♥♥Gone to pastures new. Thanks to all of you. You are a lovely crowd, but time does not ...
♥♥Gone to pastures new. Thanks to all of you. You are a lovely crowd, but time does not permit me to do the site justice any more♥♥
Member since:01.08.2003
Reviews:633
Members who trust:492
THIS REVIEW IS BEING MOVED BY CIAO.
When I decided to write this review, I had to ask myself whether paper merited 120 words or half an hour of my time, and whether I could actually say anything that had not been said that was worth saying about it.
WELL I HAVE NEWS FOR YOU
Since buying my HP photosmart printer, there is a slot for A3 paper as well as the standard A4. I had been accustomed to printing photographs and cutting them down to size, and I decided that as this feature was part of my new machine, I should use it, instead of ending up with photographs that looked amateur and not too square.
The paper was on special offer, and I took advantage of this, and yes it works out pretty expensive in the order of things, and certainly more expensive than cardboard which prints nice matt photos, so when parting with my Nine Pounds, for a pack of 25 sheets,
I thought that bearing in mind also the price of ink, my use of the paper would be for special projects only that needed good presentation.
STORING THE PAPER
I used to have a darkroom in the dark ages, and knew that photographic paper should be stored in a cool place. My choice was a cupboard that is reasonably cool, although darkness is not really an issue, since the paper comes in a packet, and as long as the packet is closed after use, the paper stores fine.
THE TEST.
I have tried many papers, from Epsom to cheapy papers, and have never really been impressed with the finish. All of the papers that I have tried have been of similar weight to this one, i.e. 270 gram, because anything flimsier that this really isn't worth spending my money on. You remember cheap christmas cards that bend and look tatty ? well cheap photos have a similar cheapskate look, whilst the weight of this paper is acceptable.
Against the Epsom paper, the Kodak came out quite well. Colourwise, the colour was truer than with the Epsom, and when I tried really cheap paper, I found that I had to physically adjust the colour of the photo to achieve similar results, i.e. using more and more pieces in order to achieve a decent print.
Kodak came up trumps every time and there was no wastage.
FINISH
The finish on this paper is rather impressive. I chose the Satin finish as I hate glossy finishes. This paper has a professional look to it and can make superb photographs that can be put in frames and not reflect light like gloss does.
LASTING QUALITIES
I found also that the colour on the Kodak paper stayed true after a period of six months and still shows no signs of fading. My mother in law tells me also that her photographs have pride of place and show no signs of fade. This may be due to the quality of inks used as well as the quality of paper, but it is comforting to know that quality prints can be achieved with this paper.
ADVANTAGE OVER GETTING PRINTS IN A SHOP
People have seen machines that print from memory cards, but the editing functions on these machines are very limited. I find that having the software in order to edit my photographs on my screen are important to me, and my purchase of this paper is one that I shall not regret, whereas the Epsom disappointed me in that the colours were not true.
RELIABILITY
I have been using the same product ever since I checked it out against others, and I get good consistent results and absolutely no wastage whatsoever, having edited my photos on my computer first, and having been satisfied with the print being the same as that shown on the screen. This paper is simple to use, and gives flawless results, colour that lasts, and a definate quality that has been missing from my prints ever since the birth of the age of digital photographs.
VALUE FOR MONEY
Yes. I believe that this product is good value for money. The maker is reputed, and has worked with digital photography products for long enough to produce consistent quality products.
The glossy paper also gives consistent results, though it is only my personal preference that keeps me buying this paper as opposed to the glossy one.
WOULD I RECOMMEND IT ?
A resounding Yes !!
We forget too often that in this digital age, there are still people that want to see photographs, pieces of paper that hold memories of moments, captured in time, rather than JPEG's, and that can be kept in albums that tell stories of lives, and nostalgia.
Rachel
Pictures of Kodak - photo paper - 25 sheet(s)
cat picture
How helpful would this review be to a person making a buying decision? Rating guidelines
I like Kodak paper although i find HP does as good a job
grown_up_girlie 15.08.2005 16:12
Kodak paper is very good in quality and this is what I think they should stick to selling...A really informative review none the less, that was a joy to read. Vicx.
exceptional by (12%):
very helpful by (87%):
off topic by (1%):
