Print Paper gloss conundrum
Jul 6, 2014 00:53:26 #
I have a new mystery that comes from my new printer. I've finally retired my Canon i9900 printer of ten years, and replaced it with a new Canon Pixma Pro 9500 Mark II. The prints from it are more than impressive, especially the black & white. But that's not my conundrum.
From my past Canon i9900 all prints on my Ilford Galerie Gloss paper were very very glossy. I liked that, as well as those who received those prints. Using the same paper, prints have beautiful detail, but the finish is very flat.
Just as an FYI, I've used my Color Data system and created new profiles for the 9500. Perhaps trivia, when I send the same image to my second printer, an HP 8750 printer, using the same Ilford Galerie Gloss paper, the prints come out very very glossy (shinny).
Any ideas as to why the same gloss print paper out of the new Pixma printer is mostly flat and lacking the high glossy shine?
Let me give you my advance Thank You.
From my past Canon i9900 all prints on my Ilford Galerie Gloss paper were very very glossy. I liked that, as well as those who received those prints. Using the same paper, prints have beautiful detail, but the finish is very flat.
Just as an FYI, I've used my Color Data system and created new profiles for the 9500. Perhaps trivia, when I send the same image to my second printer, an HP 8750 printer, using the same Ilford Galerie Gloss paper, the prints come out very very glossy (shinny).
Any ideas as to why the same gloss print paper out of the new Pixma printer is mostly flat and lacking the high glossy shine?
Let me give you my advance Thank You.
Jul 6, 2014 01:14:09 #
Your new printer may be a pigment ink printer and if so your prints will have a difrent finish than a dye ink print.
Dan
Dan
Jul 6, 2014 01:21:08 #
Elliot, your new printer is pigment, it lays the pigment on top of the paper, as it's got more solids.
I believe your 9900 was a dye printer, where the ink goes into the paper and you should see more of the paper surface.
Also most using dye are using more semis and mat papers, leaning to art papers since pigment is archival.
My 9000ll seems to do gloss petter than my ipf5000, but thats where it stops. The pigment is hands down better everywhere else.
Good luck, that 9500 is a great printer!! ;-)
SS
I believe your 9900 was a dye printer, where the ink goes into the paper and you should see more of the paper surface.
Also most using dye are using more semis and mat papers, leaning to art papers since pigment is archival.
My 9000ll seems to do gloss petter than my ipf5000, but thats where it stops. The pigment is hands down better everywhere else.
Good luck, that 9500 is a great printer!! ;-)
SS
Jul 6, 2014 03:02:19 #
SharpShooter wrote:
...My 9000ll seems to do gloss petter than my ipf5000, but thats where it stops. The pigment is hands down better everywhere else.
Good luck, that 9500 is a great printer!! ;-)
SS
Good luck, that 9500 is a great printer!! ;-)
SS
my printer is a cheap MG5420.
Is it pigment or dye>
Jul 6, 2014 03:16:35 #
oldtigger wrote:
my printer is a cheap MG5420.
Is it pigment or dye>
Is it pigment or dye>
Old, I don't know your printer, but don't bet money that it's not dye.
Just saying! ;-)
SS
Jul 6, 2014 04:11:51 #
You may not have done the appropriate paper profile to match the printer profile for the type of paper used. Both the printer and the paper work together for a print.
Jul 6, 2014 14:26:42 #
Yes, the 9500 Mark II is, in fact, a pigment ink printer. My i9900 was dye ink. And my new profile of the Ilford paper gave me a print that exactly matched my iMac screen. As a second test, I used the complementary Pro Platinum paper from Canon, and I used their profile made exactly for the Pro Platinum paper. Both prints came out exactly. They both matched exactly with my iMac screen, and both lacked the high sheen from my dye ink Canon i9900 printer.
SS, it makes sense to me now that the pigment ink, when sitting on top of the paper, would not give as much of a shine as when a dye ink saturated into the paper, leaving the high shine. Thanks for your analysis.
SS, it makes sense to me now that the pigment ink, when sitting on top of the paper, would not give as much of a shine as when a dye ink saturated into the paper, leaving the high shine. Thanks for your analysis.
Jul 6, 2014 15:46:59 #
elliott937 wrote:
Yes, the 9500 Mark II is, in fact, a pigment ink p... (show quote)
You're welcome.
I think it looks like you've got it together for printing. You seem well calibrated!! :thumbup:
Way more than me!! ;-)
Have you tried a piece of Red River metallic in both printers to see which looks better? I have not.
But keep in mind, that if your goal is to sell prints, that the pigment is archival. Not that dye is not long lasting, but archival is the big Buzzword!
SS
Jul 6, 2014 17:09:59 #
If you were one who saw my website, you might think I do a lot of 'business', when actually I don't. My main compassion during the academic year is teaching physics. But I do enjoy the occasional speciality type of photography request, mostly restoration of prints and some custom work.
Something weird happened, perhaps you all have a thought. The print profile I made for the new Pixma printer turned out super well, as I mentioned. However, for reason that totally escape me, the icc profile I made for the HP 8750 printer came out very disappointing. It is way too dark, too brown. If I use one of HP's profiles on my Ilford paper, it turns out quite well. But the custom made printer profile turned out bad. I made the one for the HP the same afternoon I made the one for the new Pixma printer, and I opted for the four-page of target colors so that black-and-white would be included. This is a total mystery for me.
BTW, the black-and-white, with my custom icc profile for the Pixma printer, is the first time I've been happy with black-and-white prints.
Something weird happened, perhaps you all have a thought. The print profile I made for the new Pixma printer turned out super well, as I mentioned. However, for reason that totally escape me, the icc profile I made for the HP 8750 printer came out very disappointing. It is way too dark, too brown. If I use one of HP's profiles on my Ilford paper, it turns out quite well. But the custom made printer profile turned out bad. I made the one for the HP the same afternoon I made the one for the new Pixma printer, and I opted for the four-page of target colors so that black-and-white would be included. This is a total mystery for me.
BTW, the black-and-white, with my custom icc profile for the Pixma printer, is the first time I've been happy with black-and-white prints.
Jul 7, 2014 07:10:48 #
Jul 7, 2014 09:20:56 #
Jul 7, 2014 17:19:59 #
RON 11
Loc: Pittsburgh
I use Ilford Gold Fiber Silk when printing on my 9500. Very much like the results. It may also be necessary to show your print under museum grade glass to get more sheen to the finished product. I myself, use conservation glass as I do not favor a high sheen.
Jul 7, 2014 21:38:14 #
Hey, Dandij - Nothing about printers, but I love your Airedale. Looks just like mine. World's best dogs!
Jul 8, 2014 07:48:42 #
elliott937 wrote:
I have a new mystery that comes from my new printe... (show quote)
I also have the Mark II. I use canon paper. Happy with prints :thumbup:
Jul 8, 2014 15:22:16 #
Warrior, Don't get me wrong, I love my new Mark II printer. In fact, for the first time I'm thinking about exploring my black-and-white side as a photographer. Why? The B&W prints from the Mark II are awesome.
There are several groups that I make prints for, all complementary. They tell me they have enjoyed the "glossy" prints that really shine. That won't be happening any more. And it's not an Ilford Galerie concept. With the printer was included a 20-pack of Canon Pro Platinum paper. From the Mark II, both the Ilford and Pro Platinum prints were without the high gloss shine. I wish it were not that way. I'm fine with it for I mount all of my prints behind glass. But those to whom I give prints will be a little disappointed.
I know, how can they be disappointed when the prints will be free to them. I just wish the gloss prints were also shiny too.
There are several groups that I make prints for, all complementary. They tell me they have enjoyed the "glossy" prints that really shine. That won't be happening any more. And it's not an Ilford Galerie concept. With the printer was included a 20-pack of Canon Pro Platinum paper. From the Mark II, both the Ilford and Pro Platinum prints were without the high gloss shine. I wish it were not that way. I'm fine with it for I mount all of my prints behind glass. But those to whom I give prints will be a little disappointed.
I know, how can they be disappointed when the prints will be free to them. I just wish the gloss prints were also shiny too.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.