Heads Up: Paper Switch from Fuji to Kodak

[Andy]

http://www.smugmug.com/photos/270152774_e8XAQ-S.jpgHi everyone, a bit of news! On March 30, 2008, our Lab Partner, EZPrints, will be changing the paper that is used to make your prints. They'll be switching from Fuji Crystal Archive to Kodak's Endura and Edge papers.

Over the last several months, SmugMug and the EZPrints Technical Team have been working closely with Kodak Engineers to ensure that we exceed the quality that you've depended on for years. We have also performed operational tests to ensure we have no service disruptions at the lab. We're confident that you'll be getting the same high quality prints that you've been accustomed to, and that we continue to guarantee, unconditionally (http://www.smugmug.com/prints/our-guarantee.mg).

You won't have to do anything at all, in your workflow, or with your sites or your pricing.

OK so what are the new papers?

We still have Glossy, Matte, and Lustre. And our prices aren't changing. Kodak Glossy and Matte will be printed on Kodak Edge, and Kodak Lustre will be printed on Kodak Supra Endura.

What are the Specs and Characteristics?

Glossy: printed on coated paper with a very smooth, shiny reflective surface. Glossy finishes have a high-contrast appearance and look slick to the touch when not under glass. This finish has an excellent dynamic range and color - slightly more "pop" than the matte paper, though less noticeable once framed. Photos will have a shiny finish, colors will be vibrant, and images will be crisp and sharp.

Matte: matte finishes have a very smooth, non-glare surface. Matte finishes have a lower-contrast when printed and are often used to enhance the texture of a print. Fingerprint and smudge resistant, and works very well with black and white photos. Much less glare than with glossy.

Lustre: lustre is our premier paper offering, and is considered more of a professional-grade paper. Lustre has a slight gloss with a subtle, often pearl-like texture. Lustre paper has a deeper color-saturation than matte, has a higher contrast and is thicker than consumer paper.

What is the watermark? Lustre paper is watermarked on the back as follows:

Kodak Professional ENDURA Paper
DO NOT COPY
PROFESSIONAL IMAGES ARE
COPYRIGHT PROTECTED

Edge Paper has on the back, the Kodak Logo.

All prints will have an EZPrints control number on the back of them. And backprinting (on sizes up to 10") if you are a pro, and if you choose it.

Is There a New Soft-Proofing Profile?
Yup, get it here (http://wiki.smugmug.com/download/attachments/753875/EZ+Prints+2008.1.icc). It's essentially the same profile as before, updated by EZPrints to work with the new papers, to get the same great results you are used to. Help on Soft-Proofing (http://dgrin.smugmug.com/gallery/1123524).

What About Longevity? KODAK Endura (Lustre) and Edge (Glossy, Matte) papers are designed to last for generations. KODAK's tested light-keeping is equivalent to 100+ years before noticeable fading occurs in a typical home display, and over 200 years in dark storage.

I love details and Tech Specs - where are they? You bet. Download the pdfs, here on our wiki (http://wiki.smugmug.com/display/SmugMug/Kodak+Edge+and+Endura+Paper+Specs).

I wanna see it! Sure. Shoot an email (http://www.smugmug.com/help/emailreal), Attn: Robin to our help desk, after April 1st, and we'll take care of a sample set!

What about the future? We are looking hard at metallic papers as well, and the switch to Kodak would allow for this as well. More to come on this, as we know it.

We're sending a news item out to SmugMug subscribers (you!) tonight, pointing to this info thread. And over the next few days we'll get our help pages updated, and our wiki documentation as well. Holler here in this thread, with any questions that you have, we'd love to hear 'em.

[DrDavid]

Why the change? I've been happy with the Fuji paper... My understanding is that the Kodak's Endura lack the pop of Fuji, as well as a smaller gammut. Is that not the case with Supra Endura?

When do you expect to release the new ICC profiles for soft-proofing?

And.. I run my photos through i2e using the EZPrints icc profile before uploading. Is that going to cause a problem when I print the photos after April 1?

David

[Andy]

Why the change? I've been happy with the Fuji paper... My understanding is that the Kodak's Endura lack the pop of Fuji, as well as a smaller gammut. Is that not the case with Supra Endura?
It's our opinion you won't see any such difference. I haven't seen anything remotely like what you are speaking about, regarding pop and saturation. I'm quite happy about this change, actually, as many really well respected labs are using this paper already... Mpix, Miller's, WHCC.

When do you expect to release the new ICC profiles for soft-proofing?
As of right now, EZPrints-2007.ICC (http://www.smugmug.com/help/display-color) is the current profile. If it changes, we'll let you all know.

And.. I run my photos through i2e using the EZPrints icc profile before uploading. Is that going to cause a problem when I print the photos after April 1?

DavidYou'll be printing true color, and you shouldn't see any difference from what you're used to.

[DrDavid]

It's our opinion you won't see any such difference. I haven't seen anything remotely like what you are speaking about, regarding pop and saturation. I'm quite happy about this change, actually, as many really well respected labs are using this paper already... Mpix, Miller's, WHCC. It's just interesting that they're switching to kodak. My understanding is that Kodak is more expensive to use... Anyways, I guess the proof is in the pudding as they say. If SM and EZ can deliver good prints on Kodak, PLUS we get Metallic & true B&W (please?), then I guess it's a good thing (tm).
As of right now, EZPrints-2007.ICC (http://www.smugmug.com/help/display-color) is the current profile. If it changes, we'll let you all know.
You'll be printing true color, and you shouldn't see any difference from what you're used to.Cool. Thanks for the info :thumb

David

[claudermilk]

What is the watermark? Lustre paper is watermarked on the back as follows:

Kodak Professional ENDURA Paper
DO NOT COPY
PROFESSIONAL IMAGES ARE
COPYRIGHT PROTECTED


:clap:clap:clap:thumb Very cool. I like that "feature." Every little bit helps.

[kwalsh]

Just so you are aware, and I know that smugmug has always done their utmost to be the best corporate citizens around, you might want to remove your 100+ year claim from this post and any marketing material. If you've spent anytime around longevity issues you'll know that Kodak is outright fraudulent with regards to their longevity testing. They always have been and as they've moved into the new printing technologies they've been even worse about it.

Kodak, flat out, bar none, absolutely period is inferior to Fuji and most anyone else in longevity. Go look at their data, they use way lower light levels and illumination times than every single other manufacturer. When tested independently using the accepted standard they've always failed to live up to the competition. All the other manufacturers have agreed on standard illumination figures for light-fastness testing. Kodak has always come up with their own BS ones so they can make false claims about their products. I doubt smugmug wants to participate in such corporate behavior.

For more details on print longevity and Kodak's long track record of fraud check out the tests and articles at:

http://www.wilhelm-research.com/

That said, the new paper may actually be quite excellent and very suitable for smugmug's customers. I'm just saying don't throw around that 100+ year line because it is a lie.

Ken

EDIT: For any reading the first time, responses below indicate this will be a silver halide process. This means that while a 100+ year claim might be true or false, it should still be a very stable process and in all likelyhood very comprable to the current printing process being used.

[swintonphoto]

I think this is great news. I actually prefer the Kodak papers to the Fuji papers. I was hesitant to switch to smugmug (ezprints) because I have had a preference for the Kodak papers for years. GOOD MOVE! All is well for me!:clap

[Andy]

Just so you are aware,...Hi Ken, thanks for the heads up, we'll surely look into it.

[DJ-S1]

This 2004 article (http://www.wilhelm-research.com/kodak_test/InkJetArt_KodakTestMethods.pdf) sums it up, I think.

[DrDavid]

This 2004 article (http://www.wilhelm-research.com/kodak_test/InkJetArt_KodakTestMethods.pdf) sums it up, I think.
Does that article still apply 4 years later?

I found an article written by Kodak, that disputes the above article. An interesting read, but, since it is written by Kodak themselves, needs to be taken with a grain of salt... http://www.kodak.com/eknec/documents/18/0900688a8033da18/Photograph_Longevity_FAQ.pdf

There was one interesting piece in the article... They say that the 450lux experiments aren't as long (duration wise) as Kodak's 120lux experiments (that they say will run for up to 2 years). So, they're fading the images over a longer period of time, but with a less intense light. Since the original article was prepared by a testing company, I'm wondering if THEY too have a vested interest in showing that Kodak isn't using "their" special method... Anyways.... Just a few thoughts..

David

[scwalter]

This 2004 article (http://www.wilhelm-research.com/kodak_test/InkJetArt_KodakTestMethods.pdf) sums it up, I think.

That seems specific to inkjet prints, which I'm pretty sure is not what is used by EZ Prints.

[scwalter]

They'll be switching from Fuji Crystal Archive to Kodak's Endura and Edge papers.

I certainly think a change of this magnitude is worthy of an email to all customers (especially pros) and also a homepage banner BEFORE it actually happens.

-Scott

[Dr. Know]

Good morning all,

I understand that there is a bit of confusion regarding the archival quality of Kodak papers, and after reading the .pdf posted earlier this week, I too am suspect of that particular paper type. Ink Jet photographic papers are still on the block from an archival perspective, and although we are launching some new poster stock products this summer, we are going to coat / laminate them to ensure that there is a basis for an archival claim. With this said, the papers we are using from Kodak are siliver halide, which is a traditional photographic print that uses chemicals to expose the paper. This is also known as wet processing, AgX or RA 4 processing.

We at EZ Prints continue to explore the realm of dry processing and will only bring the highest levels of quality, including archival features, to the Smugmug customer. If we suspect a definciency in any area we will take measures, such as lamination, to ensure that the products we sell and promote are of a professional level.

Thanks for this information. It is valuable to understand how claims are made, especially with new methods of production.

[Andy]

I certainly think a change of this magnitude is worthy of an email to all customers (especially pros) and also a homepage banner BEFORE it actually happens.

-ScottThe message to our customers is queued.

[Andy]

Got this from David @ EZP

I have read this discussion for years and we need to be sure we are not getting inkjet materials in the mix. Something I can say is that Endura has more silver in the paper, higher Dmax point and is used in almost all Pro labs for high end wedding or portrait work. Another point is that the prints have to be processed in chemicals that are properly replenished and washed, which ours is. The Endura Supra has maintained the highest quality and largest gamut of any of the papers we are or have been using.

[DavidEgolf]

Got this from David @ EZP

Thanks Andy. We have been working hard here at EZPrints to implement this change from Fuji paper to Kodak and no smallest detail have been ignored. We are striving to be the highest quality professional lab with high volume production capabilities. These two attributes sometimes seem as though they conflict but in our case we have been only adding the best of the best equipment and improving every procedure we utilize to move work seamlessly through the laboratory. We would love to share any details that you or anyone have questions on as we used to do in the old days where everything was done face to face over the counter. I have been in the Photofinishing business now 32 years and everyday is exciting with new advancements in business and technology. The paper change will position us to offer higher quality and additional new products that are not only state-of-the-art but have a very high "coolness" factor. I hope everyone enjoys their products as much as we enjoy producing them.

David Egolf :D

[marlinspike]

Anyways, I guess the proof is in the pudding as they say.

Actually, the sayng is the proof of the pudding is in the tasting. I think I'm the only person who knows ths though, so I do my part to spread the word.

[kwalsh]

Glad to hear it is a silver process. And I didn't mean to give the impression that the change to Kodak is necessarily a bad thing. I just wanted to give a heads up to be careful with passing along any sort of longevity numbers from Kodak, they have a very VERY bad track record in the industry for truth in advertising in this regard.

If it is a silver process and as the guys at EZP pointed out the chemistry is done carefully they should be very stable prints when displayed properly. Maybe not 100+ years, or maybe so, but should be plenty long enough. I'm sure EZP isn't making the change lightly and know what they are doing!

Ken

[Theresa K]

My only complaint from customers was the lack of variety in papers from Smugmug/EZprints. I can't wait until you guys get metallics!
:clap

[poleinajeep]

My only complaint from customers was the lack of variety in papers from Smugmug/EZprints. I can't wait until you guys get metallics!
:clap

we at work did a little comparo between Mpix and EZPrints and EZP came out on top (because of what at the time i thought was the superior paper). lustre paper looked way better than metallic (metallics should only be used for very specific purposes).

im not against the change, i just hope its for the better as i was overly impressed with the Fuji lustre finish.

im anxious and eager to try it out and hopefully the color and blacks are as rich as before...

[Andy]

we at work did a little comparo between Mpix and EZPrints and EZP came out on top (because of what at the time i thought was the superior paper). lustre paper looked way better than metallic (metallics should only be used for very specific purposes).

im not against the change, i just hope its for the better as i was overly impressed with the Fuji lustre finish.

im anxious and eager to try it out and hopefully the color and blacks are as rich as before...
Remember, we don't have Metallic yet. Kodak Lustre is, to me, identical to Fuji Lustre. Put a dozen prints on a table, side by side, and you won't tell the difference.

[MichaelKirk]

Andy,
It's been quite a while since I updated the EZ prints print proof profile.
Can you point me to a link with instructions of how to update my print profile in CS3.

I looked around and could not find it.

Thanks,
Michael

[Andy]

Andy,
It's been quite a while since I updated the EZ prints print proof profile.
Can you point me to a link with instructions of how to update my print profile in CS3.

I looked around and could not find it.

Thanks,
Michael
There's a link in my post #1 of this thread, to here:

http://dgrin.smugmug.com/gallery/1123524

:thumb

[achambers]

Since the original article was prepared by a testing company, I'm wondering if THEY too have a vested interest in showing that Kodak isn't using "their" special method... Anyways.... Just a few thoughts..

Dr. David,

My day job is in an engineering laboratory where I perform validation testing. I test automotive electronics. While every manufacturer has their own standards these standards are based on international (ISO) standards. The manufacturers may add to the standards to make them more rigorous but not subtract from them to make them easier (and still say their product complies.)

There does seem to be a standard test:
ISO 18909:2006 Photography -- Processed photographic colour films and paper prints -- Methods for measuring image stability

[Matthew Saville]

How about a true B&W paper? Yet again, I feel like we're playing around with something that ain't broken, while other long-hoped-for things are yet to come. B&W paper! Metallic! MOUNTED prints like WHCC offers!

=Matt=

EDIT: In other news, I've been with Smugmug for four years now, and things HAVE come a long way, I'll grant!

[Andy]

How about a true B&W paper? Yet again, I feel like we're playing around with something that ain't broken, while other long-hoped-for things are yet to come. B&W paper! Metallic! MOUNTED prints like WHCC offers!

=Matt=

EDIT: In other news, I've been with Smugmug for four years now, and things HAVE come a long way, I'll grant!
Matthew, we love EZP, it was their business decision to make this change, we helped and made sure that you guys wouldn't be affected except for the better in our estimation. It paves the way for more things, metallic paper, true bw, yes.

[timgangloff]

I am glad for the switch. I simply prefer the Kodak papers and do look forward to adding more choices like metallic. Now, get busy on the package deal ability and you'll have me sold.

[Jay_S]

Andy,

So if I read it right, the change should be in effect now? I have a couple of Lustre 8x10s on Fuji that haven't seen any light that I'll compare side by side. No sense in passing judgement until we can see it for ourselves. That said, I have to say my preference has been for Fuji.. Colors are richer and deeper in most comparisons, but again, I won't know until I see them side by side. I don't want to place an order though until I know the Kodak is in play. Thanks.

Jay S.

[DrDavid]

I soft proofed between the 2007 EZ profile and the 2008 EZ profile. I could see a difference in how it showed red. Definately not as saturated as the Fuji on the red--although, I can't say I disliked the less saturated look. I did notice it was a slightly warmer temperature though, but again, I can't honestly say that I didn't like the warmer skin tone. I'm looking forward to a print sample (especially a print sample of the Smugmug calibration print), so I can really compare apples-to-apples :)

David

Andy,

So if I read it right, the change should be in effect now? I have a couple of Lustre 8x10s on Fuji that haven't seen any light that I'll compare side by side. No sense in passing judgement until we can see it for ourselves. That said, I have to say my preference has been for Fuji.. Colors are richer and deeper in most comparisons, but again, I won't know until I see them side by side. I don't want to place an order though until I know the Kodak is in play. Thanks.

Jay S.

[Andy]

Andy,

So if I read it right, the change should be in effect now? I have a couple of Lustre 8x10s on Fuji that haven't seen any light that I'll compare side by side. No sense in passing judgement until we can see it for ourselves. That said, I have to say my preference has been for Fuji.. Colors are richer and deeper in most comparisons, but again, I won't know until I see them side by side. I don't want to place an order though until I know the Kodak is in play. Thanks.

Jay S.Yup, As of March 30... all the details in post #1 above :thumb

[CaliforniaNativeSun]

Yup, As of March 30... all the details in post #1 above :thumb

If the quality is similar to what the folks at Miller's are using, I am very excited about trying something new through SmugMug.

I can only imagine that such a large business decision wasn't that easy-- lucky YOU!

[Glory2Jesus4Photography]

Yup, As of March 30... all the details in post #1 above :thumb
I hope this will lay the way for some new products like base ball cards, school packages and proof books and the such some of what millers offers. It will be nice to be able to keep every thing in on house so to speak. It is nice to always se SM and EZ always trying to improve and moving forward it lets us know that you will always be trying to stay up with the biz.
Thanks

[Andy]

If the quality is similar to what the folks at Miller's are using, I am very excited about trying something new through SmugMug.

I can only imagine that such a large business decision wasn't that easy-- lucky YOU!
We love Miller's (and Mpix) and respect them greatly. Miller's and Mpix use Kodak papers.

[Jay_S]

I soft proofed between the 2007 EZ profile and the 2008 EZ profile. I could see a difference in how it showed red. Definately not as saturated as the Fuji on the red--although, I can't say I disliked the less saturated look. I did notice it was a slightly warmer temperature though, but again, I can't honestly say that I didn't like the warmer skin tone. I'm looking forward to a print sample (especially a print sample of the Smugmug calibration print), so I can really compare apples-to-apples :)

David

David,

Interesting you say that. Reds are one of the colors that I was thinking about. Since other colors are based off that as well, you might suspect less saturation there as well. Fuji has always leaned toward saturation, even in cameras. I have some fireworks prints with deep reds that I'll be looking to see how they do. Thanks.

Jay S.

[Jay_S]

We love Miller's (and Mpix) and respect them greatly. Miller's and Mpix use Kodak papers.

Andy,

Thanks for the earlier answer and I hope the B&W that may be coming is up to the MPIX process for grayscales.. They have an excellent process and paper there. TRUE B&W.... I'll order a couple of 8x10s and see how they look on the new paper.

Jay S.

[landrum]

I am glad for the switch. I simply prefer the Kodak papers and do look forward to adding more choices like metallic. Now, get busy on the package deal ability and you'll have me sold.
:barbI'm excited about the move. I prefer Kodak, and REALLY hope they can add Metallic very soon. I also use FullColor and WHCC, and would love it if EZP would follow suit with similar products.

BTW...I'm with Tim on the ability to create "packages". How great would life be then? :thumb

(I know, I know...just add it to the 'list'!:wxwax)

[Mitchell]

How do we go about getting some samples of these papers?

[Barb]

How do we go about getting some samples of these papers?
Hi :)

Shoot an email (http://www.smugmug.com/help/emailreal), Attn: Robin to our help desk, and we'll take care of a sample set!

[Awais Yaqub]

:clapMany Congrats Kodak:clap

[AsPnErD]

NOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Kodak paper has too red in the picture and doesn't represent the true color of photographs.

PLEASE do not make this change! Go back to Fuji paper!!!

http://www.smugmug.com/photos/270152774_e8XAQ-S.jpgHi everyone, a bit of news! On March 30, 2008, our Lab Partner, EZPrints, will be changing the paper that is used to make your prints. They'll be switching from Fuji Crystal Archive to Kodak's Endura and Edge papers.

Over the last several months, SmugMug and the EZPrints Technical Team have been working closely with Kodak Engineers to ensure that we exceed the quality that you've depended on for years. We have also performed operational tests to ensure we have no service disruptions at the lab. We're confident that you'll be getting the same high quality prints that you've been accustomed to, and that we continue to guarantee, unconditionally (http://www.smugmug.com/prints/our-guarantee.mg).

You won't have to do anything at all, in your workflow, or with your sites or your pricing.

OK so what are the new papers?

We still have Glossy, Matte, and Lustre. And our prices aren't changing. Kodak Glossy and Matte will be printed on Kodak Edge, and Kodak Lustre will be printed on Kodak Supra Endura.

What are the Specs and Characteristics?

Glossy: printed on coated paper with a very smooth, shiny reflective surface. Glossy finishes have a high-contrast appearance and look slick to the touch when not under glass. This finish has an excellent dynamic range and color - slightly more "pop" than the matte paper, though less noticeable once framed. Photos will have a shiny finish, colors will be vibrant, and images will be crisp and sharp.

Matte: matte finishes have a very smooth, non-glare surface. Matte finishes have a lower-contrast when printed and are often used to enhance the texture of a print. Fingerprint and smudge resistant, and works very well with black and white photos. Much less glare than with glossy.

Lustre: lustre is our premier paper offering, and is considered more of a professional-grade paper. Lustre has a slight gloss with a subtle, often pearl-like texture. Lustre paper has a deeper color-saturation than matte, has a higher contrast and is thicker than consumer paper.

What is the watermark? Lustre paper is watermarked on the back as follows:

Kodak Professional ENDURA Paper
DO NOT COPY
PROFESSIONAL IMAGES ARE
COPYRIGHT PROTECTED

Is There a New Soft-Proofing Profile?
Yup, get it here (http://wiki.smugmug.com/download/attachments/753875/EZ+Prints+2008.1.icc). It's essentially the same profile as before, updated by EZPrints to work with the new papers, to get the same great results you are used to. Help on Soft-Proofing (http://dgrin.smugmug.com/gallery/1123524).

What About Longevity? KODAK Endura (Lustre) and Edge (Glossy, Matte) papers are designed to last for generations. KODAK's tested light-keeping is equivalent to 100+ years before noticeable fading occurs in a typical home display, and over 200 years in dark storage.

I love details and Tech Specs - where are they? You bet. Download the pdfs, here on our wiki (http://wiki.smugmug.com/display/SmugMug/Kodak+Edge+and+Endura+Paper+Specs).

I wanna see it! Sure. Shoot an email (http://www.smugmug.com/help/emailreal), Attn: Robin to our help desk, after April 1st, and we'll take care of a sample set!

What about the future? We are looking hard at metallic papers as well, and the switch to Kodak would allow for this as well. More to come on this, as we know it.

We're sending a news item out to SmugMug subscribers (you!) tonight, pointing to this info thread. And over the next few days we'll get our help pages updated, and our wiki documentation as well. Holler here in this thread, with any questions that you have, we'd love to hear 'em.

[JDrake]

Sadly I must say that I am really disappointed by this change...and with no warning too. I very much prefer the fuji over kodak... their color saturation is a lot better. I actually changed to SM from another company bc they had changed to Kodak and I really didn't like the difference in the prints I was seeing. Fuji had a lot more vivid colors and seemed to have a lot more value than Kodak.

If I find that this is the case here too.... well... I moved once.... but I would have to say that I would try to find another print company to use that does have the fuji I prefer.

[Andy]

Sadly I must say that I am really disappointed by this change...and with no warning too. I very much prefer the fuji over kodak... their color saturation is a lot better. I actually changed to SM from another company bc they had changed to Kodak and I really didn't like the difference in the prints I was seeing. Fuji had a lot more vivid colors and seemed to have a lot more value than Kodak.

If I find that this is the case here too.... well... I moved once.... but I would have to say that I would try to find another print company to use that does have the fuji I prefer.
In the end, we didn't have much choice, either :) I am quite fine with it though. I also think you'll find fewer and fewer Fuji paper options, though they are out there...

[DrDavid]

In the end, we didn't have much choice, either :) I am quite fine with it though. I also think you'll find fewer and fewer Fuji paper options, though they are out there...
Do you know WHY Fuji is going out of favor with printers? I thought Kodak was more expensive, etc..? I guess I don't understand the business decision behind the fuji -> kodak decision. Especially since most of the big printers in the country (Mpix, whcc, ezp, etc.) use Kodak.

David

[I Simonius]

Actually, the sayng is the proof of the pudding is in the tasting. I think I'm the only person who knows ths though, so I do my part to spread the word.

the proof of the pudding is indeed in the tasting , well, actually it's 'in the eating'; on the other hand the coin is often in the pudding

(as in christmas pudding, where a sixpenny or threepenny bit (piece) was traditionally put)

[glasgowman]

What is the watermark? Lustre paper is watermarked on the back as follows:

Kodak Professional ENDURA Paper
DO NOT COPY
PROFESSIONAL IMAGES ARE
COPYRIGHT PROTECTED


I am intrigued by the watermark statement - why "Professional" Images?

Are all images not copyright protected?

[Jay_S]

Do you know WHY Fuji is going out of favor with printers? I thought Kodak was more expensive, etc..? I guess I don't understand the business decision behind the fuji -> kodak decision. Especially since most of the big printers in the country (Mpix, whcc, ezp, etc.) use Kodak.

David

David,

In the end, I'm guessing there is some element of cost, although it sounds like EZP is making a processing change as well, perhaps a part of the Kodak deal.. we'll never know. Kodak has had to remake itself in the digital age, and they are turning some corners. I know for my prints at home I won't use it, preferring the Ilford papers overall. My guess is Fuji was expensive enough that there was a payback in making the move to Kodak for EZP, even if there is a short term expense to get there. I really can't see it being completely the quality of the paper... otherwise they could have gone the opposite way and go higher quailty on the paper used. Just a nickel's worth of cheap guessing.. :-)

Jay S.

[OsirisPhoto]

Can I ask.. will lustre finish now be available in 40inch prints? At the moment, large size prints are glossy / matte only. I have had comments that glossy is too shiny, and matte is too textured :rolleyes

[Andy]

Can I ask.. will lustre finish now be available in 40inch prints? At the moment, large size prints are glossy / matte only. I have had comments that glossy is too shiny, and matte is too textured :rolleyes
We only have gloss and matte at 30x40.

Funny, I've never heard (nor do I agree) your comments re matte being textured more than lustre....

[stan.k]

It's our opinion you won't see any such difference. I haven't seen anything remotely like what you are speaking about, regarding pop and saturation. I'm quite happy about this change, actually, as many really well respected labs are using this paper already... Mpix, Miller's, WHCC.

Mpix/Millers, and WHCC are amongst the worst national labs when it comes to good color. Trust me. They may be very popular, but that's only because most folks have no CLUE what it takes to get good, and accurate color. So PLEASE do NOT compare to those labs. There are some good labs out there that have great color with Kodak paper, but Mpix/Millers and WHCC are not one of them. Saying that a paper must be good if big labs like Millers and WHCC use them and they're such popular labs.. well thats like saying that burgers from McDonalds must be the best because they're the most popular restaurant... know what i mean?

I've personally always preferred Fuji paper, but not because of the color. I prefer them because their paper lasts longer. Its a proven fact.

As far as getting good color, the Kodak paper vs. Fuji paper makes little to no difference. Both papers are more than capable of getting great color. What matters is how you print it, how you profile the paper, and keeping the printing equipment profiled correctly and calibrated correctly. There are labs out there like Burrell who use Kodak paper and do a fantastic job of profiling it and get excellent, top notch color. There are other labs out there that have an absolute terrible profile that results in much less color saturation and terrible reds and yellows (Millers and WHCC are a prime example). I've not tested EZprints myself, but i really should. Though I have a feeling I won't like what I see.

[mrschunder]

Will this link be updated with the correct information

http://www.smugmug.com/help/lustre

or do I need to redirect my website???

this is what it currently says

Lustre paper is .7mils thicker than gloss and matte. In addition, Lustre paper is watermarked on the back as follows: "Fuji Professional Paper. If copyright applies, permission to reproduce required."

[OsirisPhoto]

We only have gloss and matte at 30x40.

Funny, I've never heard (nor do I agree) your comments re matte being textured more than lustre....

Oh, I'm not saying that lustre would be any less textured.. I haven't even used lustre yet, just making a guess that it would be less textured... like half way between glossy and matte. :dunno

I really need to boldly ask the photographer displaying his prints next to mine what paper / lab he uses. I had thought it must be this magic 'lustre' because it looks way better than my glossy or matte prints (contrast / smoothness / reflection).

There is a local lab that does large prints in lustre, and they use Kodak.. that's why I asked.

[Pezpix]

So has anyone done the 100 year test in person on their print yet? (badabing!) :rofl Sorry, I had to get my April Fools comment in there.

I've been a Fuji Crystal Archive honk for quite a few years and I am like quite a few others here in being tentative towards change. My hope is that the saturation in the Kodak can be as good as the Fuji has produced in my prints.

Has anyone here got any real world experience with this new and upcoming paper that can put me at ease further?

[stan.k]

Has anyone here got any real world experience with this new and upcoming paper that can put me at ease further?

Its not the paper. Its the profile. Profile the paper correctly and you'll get excellent color with plenty of pop and contrast. Profile it poorly and you get flat, undersaturated prints.

That being said, in my experience I've found that around half of all Kodak labs do a poor job of profiling, but the vast majority of Fuji labs do at least a good job of profiling their paper. I'm not sure exactly why it is that way, but it is a trend none the less.

[Andy]

Will this link be updated with the correct information

http://www.smugmug.com/help/lustre

or do I need to redirect my website???

this is what it currently says

Lustre paper is .7mils thicker than gloss and matte. In addition, Lustre paper is watermarked on the back as follows: "Fuji Professional Paper. If copyright applies, permission to reproduce required."
It will indeed. It will say: "Lustre paper is thicker than gloss and matte. In addition, Lustre paper is watermarked on the back as follows:

Kodak Professional ENDURA Paper
DO NOT COPY
PROFESSIONAL IMAGES ARE
COPYRIGHT PROTECTED

[Andy]

What is the watermark? Lustre paper is watermarked on the back as follows:

Kodak Professional ENDURA Paper
DO NOT COPY
PROFESSIONAL IMAGES ARE
COPYRIGHT PROTECTED


I am intrigued by the watermark statement - why "Professional" Images?

Are all images not copyright protected?
yes indeed - but Kodak chose to do the watermark this way. It's a distinguishing element between the papers.

[Andy]

Oh, I'm not saying that lustre would be any less textured.. I haven't even used lustre yet, just making a guess that it would be less textured... like half way between glossy and matte. :dunno

Lustre has more texture than matte, at least to me :thumb

[Andy]

Mpix/Millers, and WHCC are amongst the worst national labs when it comes to good color. Trust me. They may be very popular, but that's only because most folks have no CLUE what it takes to get good, and accurate color. So PLEASE do NOT compare to those labs.

Hi Stan, I'm not comparing. Our work and our guarantee stands on its' own.

But I can tell you, as a working pro, I deeply respect Millers, Mpix, and WHCC. I really feel you are in the minority here, sorry. I'm sorry you've had bad experience with them, but I and many, many others I know and work with personally have nothing but great results and experience with these guys.

I hope we don't let you down.

[stan.k]

But I can tell you, as a working pro, I deeply respect Millers, Mpix, and WHCC. I really feel you are in the minority here, sorry. I'm sorry you've had bad experience with them, but I and many, many others I know and work with personally have nothing but great results and experience with these guys.

I'm a working pro too. If you're using Millers or WHCC, there is a WORLD of colors that you're not seeing. Their profile is terrible. If you can't see it, I mean no disrespect, but you don't know what you're looking for. I've tested them continuously. I've not had a bad experience with them (i don't know where you came up with that??). This is not a subjective thing. They never "wronged" me. Its a matter of accuracy and inaccuracy. Its not a matter of having a "bad experience", its a matter of labs having consistently bad color.

Trust me that I know how popular those labs are. But that has got NOTHING to do with them producing accurate color and using a good profile. NOTHING. Sadly, the vast majority of pro photogs don't have a clue between a lab that produces great accurate color and one that produces poor, and un-accurate color.

The difference is huge. But if your prints don't tend to have very saturated color to begin with, then you'll probably never notice a difference. Me, I like accurate color and I like color that IS accurate and saturated.

If you really don't believe me, I can show you what I mean. It will take some time and effort on your part (you'll have to send good target test prints to labs and wait till they come back, etc..), but when you're done, you'll be amazed.

You may be just fine and happy with Millers and WHCC, but accurate color they just don't have. You may be happy with them, but you probably have no idea what you're missing. It is what it is.


The problem why most pros don't have a clue is because the majority of prints/subjects out there don't use real saturated color. Any lab can accurately reproduce colors that aren't saturated and aren't very vivid. Those colors are easy. WHCC and Millers will do a fine job with those colors..... but then again so will my neighborhood Target and Wal-Mart photo lab too. What it comes down to is accuracy and rendering when you start pushing the limits of the colorspace and the gamut of the paper. There are tons of colors within the colorspace (sRGB or Adobe98 RGB) that are outside of the gamut of the paper. These colors as well as the colors just on the edge of the gamut of the paper are the most saturated colors you'll see: the deep blues, vibrant greens, strong reds and bright bold yellows. THAT is where you separate the men from the boys and a good profile from a bad one. A good profile will keep reds red and it will keep yellows yellow and the vibrancy will remain. A bad profile will change bold reds to orange and yellows to pale green.

[Capturimage]

I'm looking forward to Metallics!! I was hunting for a lab that offers them, but now I don't have to. The samples I've seen really pop. Thanks and may the force be with Smugmug!!

[Mr Michael]

I've used the Endura papers before, and I've always been pleased with the breadth of color and 'pop' on my images. My experience has been with Adorama, not the others mentioned.

I'm really happy that we've made the change... and I really look forward to the availability of the Endura Metallic paper. It doesn't look great with some images, looks terribly 'fakey' or 'stunty' with some. But for images like night shots, Sunrises/Sunsets, and if you shoot specifically for the process, you can get some spectacular results that just make jaws drop!

Kudos to the Team, and thanks for the upgrade.

[Andy]

I'm looking forward to Metallics!! I was hunting for a lab that offers them, but now I don't have to. The samples I've seen really pop. Thanks and may the force be with Smugmug!!
To be clear: the way is *paved* for this but we've made no announcement on it.

[Andy]

You may be just fine and happy with Millers and WHCC, but accurate color they just don't have. You may be happy with them, but you probably have no idea what you're missing. It is what it is.


Actually what I'm fine with isEZPrints :) Which is our Lab.

I just have a lot of respect for Millers & WHCC quality. And I've used 'em plenty.

[DanW]

I have found in the past that Endura luster is somewhat plasticky in surface and that the matte paper, which some of my clients and I have preferred, is very susceptible to slight creases if not handled very, very carefully. Are these traits true of the Edge paper? I had not heard of Edge before.

Also, which of these papers would you recommend for monochrome or B&W photos that would be shown behind glass?

Likewise, is one of these papers best color that would be matted and behind glass?

Thanks.

Dan

[stan.k]

Actually what I'm fine with isEZPrints :) Which is our Lab.

I just have a lot of respect for Millers & WHCC quality. And I've used 'em plenty.

i meant in general "you", not "you" specifically. i have a lot of respect for WHCC and Millers too. They make a TON of money and are two of the biggest and busiest labs in the country. But as a discriminating photographer, I could care less about how big they are, nor do my clients care either. What they do care about is good looking prints.

I only bring this up simply because you referenced them. You say that EZprints is your lab, thus I hope EZprints (you) is/are going to take accurate color more seriously than labs like WHCC and Millers do. Thats all. If you are using them as a measuring stick then I hope you find a better ruler and come to know the difference (or at least hire someone who knows what they're doing). But then again, maybe really accurate color doesn't matter. Lord knows that its not necessary to be popular and very profitable.

Remember folks, if you're talking about COLOR, its NOT THE PAPER, it's the PROFILE. Longevity is another matter, but with correct and accurate profiles, you will really see NO VISUAL DIFFERENCE between Fuji and Kodak paper. If you see a difference, its not the paper, its the Lab (because of their profile most likely).

[PB Media]

Why is there only one profile for multiple paper types?

[com3]

hrm...before i EVER sent out a single print to a customer from smugmug, i ordered myself up a 20x30 so i could see what kinda quality it was; whether i felt it was good enough for my customers... i was pleased... i've been using smugmug for ALL my printing for the last year and a half or so...

i hate change, sometimes even if it's for the better.

i do anywhere from 10 to 60 prints per month varying from 4x6's to 20x30's (most being in the 8x12 range) for customers...

i'm a little scared, to be honest, as i know SQUAT about the whole printing thing... i simply do a test run, and if i think I would be happy with it, then i'm comfortable with selling it to customers...

looks like it's time for another test run before i order any more prints. *sigh*

EDIT// just ordered up an 8x12 of each flavor of these shots; gloss, matte, and luster. *crosses fingers*

http://www.seppes.com/photos/270081871_ofsZV-S.jpg

http://www.seppes.com/photos/270574559_f3WTw-S.jpg

http://www.seppes.com/photos/239771779_yj343-S-1.jpg

[Jay_S]

I have found in the past that Endura luster is somewhat plasticky in surface and that the matte paper, which some of my clients and I have preferred, is very susceptible to slight creases if not handled very, very carefully. Are these traits true of the Edge paper? I had not heard of Edge before.

Also, which of these papers would you recommend for monochrome or B&W photos that would be shown behind glass?

Likewise, is one of these papers best color that would be matted and behind glass?

Thanks.

Dan

Dan,

I would not do monochrome here. It isn't a true B&W rendition at EZPrints, at least not yet. The indication is we may get it as a part of this change according to Andy. If you want an excellent and true B&W, go to MPIX. They have a totally Monochrome process you can use. There is a huge difference in reproducing B&W and actually processing for B&W.

Jay S.

[DavidEgolf]

Why is there only one profile for multiple paper types? That is an excellent question. We use individual output profiles for each printer/paper combination and that is what does the output mapping of the colors. Remember the profile is a snapshot of where the printer sits on balance and linearization so if we map each color to the same place no matter what paper or printer it goes to you should only need one profile to tell you where that point is. When you use our soft proofing profile you are seeing where these points are and can then determine if that is what you want or if adjustments are necessary. We want to make a rock solid base of color so the pallet remains the same and you are in drivers seat.

Some technical points on our procedures are also that we balance our printers every time we change a roll of paper, not once a day, or a week. We do a complete linearization which balances steps all the way from Black to white not just normal and over and under. We read and plot our linearizations to make sure that a change in paper emulsion does not have an adverse effect on any images. We also do our profiling with an Xrite iSis

http://www.xrite.com/documents/literature/en/IsisPR_en.pdf

This is a award winning tool to create and maintain profiles and it has enabled us to create 4000 mapping point profiles and constantly maintain them. This allows smooth mapping of colors and with the proper adjustments to the printer Dmax points to take advantage of all the paper gamut the paper has to offer. This is the pop in the paper and the end points are the critical adjustments that allow us to get the most gamut without compromising linearity or gray scale balance. We start with these excellent 4000 point profiles and then continue to analyze them numerically to make sure the printer and paper can indeed map to all points and still maintain great flesh tones and good color saturation without going to the cartoonish side.

On the chemistry side each machine is monitored hourly for proper chemical balance and replenishment. Without proper chemical balance our color control would not be possible.

Hope this fills in some of the details.

[DavidEgolf]

Dan,

I would not do monochrome here. It isn't a true B&W rendition at EZPrints, at least not yet. The indication is we may get it as a part of this change according to Andy. If you want an excellent and true B&W, go to MPIX. They have a totally Monochrome process you can use. There is a huge difference in reproducing B&W and actually processing for B&W.

Jay S.

Agreed. This is why it is in the pipeline. We are looking at only the best implementation of each type of processing. Currently Durst Theta units are set up for Black and White with Ilford papers and gray scale profiles which while being excellent do not afford the opportunity to do all types of Black and White papers such as fine art papers and non resin coated papers. If and when we offer true Black and White we want to be able to offer all options.

[DavidEgolf]

I have found in the past that Endura luster is somewhat plasticky in surface and that the matte paper, which some of my clients and I have preferred, is very susceptible to slight creases if not handled very, very carefully. Are these traits true of the Edge paper? I had not heard of Edge before.

Also, which of these papers would you recommend for monochrome or B&W photos that would be shown behind glass?

Likewise, is one of these papers best color that would be matted and behind glass?

Thanks.

Dan

We are very careful to check the linearity and gray balance of all of our profiles to get neutrality in the full gamut of images. Also on the surface issue some of this depends on the drying capabilities of the printers. Paper has to be dried correctly, hot at first and then cooled down gradually. If a paper is made too hot it will change the finish especially on matte as it will gloss up.

Thanks

[Jay_S]

Agreed. This is why it is in the pipeline. We are looking at only the best implementation of each type of processing. Currently Durst Theta units are set up for Black and White with Ilford papers and gray scale profiles which while being excellent do not afford the opportunity to do all types of Black and White papers such as fine art papers and non resin coated papers. If and when we offer true Black and White we want to be able to offer all options.

Dave,

Thanks for replying. I do think the Ilford papers do an excellent job on B&W, and hope that is an option.

WIth regard to some of Stan's comments on papers and profiles. I agree that the correct profiling by any lab is critical to the output. There is an inherent difference though in the absorbtion of these papers as well, which does effect the result, not just the profiling, in my opinion. The point being that a properly profiled Kodak and a properly profiled Fuji should, in theory, both show excellent results. That doesn't mean that side by side they will be exactly the same. There are just basic differences in the papers themselves. Those difference impact more than just longevity, IMHO. Proper profiling (and processing) brings out the best in each paper. The question is whose best is better? :-)

Thanks again... looking forward to excellent B&Ws (if and when we get them)!

Jay S.

[DavidEgolf]

I'm looking forward to Metallics!! I was hunting for a lab that offers them, but now I don't have to. The samples I've seen really pop. Thanks and may the force be with Smugmug!! It is in the pipeline.

[DavidEgolf]

Dave,

Thanks for replying. I do think the Ilford papers do an excellent job on B&W, and hope that is an option.

With regard to some of Stan's comments on papers and profiles. I agree that the correct profiling by any lab is critical to the output. There is an inherent difference though in the absorption of these papers as well, which does effect the result, not just the profiling, in my opinion. The point being that a properly profiled Kodak and a properly profiled Fuji should, in theory, both show excellent results. That doesn't mean that side by side they will be exactly the same. There are just basic differences in the papers themselves. Those difference impact more than just longevity, IMHO. Proper profiling (and processing) brings out the best in each paper. The question is whose best is better? :-)

Thanks again... looking forward to excellent B&Ws (if and when we get them)!

Jay S.

You are correct, no matter how much nulling we do with balance and profiling there are differences in the papers. In balancing all printers the setting of the Dmax is crucial to getting everything out of the paper it has to give. This has to be done with the chemistry in mind and to set it as close to the top without going over the shoulder of the curves. The individual curves top out at a specific point and beyond that we cannot adjust due to loosing gray balance so if a particular paper can only achieve a 1.30 in the red it does not matter that it can go above in the green or blue. The big difference can also be how well the chemistry is maintained and replenished. If everything is not neutral with the developer at LD and HD-LD point then all the balancing will not bring it inside that split and this must be maintained through the linear part of the paper response curves. The entire system is only as good as the weakest link. Beyond the qualifying and quantifying equally it comes down then to personal taste as to paper choice.

[Jay_S]

You are correct, no matter how much nulling we do with balance and profiling there are differences in the papers. In balancing all printers the setting of the Dmax is crucial to getting everything out of the paper it has to give. This has to be done with the chemistry in mind and to set it as close to the top without going over the shoulder of the curves. The individual curves top out at a specific point and beyond that we cannot adjust due to loosing gray balance so if a particular paper can only achieve a 1.30 in the red it does not matter that it can go above in the green or blue. The big difference can also be how well the chemistry is maintained and replenished. If everything is not neutral with the developer at LD and HD-LD point then all the balancing will not bring it inside that split and this must be maintained through the linear part of the paper response curves. The entire system is only as good as the weakest link. Beyond the qualifying and quantifying equally it comes down then to personal taste as to paper choice.

Dave,

Again thanks for fielding all this (and running a business). That, I think, is to the point of what some folks were indicating on the levels of "saturation" from one paper to another. I have to say I don't have those numbers in front of me relative to your 1.30 example above for Red. It is "perception" that the Fuji Crystal's abilities to take more in was always greater than Kodak's at least for my eyes. I'm assuming that you max'd out the Fuji that same way you're doing it now with the Kodak. I've ordered a couple of 8x10s on the new Kodak "Lustre" and have their Fuji counterparts here. It will be interesting to see. Thanks again.

Jay S.

[DanW]

Agreed. This is why it is in the pipeline. We are looking at only the best implementation of each type of processing. Currently Durst Theta units are set up for Black and White with Ilford papers and gray scale profiles which while being excellent do not afford the opportunity to do all types of Black and White papers such as fine art papers and non resin coated papers. If and when we offer true Black and White we want to be able to offer all options.

I dearly hope that you will offer true Black and White. I, like other posters, do like the one-stop shopping, and want this to be part of what I do and part of what I offer clients. I think this is far more important, though possibly more difficult and expensive, than adding metallic paper to the line-up.

By the way, I just got matte and glossy prints of the calibration sheet, on Fuji paper, from Smugmug last week. Should I now re-order on the Kodak paper?

Thanks.

Dan

[Andy]

By the way, I just got matte and glossy prints of the calibration sheet, on Fuji paper, from Smugmug last week. Should I now re-order on the Kodak paper?

Thanks.

DanSend a note, ATTN Robin, to our help desk, we'll get you new ones :)

[mrschunder]

It will indeed. It will say: "Lustre paper is thicker than gloss and matte. In addition, Lustre paper is watermarked on the back as follows:

Kodak Professional ENDURA Paper
DO NOT COPY
PROFESSIONAL IMAGES ARE
COPYRIGHT PROTECTED


That's great and thanks for the response but when can this link get updated on the smug mug website?

http://www.smugmug.com/help/lustre

[Andy]

That's great and thanks for the response but when can this link get updated on the smug mug website?

http://www.smugmug.com/help/lustre
It will be, very soon. It's tied up with our next release which we hope to have shortly. Sorry!

[PhotoTarzan]

Just another vote of approval for the paper switch! I've always had a big preference for Kodak e-surface lustre. I think it's easier to get great skin tones than on Fuji's.

Of course this is entirely subjective, but I've always thought the photogs who preferred the saturation and look of Fuji were looking for the rich greens, magentas, and blue skies in landscape and nature photography. For people/ flesh tones, Kodak seems to me to be the sure winner. Again, totally subjective.

So should we all order new calibration prints? A sale on calibration prints in conjunction with the switch could be the icing on the cake. :beer

[com3]

So should we all order new calibration prints? A sale on calibration prints in conjunction with the switch could be the icing on the cake. :beer


i've already ordered up some... i'll let you know when i get them. i suspect that'll be on monday. :thumb

[scwalter]

You guys might want to update the fotoflot page because it mentions Fuji paper as what we're used to. Does fotoflot use Fuji still or is it also now Kodak? Either way, this page needs updating...

http://www.smugmug.com/prints/fotoflot

fotoflōts are professionally printed on the same fuji-crystal archive paper that you're used to from SmugMug then mounted onto 1/8" acrylic. The final step in this patented process is a laser trim and finish, leaving a gorgeous polished edge and a print that floats off the wall.

[Andy]

Hello Scott, thank you.

We are updating many pages, but not that one. fotoflots are printed by fotoflot, not EZPrints, and thus they are still on Fuji Crystal Archive.

[stan.k]

i just wanted to add one last note. with the change of paper to kodak and with my previous comments with regards to profiling papers, i've done a test print with EZprints on their kodak endura lustre and i'm happy to say that the profile is excellent. i've seen many highly respected pro labs run this exact same paper and they profile it horribly, but this is not the case with EZprints. very accurate color and excellent saturation. keep up the good work!

[Mitchell]

Just want to say I gave the new papers a try and I'm quite impressed. The kodak lustre is really nice. Better than the Fuji IMHO.

Printed this image 12x12 and it looks stunning in lustre!



http://clearwaterphotography.smugmug.com/photos/273642312_QvK6t-XL.jpg

[Andy]

i just wanted to add one last note. with the change of paper to kodak and with my previous comments with regards to profiling papers, i've done a test print with EZprints on their kodak endura lustre and i'm happy to say that the profile is excellent. i've seen many highly respected pro labs run this exact same paper and they profile it horribly, but this is not the case with EZprints. very accurate color and excellent saturation. keep up the good work!

:clap

[3rdPlanetPhotography]

:bow

I've always been a major fan of the Endura paper. I've stuck with other labs for that reason. Now since I changed my printing to a St. Louis lab I was jolted back to Fuji which I don't prefer :huh

Great Change!

[com3]

still waiting to get my prints. i think they came in already, but to my biz address. ain't been in the "office" for ~5 days now. i love being able to be a slacker. :D

[HoyBoy]

I have to admit that all of this talk about metallic paper made me wonder what I was missing. I have to admit that I just cheated and ordered a couple prints from mpix. Ordered on Sunday and they arrived today (Tuesday).

They're AWESOME! I can't wait for EZPrints to have this option through Smuggy!!!:D

[cabbey]

We are updating many pages, but not that one. fotoflots are printed by fotoflot, not EZPrints, and thus they are still on Fuji Crystal Archive.

I think the point was that the phrase "the same fuji-crystal archive paper that you're used to from SmugMug" is no longer entirely accurate, since we're soon to be used to gorgeous Endrua paper from Kodak. (I've got a handfull of Endura prints around the house already, not from EZprints... so I actually thought the previous Lustre papers were an improvement. I can't wait to see my first order of prints from EZPrints to compare. :thumb )

[Andy]

I think the point was that the phrase "the same fuji-crystal archive paper that you're used to from SmugMug" is no longer entirely accurate, since we're soon to be used to gorgeous Endrua paper from Kodak. (I've got a handfull of Endura prints around the house already, not from EZprints... so I actually thought the previous Lustre papers were an improvement. I can't wait to see my first order of prints from EZPrints to compare. :thumb )
Yes, that portion is gone already. Looks like this:

http://img.skitch.com/20080410-pmytk3cf4j7ti7huskrtcgtsib.jpg

but it's not on the live site yet - will be soon :thumb

[com3]

finally got my prints today. they'd been sitting in the mailbox at the office, i just hadn't been in to retreive them...

all the prints seem to be on thinner paper. i grabbed a fuji paper print really quick just to see if i was crazy or not, but, thankfully, i'm not. it really IS thinner paper... almost feels "cheaper."

glossy - looks great. again, thin paper, but the print itself looks excellent. i'd be happy with pics of myself on said paper.

matte - meh. looks "blotchy" for lack of better words. plus, i'm accustomed to seeing matte finishes on THICK paper...so this whole thin paper thing was kinda weird. i won't be ordering any matte prints for customers in the future unless they specify they want matte...

luster - looks great. paper seems thicker than both the matte and gloss finishes too. more like the old fuji paper...

like i said before, i know SQUAT about printing...i simply know what LOOKS GOOD and what doesn't look good. YMMV. :thumb

[Seneca]

Too cool...now when will we be offering packages? I still need packages. But I can wait...I know...one thing at a time. :barb

[MichaelKirk]

I just received and email from a client tonight that is looking for a 4'x6' maybe larger print. This might be worth offering....if its available.
If not any other suggestions? I have a friend that works for Kodak and can possibly print wall size prints, but I have yet to discuss it with him.

Thanks
Michael




Yes, that portion is gone already. Looks like this:

http://img.skitch.com/20080410-pmytk3cf4j7ti7huskrtcgtsib.jpg

but it's not on the live site yet - will be soon :thumb

[Andy]

I just received and email from a client tonight that is looking for a 4'x6' maybe larger print. This might be worth offering....if its available.
If not any other suggestions? I have a friend that works for Kodak and can possibly print wall size prints, but I have yet to discuss it with him.

Thanks
MichaelI'm sorry, not quite following - how soon, what?

[denisegoldberg]

I just received and email from a client tonight that is looking for a 4'x6' maybe larger print. This might be worth offering....if its available.
According to the fotoflot (http://www.fotoflot.com) product page, they offer sizes ranging from 7.5" x 10" to 15" x 30". Does your 4' x 6' print need to be in one piece? Might be interesting to create a mosaic of prints.

--- Denise

[MichaelKirk]

Sorry Andy, I was talking about the fotoflot product, but Denise answered my question as they do not offer large enough print sizes.

Denise,
I think safety of shipping, a mosaic would be the safest and best way to try and do a print this large. As I mentioned I know someone that works at Kodak and has a large printer in his basement - he has already printed a 4x6 mosaic and it looked Fantastic. I think once I get confirmation of the print being ordered I will probably talk to him about getting a quote.

Thanks,
Michael


According to the fotoflot (http://www.fotoflot.com) product page, they offer sizes ranging from 7.5" x 10" to 15" x 30". Does your 4' x 6' print need to be in one piece? Might be interesting to create a mosaic of prints.

--- Denise

[Andy]

Sorry Andy, I was talking about the fotoflot product, but Denise answered my question as they do not offer large enough print sizes.

Denise,
I think safety of shipping, a mosaic would be the safest and best way to try and do a print this large. As I mentioned I know someone that works at Kodak and has a large printer in his basement - he has already printed a 4x6 mosaic and it looked Fantastic. I think once I get confirmation of the print being ordered I will probably talk to him about getting a quote.

Thanks,
MichaelOh - ha - 4feet by 6feet - My bad, didn't read carefully - so, I recommend very much, www.bigposters.com - they go big very well :thumb

[Mike Kalcevic]

This is what I'm seeing with the new ICC for the Kodak paper (on the right). Notice the heavier saturation in the wood, and her lips. How would I go about correcting this? Prior to the paper switch, I only had to do a minor adjustment to the contrast, so I'm a little lost now...

http://MEKPhotography.smugmug.com/photos/274579582_HWDhS-X3.jpg

[Andy]

This is what I'm seeing with the new ICC for the Kodak paper (on the right). Notice the heavier saturation in the wood, and her lips. How would I go about correcting this? Prior to the paper switch, I only had to do a minor adjustment to the contrast, so I'm a little lost now...

http://MEKPhotography.smugmug.com/photos/274579582_HWDhS-X3.jpg
Shoot me an email to our help desk, ATTN: Andy in the subject - with a link to this photo so I can look this weekend and get back to you okay?

[Mike Kalcevic]

Shoot me an email to our help desk, ATTN: Andy in the subject - with a link to this photo so I can look this weekend and get back to you okay?

Just sent it. Thanks Andy! Please, let me know what you find out.

Mike.

[coleygm]

any reason that the 'Pro' watermark is only offered on the Lustre paper? Makes me only want to offer lustre to my customers.

any thoughts greatly appreciated

[Andy]

any reason that the 'Pro' watermark is only offered on the Lustre paper? Makes me only want to offer lustre to my customers.

any thoughts greatly appreciated
It's just the way Kodak makes it. You can add your backprinting, as a pro, to all papers:

http://www.smugmug.com/help/print-backprinting

[davidweaver]

Did EZ switch from Fuji to Kodak? A lab their size can generally only handle one company paper...per the paper company :-)


Or, did you switch labs?

[Andy]

Did EZ switch from Fuji to Kodak? A lab their size can generally only handle one company paper...per the paper company :-)


Or, did you switch labs?
Hi David, read post #1 here in this thread - it's EZPrints our lab, they switched :thumb

[Red71Shark]

I like the skin tones with the new paper. (Which has been a lifelong quest of mine lately...)

Hi Andy - it's Jim Strathearn here. I tried some gloss people prints and was quite satisfied with them. If I can get consistently good results, I'm in! ;-)

[Andy]

I like the skin tones with the new paper. (Which has been a lifelong quest of mine lately...)

Hi Andy - it's Jim Strathearn here. I tried some gloss people prints and was quite satisfied with them. If I can get consistently good results, I'm in! ;-)

w00p :barb

:wave hiya Jim

[HoyBoy]

I just received my first order from the "new" paper this week. They're fantastic!! I'm quite happy with the results. Thanks SmugMug and EZPrints! :clap

[davidweaver]

A solid bump for the newbie.

The decision is based on cost.

Period.

But most of you and your customers and my customers and I will be dead when fading becomes an issue for silver prints. Have you proved to yourself that prints made on different brand papers are better after 100 years framed up or stored dark?

As for color, I still understand that SM will reprint/refund for prints that don't meet your quality standards. So using a cheaper product and getting acceptable results is a bad thing?

Seems reasonable.

Labs like EZ are fulfilling for a whole lot of people. I thik Fotki and DotPhoto are fulfilling there nowadays as are hundreds of other smaller companies.

I wonder if SM is doing regular quality control against EZ and other labs. You basically have a set of test images that you send to the labs on a regular basis and you compare them against the other labs and then again compare them against their prior work to look for issues of consistency. It was a fun, weekly activity at a lab I worked at once upon a time.




Mpix/Millers, and WHCC are amongst the worst national labs when it comes to good color. Trust me. They may be very popular, but that's only because most folks have no CLUE what it takes to get good, and accurate color. So PLEASE do NOT compare to those labs. There are some good labs out there that have great color with Kodak paper, but Mpix/Millers and WHCC are not one of them. Saying that a paper must be good if big labs like Millers and WHCC use them and they're such popular labs.. well thats like saying that burgers from McDonalds must be the best because they're the most popular restaurant... know what i mean?

I've personally always preferred Fuji paper, but not because of the color. I prefer them because their paper lasts longer. Its a proven fact.

As far as getting good color, the Kodak paper vs. Fuji paper makes little to no difference. Both papers are more than capable of getting great color. What matters is how you print it, how you profile the paper, and keeping the printing equipment profiled correctly and calibrated correctly. There are labs out there like Burrell who use Kodak paper and do a fantastic job of profiling it and get excellent, top notch color. There are other labs out there that have an absolute terrible profile that results in much less color saturation and terrible reds and yellows (Millers and WHCC are a prime example). I've not tested EZprints myself, but i really should. Though I have a feeling I won't like what I see.

[davidweaver]

Should I or anyone update this with the info that Fuji bought Kodak's paper and fulfillment business? And that it happened a few months ago?

So 'Kodak' paper is really 'Fuji' paper. Kodak's manufacturing facilities for print and print related products are Fuji's.

This leaves major silver-based paper manufacturing to Fuji, Konica, and some Chinese firms. Don't know about the old Ilford folks however.

Cheers,
David