An Alternative to Matte Photo paper
Ricky, Newton & Winston
I haven't been able to find matte photo paper for my photo printer,
however, I came up with what is turning out to be a great alternative.
I purchased a pad of 80 pound watercolor paper (it cost me about $10
for 15 sheets). I cut it down to standard paper size and printed out
one of my photos using the plain paper setting on the HP Photosmart.
The result was great!! They dry instantly, and because the paper is
made for a "wet" medium, the colors don't bleed and the detail is just
fine.
Ricky
--
To send either Ricky, Newton (purr!), or Winston (meow!) e-mail, just
write to
mailto:ri...@home.com
Newton's Alley -- http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/2860
Tracey
ye gads..... something else i want now......
STOP giving me ideas......
OTOH, i got my hand painting "paints" out last night - after 10 years they
haven't dried up!!!!!!
i'd like to print on water color paper in B&W and then hand color.....
wow... cool....
Tracey
Dick Barker
Ricky, Newton & Winston <ri...@home.com> wrote:
> I haven't been able to find matte photo paper for my photo printer,
> however, I came up with what is turning out to be a great alternative.
> I purchased a pad of 80 pound watercolor paper (it cost me about $10
> for 15 sheets). I cut it down to standard paper size and printed out
> one of my photos using the plain paper setting on the HP Photosmart.
> The result was great!! They dry instantly, and because the paper is
> made for a "wet" medium, the colors don't bleed and the detail is just
> fine.
>
> Ricky
I use 65 pound white Howard Felt Cover stock. I paid $14 for 250
sheets of 11 x 17 at a local print paper surplus broker. It looks
and acts just like the 80 pound watercolor stuff and prints great
on my hp855c.
For heavy gloss I use .012 King James Cover Gloss at 250 sheets
for $16. It blocks up a bit on the shadows so you have to fuss
with the image a bit prior to printing. Works great with text for
indoor signs, etc.
I still find the Hammermill Jet Print Ultra Gloss the best gloss
for photos on the hp855c. Wish it was a bit more reasonable price.
--
Dick Barker di...@eskimo.com http://www.eskimo.com/~dickb/
Do you qualify to join OFDA? http://www.eskimo.com/~dickb/ofda.html
San Juan Isl Dive Charter? http://www.eskimo.com/~dickb/starfire.html
Tracey
>>On that thought .... I did a little water test using the watercolor
paper with a photograph printed with my HP Photosmart printer.
Interesting, even though I got the paper rather wet, there was very
little bleeding of the ink .... very very little.
thanks..... glad it will work.
I know i can tint them in PShop, but i'm not sure they will render the same
look as doing them by hand.... at least in PShop it's easy to fis your
mistakes - cheaper too.
HEY, did the image print all the way into the paper or float on top of the
texture???
i can see this image in my head... it wants out... gotta get the
printer!!!!!! (dad, are you listening???? kidding, he doesn't read
newsgroups!)
Tracey
Ricky, Newton & Winston
Tracey wrote:
>
> HEY, did the image print all the way into the paper or float on top of the
> texture???
Good question, and eventually I'm going to have a dud print that I can
rip up to see .... I myself can't tell just by looking at the print.
>
> i can see this image in my head... it wants out... gotta get the
> printer!!!!!! (dad, are you listening???? kidding, he doesn't read
> newsgroups!)
The printer is only about $500 ... so maybe you can talk him into it for
Christmas??
Ricky, Newton & Winston
Leon G. Wigrizer wrote:
>
> I followed this lead and went out and was only able to get 90 lb watercolor
> SMOOTH paper. 20 x 30 something sheet cost $3.24. I cut it down to 6 sheets
> and printed photos today on my Epson Stylus 600. The results were perfect.
> I used the plain paper setting at 720 dpi. I am certain if I look I can
> find it for less.
>
> How big were the pages in your pad, Ricky?
The pad I am using is 9x12 ... so it only requires a little trimming. I
also purchased a pad of 6x4 to print mini-watercolors. I had hoped it
might work in the small sheet mode of the HP, but, alas, when you use a
plain paper setting you are stuck with 8.5x11. So .... I took some of
my text drafts that were destined for the trash bin and taped (using
thin masking tape) a 6x4 piece smack in the middle of one of them. It
printed with no problem.
Ricky, Newton & Winston
Ron Yost wrote:
>
> Did you find, Leon, with the increased absorbency of the watercolor paper your
> colors were deeper .. more saturated (pardon the pun :). More intense, IOW,
> compared with Photo Paper.?? Or, does the Epson produce the opposite effect? I
> believe the Epson has a much more versatile 'control panel' for adjusting colors
> and such (doesn't it?).
>
> I expected the PSmart to print sort of washed-out on the watercolor paper (in
> the plain paper setting) .. but it doesn't. In fact, I'm thinking I should
> probably de-saturate some of the stuff I'm printing. 'Course, it all depends on
> one's taste and what you're after.
>
> Actually, the cheap paper I used is *barely* what I'd call 'textured' .. it's
> just ever so slightly 'rough' .. not at all like a quality watercolor paper.
> But, everyone prob. knows what the Academie papers are like.
>
> Fun, fun, fun ! :)
Since I was going for a true watercolor look, the intense colors work
out nice for me. But, you are right .... it certainly comes out
saturated. I'm doing a series of my favorite houses here in town, and
the lawns are coming out the prettiest shade of green you ever saw.
Ricky, Newton & Winston
Ricky, Newton & Winston wrote:
>
> Leon G. Wigrizer wrote:
> >
> > I followed this lead and went out and was only able to get 90 lb watercolor
> > SMOOTH paper. 20 x 30 something sheet cost $3.24. I cut it down to 6 sheets
> > and printed photos today on my Epson Stylus 600. The results were perfect.
> > I used the plain paper setting at 720 dpi. I am certain if I look I can
> > find it for less.
> >
> > How big were the pages in your pad, Ricky?
>
> The pad I am using is 9x12 ... so it only requires a little trimming. I
> also purchased a pad of 6x4 to print mini-watercolors. I had hoped it
> might work in the small sheet mode of the HP, but, alas, when you use a
> plain paper setting you are stuck with 8.5x11. So .... I took some of
> my text drafts that were destined for the trash bin and taped (using
> thin masking tape) a 6x4 piece smack in the middle of one of them. It
> printed with no problem.
>
> Ricky
>
Oh, and yet more fun and games .... I wanted to see how the texture
would translate back in the computer. I don't have a flat bed scanner
yet, so I popped that 4x6 watercolor print right into the Photosmart
scanner and it came out quite nicely.
I've posted it, for anyone who is interested, at
http://www.geocities.com/soho/1750/test.htm
Keep in mind that I started with a Kodak DC120 digital photograph and
came up with this "watercolor" after precious little manipulation.
(Even if I count the time it took me to take the photo, download it, cut
the paper to size, print it and scan it back into the computer -- the
process was under an hour.)
Ricky, Newton & Winston
Leon G. Wigrizer wrote:
>
> Ron,
> I did find that the colors were deeper and very good. In my eye equal to
> the good Kodak Glossy Double Weight paper that I like. I figured out that
> the paper cost exactluy the same as the good Kodak, ut gives a very fine
> finished look. I will still use the Kodak, but will certainly use this for
> many photos. I may try printing with the 1440 dpi setting the next time to
> see what that does. I only used the 720 dpi this time. I will be on the
> look out for less expensive paper that I do not have to chop up so much.
>
> This turned out to be a very informative thread.
>
> Has anyone had the nerve to use a textured paper yet?
Well, yes, that's how I started the whole thing .... the paper I used
(Canson 80 lb watercolor paper) is highly textured. It came out just
fine on textured paper. I had no idea that using textured paper would
take any amount of nerve, or perhaps I would have thought twice. :)
As noted somewhere else in this thread, I also scanned back a 4x6
"watercolor" I created on my HP using my Photosmart scanner. The
watercolor paper was fairly stiff, so it ran through the scanner
nicely.
I've posted the results of that scan, and you can see how it came out.
Although, for the record, the 4x6 paper I found is Canson 140 lb
watercolor paper and is somewhat less textured than the 80 lb stuff I
started with.
Ricky
>
> Leon
>
> Ron Yost <mu...@tcsn.REMOVEnet> wrote in article
> <33f4eea...@news.supernews.com>...
> > On 15 Aug 1997 20:00:14 GMT, "Leon G. Wigrizer" <leo...@erols.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > >I followed this lead and went out and was only able to get 90 lb
> watercolor
> > >SMOOTH paper. 20 x 30 something sheet cost $3.24. I cut it down to 6
> sheets
> > >and printed photos today on my Epson Stylus 600. The results were
> perfect.
> > >I used the plain paper setting at 720 dpi. I am certain if I look I can
> > >find it for less.
> > >
> > >How big were the pages in your pad, Ricky?
> > >Leon
> >
> > Great, Leon! Gee .. we've got a nice thread going here .. but we're
> driving
> > Tracey NutSo! Sorry, t .
> >
> > Did you find, Leon, with the increased absorbency of the watercolor paper
> your
> > colors were deeper .. more saturated (pardon the pun :). More intense,
> IOW,
> > compared with Photo Paper.?? Or, does the Epson produce the opposite
> effect? I
> > believe the Epson has a much more versatile 'control panel' for adjusting
> colors
> > and such (doesn't it?).
> >
> > I expected the PSmart to print sort of washed-out on the watercolor paper
> (in
> > the plain paper setting) .. but it doesn't. In fact, I'm thinking I
> should
> > probably de-saturate some of the stuff I'm printing. 'Course, it all
> depends on
> > one's taste and what you're after.
> >
> > Actually, the cheap paper I used is *barely* what I'd call 'textured' ..
> it's
> > just ever so slightly 'rough' .. not at all like a quality watercolor
> paper.
> > But, everyone prob. knows what the Academie papers are like.
> >
> > Fun, fun, fun ! :)
> >
> >
> > Ron Yost
> > Please remove REMOVE from address to reply. Thanks!
Ricky, Newton & Winston
Ron Yost wrote:
>
> On Thu, 14 Aug 1997 16:52:56 -0700, "Ricky, Newton & Winston" <ri...@home.com>
> wrote:
>
> Hey, Great!! Could you please tell us the *exact* product name?? Also, is it a
> textured watercolor paper?? I've been dying to try textured art paper, but am
> afraid I'll ruin the carts with the textured surface of the paper. Or jam
> something up. Meheapbigchicken :)
>
> Anyone else having good results from other art papers?
The paper I am using is Canson Student Light Weight Acid Free 80 lb
paper and it is indeed textured.
I have printed out about 30 pages at this point with no jams or other
problems. In fact, the results have been so good that I've started
doing a few other experiments and have actually produced some good
"watercolors" based on some of my digital photos and scans. Good
enough, anyway, to fool some true watercolor artists in to thinking I
painted them (yes ... I fessed up later).
Ricky
Ricky, Newton & Winston
On that thought .... I did a little water test using the watercolor
paper with a photograph printed with my HP Photosmart printer.
Interesting, even though I got the paper rather wet, there was very
little bleeding of the ink .... very very little.
This makes me think that even with an ink jet printer, hand coloring a
black and white print might look really good.
For myself, I've been able to use pattern-fill and gradient techniques
to get a hand colored feel to some of my black and white images, and
they have printed out quite nicely on art paper.
Most of my money seems to be going towards mats and frames for all the
goodies I'm printing out these days.
Leon G. Wigrizer
I followed this lead and went out and was only able to get 90 lb watercolor
SMOOTH paper. 20 x 30 something sheet cost $3.24. I cut it down to 6 sheets
and printed photos today on my Epson Stylus 600. The results were perfect.
I used the plain paper setting at 720 dpi. I am certain if I look I can
find it for less.
How big were the pages in your pad, Ricky?
Leon
Ron Yost <mu...@tcsn.REMOVEnet> wrote in article
<33f3d5eb...@news.supernews.com>...
> On Thu, 14 Aug 1997 16:52:56 -0700, "Ricky, Newton & Winston"
<ri...@home.com>
> wrote:
>
> Hey, Great!! Could you please tell us the *exact* product name?? Also,
is it a
> textured watercolor paper?? I've been dying to try textured art paper,
but am
> afraid I'll ruin the carts with the textured surface of the paper. Or
jam
> something up. Meheapbigchicken :)
>
> Anyone else having good results from other art papers?
>
> Thanks for the info!!
>
>
> >I haven't been able to find matte photo paper for my photo printer,
> >however, I came up with what is turning out to be a great alternative.
> >I purchased a pad of 80 pound watercolor paper (it cost me about $10
> >for 15 sheets). I cut it down to standard paper size and printed out
> >one of my photos using the plain paper setting on the HP Photosmart.
> >The result was great!! They dry instantly, and because the paper is
> >made for a "wet" medium, the colors don't bleed and the detail is just
> >fine.
> >
> >Ricky
> >
> >--
> >To send either Ricky, Newton (purr!), or Winston (meow!) e-mail, just
> >write to
> >mailto:ri...@home.com
> >
> >Newton's Alley -- http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/2860
> >
>
>
Leon G. Wigrizer
Ron,
I did find that the colors were deeper and very good. In my eye equal to
the good Kodak Glossy Double Weight paper that I like. I figured out that
the paper cost exactluy the same as the good Kodak, ut gives a very fine
finished look. I will still use the Kodak, but will certainly use this for
many photos. I may try printing with the 1440 dpi setting the next time to
see what that does. I only used the 720 dpi this time. I will be on the
look out for less expensive paper that I do not have to chop up so much.
This turned out to be a very informative thread.
Has anyone had the nerve to use a textured paper yet?
Leon
Ron Yost <mu...@tcsn.REMOVEnet> wrote in article
<33f4eea...@news.supernews.com>...
> On 15 Aug 1997 20:00:14 GMT, "Leon G. Wigrizer" <leo...@erols.com>
wrote:
>
> >I followed this lead and went out and was only able to get 90 lb
watercolor
> >SMOOTH paper. 20 x 30 something sheet cost $3.24. I cut it down to 6
sheets
> >and printed photos today on my Epson Stylus 600. The results were
perfect.
> >I used the plain paper setting at 720 dpi. I am certain if I look I can
> >find it for less.
> >
> >How big were the pages in your pad, Ricky?
> >Leon
>
Edward Lakin
>The paper I am using is Canson Student Light Weight Acid Free 80 lb
>paper and it is indeed textured.
>
I have had great luck using high quality tracing vellum as a medium
for inkjet printing. Holds up to extremely wet ink laydown.
EL
Ricky, Newton & Winston
Ron Yost wrote:
>
> On Fri, 15 Aug 1997 17:41:32 -0700, "Ricky, Newton & Winston" <ri...@home.com>
> wrote:
>
> Very nice, Ricky! Thank You for posting it to the web. The various subtle hues
> sure blend together nicely (I, too, LOVE watercolors) .. I've not gotten such
> nice, soft tonal gradations yet from the PSmart printer. (Entirely the result
> of the images I've been printing .. not the printer's fault.)
>
> What I can't figure out is .. how did you achieve the watercolor look? Was this
> a 'sharp' digital camera image which then 'bled' when printed on the watercolor
> paper? .. or was the watercolor effect the result of a filter in an imaging
> program (Photoshop or)? To me, it looks too subtle (natural) for a filter
> effect, but I'm certainly not a PShop expert.
>
> Excuse me if this should be obvious, but I'm a tad confused. The cheap
> watercolor paper I mentioned does not bleed at all like this .. it prints fairly
> sharply, in fact. Gee .. wish I had an art store handy . Gotta try the paper
> you're using!!!
I did, indeed use a filter. It's not the paper ... which prints out
nice and sharp when the image is nice and sharp. Somewhere down the
line, I picked up a copy of MGI Photosuite. It's not the best imaging
softwear around, but it does have some nifty special effects filters.
One of them ... "oil" ... creates a great watercolor bleed in one simple
step. If you want instant watercolors from your digital photos, it is
the way to go.
Tracey
>>Neat idea! [You aren't thinking of who I think you're thinking of, are
you
<g>??]
Naw... she's to cute to NOT print in color <G> The "problem" i have with
hand coloring a pic that started out as color is that i know what it's
"supposed" to be - that always wacked my color stuff up - i wasn't "free"
enough......
I think i'm much better at taking pics now that i ever was in class - even
with a point and shoot - it's that maturity thing i suppose.
Actually, i'd like to do a "charcoal look" i think.... i see a piece of
paper with emulsion painted on in diagnol stripes - brush strokes showing
on the edges. Then printing the "photo" floating on top of the texture of
the paper... Don't know what it's called. Someday i'll install PShop here
at work and mess with it.
I don't know what i'm doing...... beside overloaded at work!
T
Tracey
Ricky -
>>The printer is only about $500 ... so maybe you can talk him into it for
Christmas??
I'm trying to get him to buy it for work (family business). He's way
impressed with the output though...... It's what he wants from the Stylus
Pro he bought last year sometime.
OTOH, he could have bought it for work and be keeping it at home (works
works a lot from home)... guess i have to take the grandbaby by to see
granpa....... <G>
My birthday is before christmas.... i'll keep that in mind!
Tracey