Canon Photo Papers

[Ed V]

Just curious as to what your favorite Canon photo paper might be, if any?

I have tested many papers from many manufacturers on my Epsons (3800 and P-6000) and have pretty much settled in on Moab Juniper Baryta (Luster) and Moab Entrada Natural (Matte).

But I also have a Canon Pro-100 that I tinker around with. So far the only Canon paper I have used is the Premium Luster. It's okay but I'm looking for something better. I could always go with the Moab papers in the PRO-100 but thought I'd ask about Canon papers.

Again, I'm just curious as to what your favorite Canon photo paper might be?

 

[Deleted member 7828]

As for Canon paper I currently only have "experience" with the "Paper Plus Semi-gloss", "Pro Luster" and the "Plus Glossy II". I recently ordered some ink and one of the free gifts is a 10-pack of 13x19 Pro Platinum, which I am curious to try out for a couple of high-res portrait shots.

I do like the Semi-gloss. It allows the image to pop without being overly reflective in moderate lighting. The Glossy II image is very crisp and details leap off the page, but the paper is a bit flimsy (not truly professional grade) and reflectiveness is a bit too high if a more subtle look is desired. I can see it being awesome for portraits and gift prints though.

My favorite has to be Pro Luster, however. It takes the pigment inks really well and it is a great balance between color pop and detail retention. When I print to that paper, I truly feel that the result that comes out is superior to any convenient store lab - in both paper and print quality - and rivals that of professional services.

For reference I'm using a Pro-10.

 

[LDS]

But I also have a Canon Pro-100 that I tinker around with. So far the only Canon paper I have used is the Premium Luster. It's okay but I'm looking for something better. I could always go with the Moab papers in the PRO-100 but thought I'd ask about Canon papers.

I used the Pro Platinum, the Pro Luster and Pro Premium Matte, using a Pixma Pro 10, especially to learn printing without "wasting" much more expensive papers.

IMHO the results are good even with the standard profiles, but very probably they are more alike the Moab Lasal line than the Entrada/Juniper one, so if you're used to the latter, you will surely the difference, and you won't like the Matte, I guess. You're not also using a glossy paper - although with the dye inks of the Pro-100 it could be a good combination for some kind of photos.

Canon's Museum Etching and Premium Fine Art Smooth may be more alike what you're using, but I have no experience with them.

But if you like the Moab papers, I see no reason to use Canon papers on the Pixma 100, unless the reason is exactly to use less expensive paper for less demanding prints.

 

[Hillsilly]

I like the Pro Lustre, too. I also find it good value.

But most of my inkjet printing is done on Canson Rag Photographique and Canson Platine Fibre Rag when I want a bit more gloss. Canson Montval is my go-to Gum Bichromate and Cyanotype paper.

I use a Pro 100.

 

[scyrene]

Just curious as to what your favorite Canon photo paper might be, if any?

I have tested many papers from many manufacturers on my Epsons (3800 and P-6000) and have pretty much settled in on Moab Juniper Baryta (Luster) and Moab Entrada Natural (Matte).

But I also have a Canon Pro-100 that I tinker around with. So far the only Canon paper I have used is the Premium Luster. It's okay but I'm looking for something better. I could always go with the Moab papers in the PRO-100 but thought I'd ask about Canon papers.

Again, I'm just curious as to what your favorite Canon photo paper might be?

Depends what I'm using it for, but the Pro Platinum paper is always excellent. It's the closest to proper old fashioned prints I've found (like you got from sending off your film back in the day). However, all the Canon papers are pretty good. In general, you get what you pay for with paper, and very cheap stuff won't provide the same quality (but can still be useful for some purposes).

 

[Dylan777]

I'm currently using Canon Pro Platinum:
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/584270-REG/Canon_2768B014_Pro_Platinum_Photo_Paper.html


Love it

 

[Ed V]

I appreciate the responses. Here's the deal. I have tried some different papers with my Epson printers (3800 & P6000) - the Moab papers, the Canson Infinity papers, Red River papers, Epson papers, and a few others. Among the things I like about the Moab Juniper and Entrada is how it feels in the hand. For me, there is a richness in the feel of those papers. Both are pretty heavy and both are cotton rag. "Nuff about those.

The Canon PRO-100 came in a package deal when I bought my 5D3. On the theory that two printers are better than one, I figured three would be better than two. So I set it up and have used it sporatically to basically check out photos I want to print before go to the Moab papers and the Epson printers. The paper I have ended up using most often is the Pro Luster.

Just recently I picked up a pack of Premium Pro Matte (8.5 x 11 which is what I use for my 6 x 9 test prints). I had an issue arise that I remembered occurring when I tried to run some other (Moab) papers through the PRO-100. The issue I have is with the Fine Art Papers which require the "Art Paper Margin 30" paper setting. Premium Pro Matte is one such paper. With a fine art paper and the "Art Paper Margin 30" setting for Letter sized paper, the largest print surface will be just 5.76 x 8.64. I can even get to 6 x 9 and forget trying to do a 8 x 10.

I spoke to someone from Canon yesterday who was very helpful in explaining why that is the case and why you can't override it. It has to do with the rollers in the PRO-100 and how the paper has to come in contact with the second set of rollers which required 30mm of paper leading and and out. Ergo the reason for the mandatory 1.18" left and right margin.

The only alternative is to use the Matte Paper setting under photo paper and regular Letter for paper size. Then I can make 6 x 9s or whatever. But the rep also warned that doing this may not always work.

I made two prints of the same photo using both settings. The "hack" works but when looking at the two prints side-by-side, I can see a difference. The print using the "hack" settings appear more faded and flat that the one using the Fine Art Paper setting.

What does all this mean? It means that I am finding the Canon printer (specifically the PRO-100) more difficult to work with than the Epsons and, more importantly maybe, more difficult to deal with than I am willing to deal with. I don't know if this issue is the same with other printers in the PIXMA PRO line.

Sorry for the ramble.

Ed

 

[LDS]

What does all this mean? It means that I am finding the Canon printer (specifically the PRO-100) more difficult to work with than the Epsons and, more importantly maybe, more difficult to deal with than I am willing to deal with. I don't know if this issue is the same with other printers in the PIXMA PRO line.

The margin issue exists in all the Pixma Pro printers, unluckily. It's probably their biggest defect, especially if you mostly print A4 or the like on fine art papers (the other is the maximum paper length, which makes true panoramas difficult as well). While I understand that canvases may need it, I wonder why other photo papers allow for borderless prints...

Changing the paper settings AFAIK change how the ink is delivered to the paper, and the result will of course be far from optimal.

IMHO testing prints using different inks and different papers has little value - you could use an hard proof workflow to simulate the Epsons on the Canon, but I guess it's really not that useful.

 

[Ed V]

IMHO testing prints using different inks and different papers has little value - you could use an hard proof workflow to simulate the Epsons on the Canon, but I guess it's really not that useful.

I agree. I'm not really testing prints. I am "living with" the content of the photograph before deciding whether to make a "final" print. As a street photographer I ask how the photo fits with my vision and voice as well as within specific projects that I am working on. For example right now I have six photos taped to my wall that I am studying and deciding whether to take to the next step. These I have printed on Pro Luster. If I decide they are a "go" I will take the next step and print them (6 x 9 on 8.5 x 11) on my Epson 3800 using Moab Juniper. Anything bigger will go to my P-6000 but also on Moab Juniper.

I hasten to add that I do not always do this just when I have some unanswered questions regarding content.

Ed

 

[LDS]

I agree. I'm not really testing prints. I am "living with" the content of the photograph before deciding whether to make a "final" print.

Ah, OK. Maybe one advantage of the Pro-100 is it can switch from matte to photo black without wasting ink, and you may find it useful to experiment if an image looks best on (semi)gloss or matte paper, if it's not already clear, and later optimize your prints with the Epsons.

 

[Hillsilly]

The print using the "hack" settings appear more faded and flat that the one using the Fine Art Paper setting.

If you are using Lightroom, you can use the soft proofing mode to make adjustments to the image and compensate for the differences.

 

[LDS]

If you are using Lightroom, you can use the soft proofing mode to make adjustments to the image and compensate for the differences.

It won't help if the ICC profile was created with different printer settings. You'd need to create a new profile for that paper with the 'hacked' settings. Still the paper type settings control, AFAIK, things as how much ink is used, and the dots characteristics. Different settings may not be good for a given paper surface.