22 sheets, 4.5x6.5 on 5x7 sheets, etc.

FYI, I don't have a preexisting stack of paper.   I'm considering purchase of 24" rolls, as it seems somewhat more cost efficient than purchasing 17" rolls.   I intend to most often print 5:7 ratio which for 3880 would (max size to keep a workable border for matting) be a 16" x 22.4" print on 17 x 24 sheets (cut from the rolls).

[Alan Goldhammer]

I don't think this would be an issue.  Head strikes which could be problematic come from paper curl.  You can solve this by rolling the paper on a mailing tube to relax it.  I routinely cut 17x25 from a role of Museo Silver Rag.  This is a cotton fiber paper and quite stiff to begin with.  After sitting on a 4 inch mailing tube for an hour or so it's flat enough to print and I've not seen any head strikes.  I use a rotatrim cutter which gives me a good level edge so there are no paper skew issues.

[BobShaw]

 I'm considering purchase of 24" rolls, as it seems somewhat more cost efficient than purchasing 17" rolls. 

Only if you value your time at zero dollars. You have to cut it twice.
Besides, if you want to make a print longer than 24" then you are going to waste 7" for the length of the print.
Printing roll paper on a sheet feed printer is not easy, using paper that isn't even the right size will make it harder.

[Pic One]

Only if you value your time at zero dollars. You have to cut it twice.
Besides, if you want to make a print longer than 24" then you are going to waste 7" for the length of the print.
Printing roll paper on a sheet feed printer is not easy, using paper that isn't even the right size will make it harder.

Why is trimming 17x24 sheets off of a 24" roll going to need two cuts?
And if I do go longer, I end up with a strip of 7" paper..  As I mentioned previously, I can use these for album and postcard purposes cutting them to 7x5 sheets.

What do you mean about using paper that "isn't even the right size".   What's a right vs. wrong size for a sheet printer?