I’m frequently asked to name “the best” paper for fine-art inkjet printing. (And, please, let’s call it what it is: “inkjet” or “pigment print” and not “giclee” which is way too affected – like “faux” pearls.)

This is, actually, an complex and “non-trivial” question, and I’ve considered doing a day-long seminar on this one subject alone. The answer, however, is simple:  “The paper you like.”

Not particularly helpful, though, is it? There are photographers of great skill, whose prints i admire, and whose choice in paper does not agree with mine. So, when asking about “the best paper” one is really asking “What paper do you like?” and you need to bear that in mind in what follows. Only you can decide what you prefer. Buy a bunch of sample packs and have a go at it.

With that said here’s my own take on it, as an abbreviation of my forthcoming seminar.

One bit of common wisdom is “Just pick one you like and stick with it. Become an expert at printing on that paper alone.” Personally, I don’t agree. There certainly is some wisdom in that approach, not the least of which is the implied “printing isn’t easy.” But it falls down in a couple of places, in my opinion.

First, you’re choosing either matte or coated paper, and that’s a severe limitation. You’re choosing one texture, with the same complaint. Ditto for temperature, and weight. In short, you’re forcing all your photos to fit the output, when, IMHO, your photos should dictate the paper you choose for the final print.

Matte papers have no “sparkle” and an image of snow, or city lights, or water, or glassware are better served by a coated paper with some sparkle to it. Yes: we do get off into “mood” here – snow on a matte paper conveys a different feeling to the viewer than snow on a coated paper… and that is at least one of the considerations you make as a printer of your own images… one of the things that makes it “an art.”

My point here is that if you limit yourself to one paper, then you no longer have the freedom to make that choice in the first place; your snow photos are all going to be sparkly or all going to be moody.

Being comfortable with different papers only goes to serve your own interests and versatility as an artist.

Papers have different “levels of whiteness” – color temperature of the reflected light. Some, particularly with optical brighteners (OBs) can be almost blindingly white, while others verge on a muted yellow. The former might be well-suited for a crisp mountain lake at noon, while the latter, the same lake during the golden hour.

Some papers are better for black and white, while others are superior for color. Some are better for highly saturated colors, while others (even matte) are better suited for muted colors.

You can see where I’m going with this. Temperature, surface, texture, weight, OBs or not… all of these things are dictated by the image itself, and how you want the viewer to respond to it.  Honestly, only by printing a lot of images will you come to learn the interplay between the paper and ink and image… but you can see by the foregoing that there are some guidelines to get you started.

Second: if you limit yourself to one paper, you’d opting out of the march of technology. Papers (and inks, and printers) improve with time. You are not making it easy on yourself by putting all your eggs in one basket… and you are putting an artificial fixed limit on your print quality. My prints would be nothing like they are now, had I limited myself to an Epson 2000 and Epson Enhanced Matte paper.

Third, just because there are various opinions, doesn’t mean that some papers are not better overall than others. It is generally conceded that a Mercedes is in a different class than a Chevrolet. The same can be said for papers. There’s a very visible reason we pay $3 or $5 or more for a single sheet of paper.

That reason, of course, is how the paper and the inks react together. How dark can you print the shadows without them “clotting up” and turning solid black? How much detail can you preserve in the highlights without them simply disappearing into the paper’s native color? And very importantly, how smooth a gradation can you print – what the width of the tonal range?

Want a great test to check on that latter issue? Do this: in Photoshop, create a circle about 1 1/2 inches in diameter (not critical, just approximate) at 300/360 dpi. Create it using the gradation tool, (in fade to transparency mode !) placing pure black at the center, and dragging out the radius. You’ll end up with “a soft spot” that’s absolute black at the center and fades off to the white of the paper at the edge.

Save it out in a nice wide gamut that your printer can handle, and print that little puppy on various papers, using identical setting each time. If your results are like mine, you’re going to be very surprised at the difference you’ll see between the papers.

I won’t spoil it for you, but let’s just say that you’re looking for a perfect duplication of that spot, and that with many papers you won’t get it. (And you won’t get it in various ways…)

Don’t use those papers for your prints!

—–

Well, let me wrap this up with what you’ve been waiting for: my paper recommendations. There’s much more to consider than the highlights I’ve skimmed through here, but I hope this will help you get going.

Best all around paper brand: Canson (aka Arches). These folks have been making paper for nearly 500 years, and their art papers were used by the world’s most artists, including Picasso, Miro,  Renoir.. the list goes on and on. Their paper is expensive, but the final print quality (which is after all, the whole point of photography) cannot be beat. My personal choice. Their baryta Photographique for a coated paper, and their Velin Museum Rag for a matte, are the two papers I’d choose to use on the proverbial desert island.

Best bang for the buck, and certainly gallery quality too: Ilford Galerie Gold Fibre Silk. Ilford’s Galerie Smooth Pearl is a good paper that’s a bit brighter.

If you want blast your eyes out white, Hawk Mountain Paper’s Sharpwing Luster is my choice.

For a really white Baryta for B&W work, Mitsubishi’s Gekko Green is suitable. (The rest of the Gekko line is sub-par, IMHO.)

Red River makes very acceptable, and less expensive papers, and I use Polar Satin as a general workhorse, where the Canson would be overkill.

Those are the papers I keep on my work-shelf.

Here are some others I don’t hesitate to recommend:

Epson Exhibition Fibre is a bright white paper. Their Watercolor is very good, and the stand-by (aka grandfather) of the fine-art papers is Velvet Fine Art, which still holds its own.

Moab is well liked, as are Legion, Hansen and Museo (although I obviously prefer the Canson products. ) Frankly, I found Hahnemuhle over-rated for the price, but perhaps my expectations were too high.

All that said, I suggest you remember the open paragraphs of this missive: the best paper, is the paper YOU like. Your tastes may be wildly different from mine, and the only way to tell is via sample packs. I hope that my opinion, however, gives you a decent starting point for your investigations.

Best

Tracy