On Behalf Of John Begg <snip> > On another note, I much preferred the > appearance of the prints on Canon's glossy paper compared to > my regular Epson Glossy Paper Photo Weight. The Canon paper > has a high gloss, almost like a laminate, and the image looks > the same as a traditional R-type print. I am happy with my > Epson prints, it is only when compared side by side that you > can appreciate an immediate difference. The Canon prints are > sharper and punchier. This was confirmed by looking at the > prints with a loupe. The Epson appeared dithered. Colours > were good on both papers, mine displaying a 2&1/2 magenta > cast. NB Shadow detail is better on the Canon paper. The > Epson prints change colour in the shadow areas when you look > at them from a slightly different angle. (List, is this what > is known as bronzing?
Hi John, You are kind-of comparing apples and oranges here. The dye ink in the Canon (and the super-high gloss paper) will help produce bright vivid colours. The Epson's pigment inks (whilst pretty good for a pigment ink) will not produce such bright colours, and the dot-gain of each ink droplet is reduced with pigments such that 'graininess' will be more apparent - particularly in highlight / low-inking areas of a print. My own understanding of this is that the difference in the way pigment and dye ink prints is rather similar to the results of film vs. transparency: With pigment prints, the light is reflected off the pigment _or- the paper. With Dye prints, the light goes into the paper, is filtered by the dyes, and then reflected off the paper base before being reflected back to your eye, possibly being filtered again on the way. I believe what you are seeing in the shadow area of 2100 prints is bronzing, although the inks do suffer a little from metamerism. Best Regards, Nij =============================================================== GO TO http://www.prodig.org for ~ GUIDELINES ~ un/SUBSCRIBING ~ ITEMS for SALE
