Creased prints

James Blonde

James Blonde

Messages
385
Name
Scott
Edit My Images
Yes
Any way of rescuing a slightly creased print on Fuji lustre paper? Printer seems to have creased a few prints whilst being rolled up, and was curious whether I could fix it myself, or whether reprinting was the best option?
 
Last edited:
I tried ironing one of the prints under a tea towel to see whether this would work, and it seems to have partly, but not completely worked, (and partly ironed the ridged pattern of the tea towel I was using into the photo - note to self, use smooth material next time), but didn't want to go onto a steam setting or go too hot, though maybe as I've done it, I've nothing to lose by going hotter / wetter... :D

I've re-ordered anyway, so can sacrifice these, but anyone any idea what heat / steam does to large lab prints?
 
The texture on paper used to be created using heated chrome rollers of the desired texture.
I am not sure if this was done prior or after the coating process.
Textured laminated Litho prints were usually done on the final printed sheet.

I would have thought a steam iron through a fine linen cloth would be worth experimenting with, however it might transfer the image to the cloth.:cool:
 
James Blonde said:
Fuji lustre paper
Click to expand...

Right, this is the source of your problems. If you are looking at printers yourself you should be looking at the same type prints on fine art papers. I am sure something like Loxley Baryte will cover all bases until you buy your own. Forget the C-types and all the problems they bring. They are cheap, but that's for a reason. Maybe there are good new ones, but these are rare as hen's teeth in most labs.
 
My biggest problem has been trying to offer everything the lab offers and giving customers too many options. I should never have offered this (or any) pic on this paper type and will learn this lesson!! now where is that facepalm emoji?

Yep, art papers will be the way forwards for me - I'm not a fan at all of C-type, except perhaps metallic (which obviously has its own problems but has a place for some of my stuff!)
 
James Blonde said:
My biggest problem has been trying to offer everything the lab offers and giving customers too many options. I should never have offered this (or any) pic on this paper type and will learn this lesson!! now where is that facepalm emoji?

Yep, art papers will be the way forwards for me - I'm not a fan at all of C-type, except perhaps metallic (which obviously has its own problems but has a place for some of my stuff!)
Click to expand...

Yes, I find the metallic to be the only one acceptable from the old C-type range. It's all around 30 year old tech, if not more. Where are the new ones???!

Baryte for gloss or semi gloss is a good choice (there are a few different versions apparently). Canson Platine is almost the same but you probably won't find that in any labs. Pearl is a budget semi-gloss choice and I find the texture less intrusive than lustre. Then you can have any of the photorag or museum rag for matt. Torchon is good for really fancy textured matt, and you can buy that cheap from arts supplies. That's all you need. But from experience the uneducated public don't understand or are afraid of these names so just be prepared to name them simply as Semi-gloss or gloss and perhaps giving more info in brackets or further down...
 
Fotospeed Lustre 275 is a good paper of it's type, we use that a lot for customer images, but your creased ones, a lot easier to bin 'em and start again.

Definitely fine art papers if you're selling your own work, I always go for quality over quantity. If you really want to posh it up a bit, get an embosser!
 
Yeh, selling on the lustre paper was definitely a mistake. It was a customer on a budget's request that I really should have talked them out of, or price matched on the fine art. The printer have said they'll reprint (for a 3rd time) and open an investigation, which is great (their customer service always is), but that would be nearly a month since the print was ordered (a weeks holiday in between, so not entirely the printer) and the customer has got to be getting twitchy!
 
LongLensPhotography said:
Right, this is the source of your problems. If you are looking at printers yourself you should be looking at the same type prints on fine art papers. I am sure something like Loxley Baryte will cover all bases until you buy your own. Forget the C-types and all the problems they bring. They are cheap, but that's for a reason. Maybe there are good new ones, but these are rare as hen's teeth in most labs.
Click to expand...


Every time you say this I contradict you & I'd be remiss not to do it again ;)
A good C-Type has vastly superior shadow detail and subtlety to Giclees - at the expensive of colour saturation, especially in the reds. I much prefer C-types for portraiture.
 
juggler said:
Every time you say this I contradict you & I'd be remiss not to do it again ;)
A good C-Type has vastly superior shadow detail and subtlety to Giclees - at the expensive of colour saturation, especially in the reds. I much prefer C-types for portraiture.
Click to expand...

I can see why you like them for portraits. As explained they are way too thin on the other hand (300gsm option?), very sensitive to moisture and typically the colour gamut is pants for anything outside of skin tones. Maybe there are good ones, but typically we are being sold only the cheapest 30-year-old tech, with metallic being by far the best and newest option. If they bring new superior ones to the mainstream I'll happily reconsider.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top