Wolf said:
Taliesyn wrote:
[...] It's not really good for digital photos,
I find. They look more like magazine prints on this paper.[...]
You're seeing so-called "pixellation." At the size you're printing the
picture, the pixels have been enlarged, and turn up as little squares.
Glossy paper doesn't absorb ink the same way as matte or plain papers do.
On more absorbent paper, the ink spreads a little more, an blurs the
edges of the pixels.
No, this is a case of us not communicating correctly. I meant that the
paper that Epson calls "Glossy Photo Paper" just doesn't look nor feel
like traditional roll film paper or the better glossy photo papers
available for digital work. Behind glass, you don't see it. But in your
hand it looks more like a cutout from a magazine. I find the paper
much better suited for CD/DVD liners/inserts, booklet covers and
greeting cards.
I only photograph at my camera's highest resolution. That's the only
way to ensure a sharp, non-grainy image. My camera is an Olympus 3.1 MP,
your basic snap-shooter. One day I had this bright red cardinal sitting
in my apple tree that was in full blossom. An awesome photo was ruined
by the limitations of my 3x camera. I had no telephoto to zoom in much
closer. All I got was a tiny red bird in a tree. Dang!?%
What I'd really like is the Panasonic Lumix 5.0 MP, 12x Optical Zoom.
It's had great reviews. But the price - $799 Canadian is a bit of a
drawback at the moment. I'll wait another year and the price should
drop by, hopefully, by $150. Maybe.
-Taliesyn
