Re: Dotworks private label papers
Re: Dotworks private label papers
- Subject: Re: Dotworks private label papers
- From: email@hidden
- Date: Sun, 15 Sep 2002 15:23:17 EDT
In a message dated 9/12/02 9:09:09 AM, email@hidden writes:
>
I'm looking in to new papers for an Epson 5000. Currently we are using Photo
>
Quality Glossy and Photo Quality Ink Jet (matte) papers. I found Dotworks
>
private label papers on the web however I can't figure out which of their
>
papers are equivelent to the above Epson papers.
>
Anyone using these papers care to recommend them, or give me the lowdown on
>
which I should test to replace the Epson papers?
>
The Dotworks Private Label line is pretty simple; there is only one gloss,
one luster, (same basic sheet, with different degrees of gloss, both are
excellent and very fade resistant with both dye and pigments) a low cost,
thin double sided semigloss that I suggest for throwaway prints, and for
books, where sheet thickness and doublesidedness matter. In the matte area
they have one fine art paper (100% rag, ph balanced etc...the serious paper
of the bunch), and a nice general purpose matte that is richly matted on both
sides and thick enough to not crease from handling (this is the rollstock I
keep in my roll printers as a standard), plus a card weight thats nearly as
nice, but more a specialty paper for cards and other heavyweight uses.
Choosing shouldn't be difficult, since each paper is for a different purpose.
Some do indeed, come from the same sources as Epson's papers, but its best to
get samples and judge from there. I would have trouble naming a favorite from
this line, as several are just right, but for different uses. Costs for cut
sheets are significantly lower than brand name versions of these papers.
CDTobie
Design Cooperative
email@hidden
_______________________________________________
colorsync-users mailing list | email@hidden
Help/Unsubscribe/Archives:
http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/colorsync-users
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.