ultra premium presentation paper matte

I was in Best Buy this morning to check prices on 8.5 x 11 photo paper, and saw one pristine box of 13 x 19 Epson Ultra Premium Presentation Paper Matte 5* - 50 sheets for $10.99. Seemed like a major bargain, but I haven't priced it as I've never used that paper or printed that big. But I have a new Epson R1800 printer. Has anyone ever used this paper and can you comment on it ?

Thanks... carolyn -- Ranger a.k.a chammett http://www.pbase.com/chammett

'elegance is simplicity'

c.hammett wrote: I was in Best Buy this morning to check prices on 8.5 x 11 photo paper, and saw one pristine box of 13 x 19 Epson Ultra Premium Presentation Paper Matte 5* - 50 sheets for $10.99. Seemed like a major bargain, but I haven't priced it as I've never used that paper or printed that big. But I have a new Epson R1800 printer. Has anyone ever used this paper and can you comment on it ? Thanks... carolyn -- Ranger a.k.a chammett http://www.pbase.com/chammett 'elegance is simplicity'

I found a sample of this paper I got in a pack of samples from Atlex, an online paper source. Their site said it was formerlly called Enhanced Matte . Printed up an 8 x 10 and I'd lgive int an "o.k." but not just really exciting if paper can be called "exciting"

So I answered my questiaon for ME.... but if anyone has opinions, I'd love to know what others think. It might be nice paper for baby or soft fuzzy pet pictures, but not sure what else.

carolyn -- Ranger a.k.a chammett http://www.pbase.com/chammett

It has also gone under the name of Archival Matte in the UK.

It's pretty good stuff and I use it a lot, especially for any b/w. It also looks great under glass.

http://www.outdoorexposure.co.uk

Alan Hewitt wrote: It has also gone under the name of Archival Matte in the UK. It's pretty good stuff and I use it a lot, especially for any b/w. It also looks great under glass.

Thanks Alan. I have no idea whether the $10.99 USD price for 50 sheets of 13 x 19 paper was good or not, as I could find no comparison locally or online, but it sounded good for that much paper. However, I can't imagine printing 50 13 x 19 matte images in my lifetiime !

carolyn Ranger a.k.a chammett http://www.pbase.com/chammett

I bought some of the 8 1/2 x 11 Ultra a few weeks ago and it sure looked and felt like the Enhanced - and I have been told Enhanced = Ultar.

Checked Altex.com which usually has fair prices - Enhanced 13 x 19 50 sheets were $35.99

Ultra Premium price @ best buy (online) is $55.95.

It is a very economical paper, good image quality, deep blacks, smooth surface, bright white surface. There are some downsides, however. With some printers the deeper values (darker tones) show an unpleasant, uneven mottling effect. The paper contains OBAs which fade shortly, leaving the paper quite yellow in comparison.

(I found this out when comparing a sheet that I had accidentally left half-sandwiched between two boxes for two months. So, one half was exposed to light for a few hours every day; the other half was not exposed to light at all. After 2 months I pulled the sheet fully out and found that there was a clear dividing line between the two halves, with the exposed half clearly yellow compared to the other half.) -- Eric Chan http://people.csail.mit.edu/ericchan/photos/ http://people.csail.mit.edu/ericchan/dp/Epson3800/index.html

c.hammett wrote:

That is an excellent price if they didn't mis-label it. Even the letter-size paper costs more than $10.99.

I thought $10.99 for 50 sheets of 13 x 19 sounded awfully cheap... even if it was 8.5 x 12 rather than the larger format. I haven't bought anything but lots of Premium Glossy which I like for albums of my 8 x 10's, so I'm a newbie at both the 13 x 19 size as well as the paper type.

I did notice when I printed a test sheet from my sample box of Epson papers, that the Premium Matte seemed to have less intensity or saturation using the same settings I use and from which I get excellent color matching on glossy, but that could be the difference in matte and gloss papers and the gloss optimizer on the glossy paper. It was not a critical difference in my subject matter (Kenyan elephants which can be any color from gray-tan in color to dusty reddish - brown depending on how much dust they've thrown on themselves l) . I would have to make some adjustments in CS3 if I were gong to anything color-critical with that paper I think.

So, has anyone noticed that the matte papes take color slightly differetnly ?

There is definitely a big difference in color appearance between matte and non-matte papers. First off, the matte papers are basically free of glare; that already makes a big difference in appearance! But also matte papers tend to have a more restricted color gamut and contrast range. These are fundamental differences that should definitely be accounted for when doing image processing, or at least when deciding which paper to use for printing specific images. -- Eric Chan http://people.csail.mit.edu/ericchan/photos/ http://people.csail.mit.edu/ericchan/dp/Epson3800/index.html

Eric Chan wrote: There is definitely a big difference in color appearance between matte and non-matte papers. First off, the matte papers are basically free of glare; that already makes a big difference in appearance! But also matte papers tend to have a more restricted color gamut and contrast range. These are fundamental differences that should definitely be accounted for when doing image processing, or at least when deciding which paper to use for printing specific images. -- Eric Chan http://people.csail.mit.edu/ericchan/photos/ http://people.csail.mit.edu/ericchan/dp/Epson3800/index.html

So what type images do you think are best used on Matte ? I see b/w and maybe some portraits or "soft subjects" like pets . I dug out a sample of Matte that came in a sample pack of Epson papers, and printed a group of elephants on it. The effect was very nice, but ti seemed to lack "punch" of a dramatic image or an image on glossy paper.

Images that have deep, dark saturated colors that need that extra "punch" could benefit from a luster, glossy paper. Images whose subject matter suggest gloss, shininess, or reflectivity can often benefit from gloss, too (e.g., images of machinery, etc.). But it comes down to personal taste. For many of my color images I prefer a smooth or lightly textured matte paper. This is especially true for New England fall foliage images. In most cases I really dislike the reflections from gloss/luster papers and often will choose a matte paper solely for this reason. These days, my default is matte unless there is a specific image need for a glossy/luster. -- Eric Chan http://people.csail.mit.edu/ericchan/photos/ http://people.csail.mit.edu/ericchan/dp/Epson3800/index.html

c.hammett wrote: Eric Chan wrote: There is definitely a big difference in color appearance between matte and non-matte papers. First off, the matte papers are basically free of glare; that already makes a big difference in appearance! But also matte papers tend to have a more restricted color gamut and contrast range. These are fundamental differences that should definitely be accounted for when doing image processing, or at least when deciding which paper to use for printing specific images. -- Eric Chan http://people.csail.mit.edu/ericchan/photos/ http://people.csail.mit.edu/ericchan/dp/Epson3800/index.html

Carolyn, it is good to read your post.

Probably 85% of my Photos are on Epson Enhanced Matte Photo paper. It now (some places) has a different name. I use the Epson 2200 and two R800 printers.

When I have an image that I "specifically" want to emphasize the Shadow details, I will process that image for the specific effects. I have had absolutely NO problems in that regard with Matte Photos....

I will acknowledge that I am NOT a fan of Glossy. I got all of that type that I wanted when using the Wet Dark Room, Ferro type Plates, and the "squeegee" (spell ?). Also, glossy seems too be much like the "drug store" type prints. However, this is NOT intended to criticize others that like glossy -- There are good reasons for the use of glossy as needed.

I do print a few images (small size -- 4 x 6) on InkJetArt Micro Ceramic Luster paper which is nice and also have a good supply of 8 1/2 x 11 inch that I occasionally use -- but none larger. The 13 x 19 box of 50 sheets price you mentioned would be a real bargain.

I have printed MANY (primarily Family) images on 13 x 19 and a few on two sheets of 13 x 19 then combined the 2 parts when mounting. These were scans form Hasselblad Medium Format (both Color and B/W) negatives and they are really nice and it almost seems like they are there in real "life size".

Latest sample galleries

Latest in-depth reviews

With the EOS R1, Canon's flagship EOS-1 line of cameras finally makes the leap to mirrorless technology. Find out how the R1 compares to its predecessors and what new features it offers professional photographers.

Canon has announced the EOS R5 Mark II: a supercharged R5 that borrows many of the innovations from the flagship EOS R1. We take a closer look at what it brings.

Sony has updated its APS-C vlogging camera with a sensor much better suited to 4K and a larger battery.

The Leica D-Lux 8 is a gently updated version of the D-Lux 7, bringing the latest interface and styling cues to match the Q3 and reminding us how much we like a good enthusiast compact.

The Pentax 17 is the first Pentax film camera in two decades. It's built around a half-frame film format and includes design cues inspired by previous Pentax models. Is the experience worth the price of admission? We tested it to find out.

Latest buying guides

What’s the best camera for around $2000? This price point gives you access to some of the most all-round capable cameras available. Excellent image quality, powerful autofocus and great looking video are the least you can expect. We've picked the models that really stand out.

What's the best camera for travel? Good travel cameras should be small, versatile, and offer good image quality. In this buying guide we've rounded-up several great cameras for travel and recommended the best.

If you want a compact camera that produces great quality photos without the hassle of changing lenses, there are plenty of choices available for every budget. Read on to find out which portable enthusiast compacts are our favorites.

'What's the best mirrorless camera?' We're glad you asked.

Above $2500 cameras tend to become increasingly specialized, making it difficult to select a 'best' option. We case our eye over the options costing more than $2500 but less than $4000, to find the best all-rounder.

• Gear Patrol
• Work for us
• Advertise with us
• Feedback / Contact us
• Camera reviews
• Lens reviews
• Printer reviews
• Buying guides
• Sample images
• Editorial enquiries
• Camera search
• Camera comparison
• Lens search
• Product timeline
• Browse all products
• Community Guidelines
• My Settings
• My GearList

• Remember me Not recommended on shared computers

Forgot your password?

• The Digital Darkroom: Process, Technique & Printing

Ultra Premium Presentation Paper Matte (formerly called EEM)

By jeff_z. March 23, 2008 in The Digital Darkroom: Process, Technique & Printing

Recommended Posts

After taking out some prints made on Epson Enhanced Matte many months ago with an Epson 2200,

and re-reading several past threads on this subject, I'm inclined to perhaps use this paper again for

framed prints offered for sale. (The paper I actually have is the formerly titled, 'Epson Enhanced

Matte', now called 'Ultra Premium.. Matte').

First of all, I am really impressed when viewing these prints from over a year and a half ago, as

compared with the same images printed on two of the highly regarded, bright white, rag papers. I've

been printing for awhile, so don't think that it's a profile issue. While the images printed on the two

other materials look subjectively quite good (I'd rather not name these papers, and perhaps

unjustifiably knock them), when compared with those on the EEM, there is a discernible difference; the

EEM prints appear sharper and more luminous; the images seem to "pop". To perhaps additionally

clarify, these prints were unframed and not matted, but stacked loosely in an acid free, Light

Impressions box. I would describe the humidity in the room as seasonably varied; I live in the

northeastern U.S.

I think that the big knock on this paper has been the OBA issue, which, from what I've read in the last

year or so (Clayton Jones among others, if memory serves), there is now more ambiguity in terms of

whether or not OBA's clearly pose a problem. Not sure if my take on this is correct, so please correct

me. As far as the yellowing that a few people say they have noticed, I don't see it in these prints, and

it seems that all along there have been other posters with the same take, and as mentioned, these

printed images have certainly not appeared to deteriorate at all.

My intention is to offer framed prints for sale, along with personal use, so I would really appreciate

others' thoughts on using this paper for that purpose. I have to say that after reading others'

dissenting (in favor of EEM) opinions in past threads, coupled with what I am actually seeing, I am very

inclined to think that Ultra-chrome images printed on this paper will last a very long time, especially

in a sealed frame. Thanks.

Link to comment

Share on other sites, robert_brake1.

EEM will yellow (or more correctly, lose its OBAs) quite rapidly. Take out a fresh piece, cover

half with another piece of heavy paper and leave on an open shelf--it doesn't have to be in

direct sunlight--then remove the covering paper a week or two later and see what you have.

The name change may have brought a new formulation, could be worth trying the same

experiment with the Presentation version.

This debate's been going on for quite a while. Since I use EEM a bit on prints that I sell, I conducted an experiment in which I made several identical Epson K3 pigment ink prints, storing a control print in a cool, dark place, one framed on my office wall away from direct sunlight and two taped to the inside of a southeast-facing window that receives direct sun for nearly half the day: one was sprayed with 3 coats of PrintShield and the other left unsprayed. In short, after 6 months there was no discernible difference amongst the prints. Maybe not scientific enough a test for some, but I continue to use EEM without worry as do several highly-regarded members of these forums.

It's a fine paper.

Robert, I intend to experiment more like the way you mentioned, but think I've at least

somewhat simulated these experiments in the past, and I'm not seeing much in the way

of yellowing. Moreover, I'm not seeing a reduction in image quality in the printed area of

the paper, at least so far. But, I will try something similar to what you mentioned and

report back.

Dick, That's a very interesting experiment, I think. I'd read your thoughts on this

previously, and find it reassuring and positive that they have not changed. Yes, I think I'm

finally realizing that it is a fine paper, too. I can't say that I've tried a huge variety of

others, but the ones that I have tried are well regarded, and they simply do not seem to

have that great quality of appearance that I attempted to describe in comparison. Frankly,

I was startled at this until looking at these older prints again, as I had pretty much given

up on EEM because of the negative publicity.

Of course, please keep the experienced thoughts and opinions coming. Thanks.

robert_fisher4

Frans_waterlander.

I've been printing on Epson Enhanced Matte (or whatever name the yutzes at Epson decide

to call it this afternoon) for several years. Probably several thousand prints. It's ultra-

smooth surface is very sharp and produces the look I want for many of my photos.

Yes, the paper color softens and warms a little bit when being displayed for long periods

and exposed to light and air. I've not found it to be objectionable.

Why I'm printing more on Velvet Fine Art and other rag papers today is because they are

able to take more ink and produce better results when I'm printing deeper toned photos. I

also like the more textured surface for some kinds of work, where ultimate detailing is not

the principle target.

bobmichaels

Robert Brake said; "EEM will yellow (or more correctly, lose its OBAs) quite rapidly. Take out a fresh piece, cover half with another piece of heavy paper and leave on an open shelf--it doesn't have to be in direct sunlight--then remove the covering paper a week or two later and see what you have."

I have done this myself and it is scary how quickly the paper base changes.

And Frans Waterlander said: "For eight years I have used EEM and now the presentation version exclusively for all my own prints and those that I sell and have noticed no fading or yellowing of either EEM or presentation prints framed behind standard glass or kept in archival quality albums."

And I've had framed EEM prints hanging for six years and cannot notice a degradation.

Now the question comes how I reconcile the two divergent observations. It may be the atmospheric contaminants on the unframed prints. Or, it may be that without comparison one does not notice the differences.

I use EEM for proofs only. I use a better rag papers for anything I distribute to anyone else, even if it's just a "thank you for posing" print since I've found those hanging on walls.

roger_smith4

"...the surface is acidic and non-archival."???

Wilhelm Research rates permanence of the Epson Premium Presentation Paper Matte with UltraChrome Inks not framed at 70 years, framed with standard glass at over 150 years and stored in an album at 185 years, which , I may say, is far better than conventional photo paper. Calling this paper acidic and non-archival is misleading at best.

Frans: I think if you read Wilhelm in detail, you will find that he's testing the fade resistance of Ultachrome inks on Epson Premium Presentation Matte. But none of the test relate to the paper, just the inks.

Personally, I skeptical of assigning much significance to the Wilhelm conclusions after reading much of what he wrote. But that's just me, YMMV.

I do know that EEM tests slightly acidic when I test it with my Ph pen.

Through this discussion I have been careful to not say one should not use EEM or UPPPM for long term use, only to say that I see questions and do not use it personally. You should follow whatever conclusions you reach and do what you want.

After carefully reading the recent posts, I went back in good natural light and tried to

carefully examine everything once more. For a few days now, I've had several prints made

on different papers taped up on the wall of a room that receives plenty of daylight. This

light is best in morning, so this is the time I chose for this purpose. And again, for the

sake of clarity, all of these prints were previously loosely stacked in a corrugated Light

Impressions box, which is most probably not air tight. The box has been in several

rooms, and in widely varying humidity conditions. I fully realize that this is in no way a

controlled scientific situation.

I pulled out some unused sheets of EEM from two different boxes that were in the

original packaging, but previously opened; this of course is not fresh paper from a sealed

box, so I'm well aware that someone is going to say that therefore there is even less

validity to this, and perhaps this does have a material effect. This unused paper was put

away carefully after its last use, placed inside the inner translucent sleeves with the flaps

down, then placed into the original boxes for storage. I made the comparisons from the

innermost sheets of each box (which, by the way, were indistinguishable from those on

the top and bottom). Fwiw, I see no difference at all in the color of the wide, unprinted

border area of the 1.5 year old printed sheets, and the unused paper.

"Frans: I think if you read Wilhelm in detail, you will find that he's testing the fade resistance of Ultachrome inks on Epson Premium Presentation Matte. But none of the test relate to the paper, just the inks."

If you had researched Wilhelm Research a little more carefully you would have found that they tested Epson Ultra Premium Presentation Paper Matte with UltraChrome Inks, as I reported. Second, you need to explain how these tests apply to the ink only and not the paper and ink combination. Maybe it's time to educate yourself a little better before opining here.

thomas_brabant1

Since I have for some 5 years used this paper, in conjunction with many other papers, and found it very satifactory, I was interested in this thread. And thank you for the imput from many.

But what irked me about this thread was the last by Fran, who said:

"Maybe it's time to educate yourself a little better before opining here."

Maybe you should educate yourself a little better about manners and respect before "opining here".

I speak out when people bring up incorrect information to contradict what I have truthfully stated. Manners and respect would dictate that people do their homework before saying others are incorrect.

Point out the differece in the two opinions about the problem, but what is to be gained by your snide little comment? What did that gain you, except to try to blow up your ego?

Frans said: "Bob,

If you had researched Wilhelm Research a little more carefully you would have found that they tested Epson Ultra Premium Presentation Paper Matte with UltraChrome Inks, as I reported. Second, you need to explain how these tests apply to the ink only and not the paper and ink combination. Maybe it's time to educate yourself a little better before opining here."

Bob replies: Frans, I have read several of Henry Wilhelm's scientific papers about his testing methodology. Suffice to say that his tests relate only to the ink fading (image stability)on various papers using various inks. None of his tests relate to the stability of the paper itself.

Now I've been wrong before and undoubtedly will be again sometime. But I don't believe this is one of those times.

Henry Wilhelm has many articles on his methodology shown on his website http://www.wilhelm-research.com/ I haven't read every one of them. But in all of those I have read, there is no reference to testing anything but image stability. If you can find one where he tests the actual paper itself, give me a reference as I'd love to read it and be more informed. And, I'll certainly have no problem acknowledging that you were right and I was wrong.

These tests determine image degradation, not degradation of ink or paper separately. Both are needed to create an image and both interact with each other in ways that determine image fade resistance. The derived fade resistance data is not for ink or paper separately, but for the combination of both.

And if you make the effort to look for it you will find on the Wilhelm website data for the combination of Epson Ultra Premium Presentation Paper Matte and UltraChrome Inks as I indicated before.

Frans said: "These tests determine image degradation, not degradation of ink or paper separately."

Yes, my point exactly. The Wilhelm tests use very bright light over a relatively short period of time to extrapolate the effect of more normal light over a shorter period of time on image degradation. Those tests involve certain inks on various papers.

And nowhere does he do any tests attempt to extrapolate the stability of the paper substrate over longer times. That has been my point all along.

There is a reason Wilhelm does not test for the paper substrate life. Paper has been around for a long time. We already know that non-acidic paper last for the time frames he references. But the key word is "non-acidic". And EEM is acidic. Others have established that. I've done simple tests myself with a pH test pen. We already know that acidic papers degrade over the time frames he test.

An analogy would be testing the paint on a car and concluding it would last for many years without determining if the metal underneath would rust away in that time frame.

Hopefully I have explained my point so that you understand it.

Bob, Although in no way do I claim to have any expertise in the meanings of Wilhelm's

test conclusions, the first thing to pop into my mind upon reading this is why in the

world would he test this, or for that matter, any ink/paper combination, if the particular

paper's longevity was a separate question?

Also, you say, "We already know that acidic papers degrade over the time frames he test."

Again, I do not have any expertise in this, but after reading this, who is "we" and what

are the data parameters as far as how much acidity must be present to ensure that this

image degradation indeed takes place? Any amount at all, or above a certain figure? And,

of course, just where does this particular paper figure in relation to this acidity issue?

Jeff Z asks: "the first thing to pop into my mind upon reading this is why in the world would he test this, or for that matter, any ink/paper combination, if the particular paper's longevity was a separate question?"

Bob replies: Wilhelm Research is a for-profit business. Henry Wilhelm tests the products that companies pay him to test. Epson previously had a serious problem with ink fading within months. Now Epson pays Wilhelm to test their ink fading so Epson can use his results to assure potential buyers that the problems of old have been solved. There was not a serious confidence problem with paper disintegrating quickly as it happens longer term. With no need to reassure skeptical buyers, Epson does not pay for tests from Wilhelm. So he doesn't do them.

Then Jeff Z. asks about degradation of acidic papers.

Bob says: I don't have hard and fast answers for this one. I don't know if there are specific parameters or, if so, how they relate to EEM / UPPPM. I only know that it is generally considered that acidic papers are not archival and EEM is not pH neutral. Just no good answers for this one.

Now I'm not comparing EEM / UPPPM to newsprint. But look at a year old newspaper that's been carried around to today's newspaper. That is the extreme example of acidic paper (i.e. low cost production).

So going back to Jeff Z's original question, it becomes a tough call with evidence going both ways. I can't answer for others, only myself. The nature of my work essentially precludes the sale of prints. But I do make it available at no cost to involved parties. I've walked into museum and found my prints as a part of a permanent exhibit. I've been invited into houses and found prints that I've make of and given to their grandfather hanging on the way. Was I thankful that I didn't do those "freebies" on EEM? You bet! There are no easy answers.

Bob, Not sure why you're using the "Jeff Z. asks", "Bob replies" format for your reply.. At

any rate, I would like to explore the facts that can be determined about this issue,

basically because of the claims about "yellowing" and what this potentially could mean for

longevity. These claims are clearly countered by several experienced printers who are not

seeing this yellowing, including me. As mentioned previously, I'd personally put this issue

to rest a while back, and consequently, had spent a lot of money and time making sure

everything was "archival", and "acid free", but was floored when rediscovering these older

prints printed on EEM. They are probably the best prints I've produced in terms of

contrast, color and sharpness.

I might be completely wrong, but still can't quite buy your reasoning about any potential

paper issues being separate from Wilhelm's test results. I'd thought that it was the unique

combination of paper and ink that constituted the most important determining factors for

his longevity ratings. In other words, any paper issues are already taken into account in

his final results. Why else would he emphasize the importance of the combination? I can

only guess that what you're saying is, that it is only the surface coating of the paper that

is the crucial factor in the paper part of the paper/ink equation? If so, does Wilhelm

clearly state that? Does anyone else know if this is correct/incorrect?

From your words, it sounds like you think there is a strong "business" factor at play.. Not

arguing, I'm cynical about these things too, generally, but was hoping his opinion was

honest.. It seems nonsensical to say on the one hand, that the combination of a particular

paper with a certain type of ink was so important, and then to say, "but wait, we really

didn't fully consider the compositional paper properties."

Also, given that this paper is acidic, did you happen to test the other papers you're using

as well? From a quick read of the literature, it doesn't look like Epson is claiming that

UPPPM/EEM is acid free, so I'm sure you're correct, but given the fact that others are

seeing no paper degradation after using it for several years, I wonder if this is critically

important? I suppose it would then be logical to say, well, I don't see anything yet, but

who's to say it won't fall apart in x years? If so, this is indeed a tough area... literally, I

guess, only time will tell..

Do alternative papers guarantee that it won't? I suspect that the composition of the over

mat, backing board, etc., could possibly be material as well. Related to this perhaps,

Epson's Velvet Fine Art paper is advertised as being acid free, but Wilhelm actually rates

it lower than the UPPPM/EEM longevity rating. I feel strongly that you are correct about

there being "no easy answers", but also feel that there is no existing empirical evidence,

that I've seen anyways, that clearly justifies denigrating this paper. It would seem

incumbent upon the paper company to clear these issues up. This all, of course, imho. All

considered replies very appreciated.

It seems to me we are beating a dead horse here. Epson Enhanced Matte paper (EEM) has been discontinued for years. Its replacement, Epson Ultra Premium Presentation Paper Matte (UPPPM) used with UltraChrome ink has an impressive fade resistance: 70 years for unframed prints, 150+ years framed with standard glass and 185 years in albums. What else is there to discuss? Are we badmouthing this excellent, very reasonably priced paper to justify more expensive papers with fade resistance characteristics that may not be any better or even worse?

Yellowing? It has been reported with EEM but I've never heard of yellowing issues with UPPPM. I don't see yellowing or fading of my 8 year old EEM prints nor of newer UPPPM prints.

Jeff: Wilhelm tests and rates the fading of the ink on the paper, not if the paper lasts. He projects (projects being a very key word) that prints on EEM will fade less than prints on VFA. He simply does not address which paper, irrespective of the ink on it, will last longer. He wasn't paid for that. I have no questions about his honesty. But one must delve into the details to see what he was testing and what he was not. That was my discussion with Frans.

My EEM tests slightly acidic. But I have no numbers, only a pH test pen. Everyone seems to agree that it's slightly acidic. None of my good rag papers tests acidic at all.

How bad is "slightly acidic"? I don't know the answer to that one.

I have seen EEM yellow. I've laid a sheet out on the table half covered and half exposed to office air and light. I see a visible difference in months.

I also have EEM prints that have been mounted for six years and still look OK. I cannot adequately reconcile that with the yellowing I have experienced and described in the previous paragraph.

I don't think that 99.9% of Epson paper users are concerned about archivability. So Epson doesn't bother. For those who have concerns, they sell non acidic paper. You seem to fall in between those two groups.

For me there are enough questions about the archivability of EEM so that I don't use it for important prints. I do use a lot of it for proofs however. It is a good standard to reference other papers to.

No problems if the questions about EEM are not enough to keep you from using it for important work. We all interpret the facts differently and reach different conclusions. I doubt if either of us will be around in 70-100 years to see the actual results. More importantly, no one may have any interest in our prints in that time frame.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Already have an account? Sign in here.

• Existing user? Sign In
• Member Albums
• Online Users
• Leaderboard
• Terms of Service
• All Activity
• Photography Fundamentals
• Photo Editing
• Camera Guides

The Unique Burial of a Child of Early Scythian Time at the Cemetery of Saryg-Bulun (Tuva)

<< Previous page

Pages:  379-406

In 1988, the Tuvan Archaeological Expedition (led by M. E. Kilunovskaya and V. A. Semenov) discovered a unique burial of the early Iron Age at Saryg-Bulun in Central Tuva. There are two burial mounds of the Aldy-Bel culture dated by 7th century BC. Within the barrows, which adjoined one another, forming a figure-of-eight, there were discovered 7 burials, from which a representative collection of artifacts was recovered. Burial 5 was the most unique, it was found in a coffin made of a larch trunk, with a tightly closed lid. Due to the preservative properties of larch and lack of air access, the coffin contained a well-preserved mummy of a child with an accompanying set of grave goods. The interred individual retained the skin on his face and had a leather headdress painted with red pigment and a coat, sewn from jerboa fur. The coat was belted with a leather belt with bronze ornaments and buckles. Besides that, a leather quiver with arrows with the shafts decorated with painted ornaments, fully preserved battle pick and a bow were buried in the coffin. Unexpectedly, the full-genomic analysis, showed that the individual was female. This fact opens a new aspect in the study of the social history of the Scythian society and perhaps brings us back to the myth of the Amazons, discussed by Herodotus. Of course, this discovery is unique in its preservation for the Scythian culture of Tuva and requires careful study and conservation.

Keywords: Tuva, Early Iron Age, early Scythian period, Aldy-Bel culture, barrow, burial in the coffin, mummy, full genome sequencing, aDNA

Information about authors: Marina Kilunovskaya (Saint Petersburg, Russian Federation). Candidate of Historical Sciences. Institute for the History of Material Culture of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Dvortsovaya Emb., 18, Saint Petersburg, 191186, Russian Federation E-mail: [email protected] Vladimir Semenov (Saint Petersburg, Russian Federation). Candidate of Historical Sciences. Institute for the History of Material Culture of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Dvortsovaya Emb., 18, Saint Petersburg, 191186, Russian Federation E-mail: [email protected] Varvara Busova  (Moscow, Russian Federation).  (Saint Petersburg, Russian Federation). Institute for the History of Material Culture of the Russian Academy of Sciences.  Dvortsovaya Emb., 18, Saint Petersburg, 191186, Russian Federation E-mail:  [email protected] Kharis Mustafin  (Moscow, Russian Federation). Candidate of Technical Sciences. Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology.  Institutsky Lane, 9, Dolgoprudny, 141701, Moscow Oblast, Russian Federation E-mail:  [email protected] Irina Alborova  (Moscow, Russian Federation). Candidate of Biological Sciences. Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology.  Institutsky Lane, 9, Dolgoprudny, 141701, Moscow Oblast, Russian Federation E-mail:  [email protected] Alina Matzvai  (Moscow, Russian Federation). Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology.  Institutsky Lane, 9, Dolgoprudny, 141701, Moscow Oblast, Russian Federation E-mail:  [email protected]

Shopping Cart Items: 0 Cart Total: 0,00 € place your order

Price pdf version

student - 2,75 € individual - 3,00 € institutional - 7,00 €

Copyright В© 1999-2022. Stratum Publishing House

Thank you for your interest in Epson. To subscribe and receive promotional emails, please visit Epson Global to find your local site.

Our system shows that the email that you entered might be incorrect or undeliverable. Please confirm your email address is correct before continuing. Email should be a [email protected] format with no space before or after.

• © 2024 Epson America, Inc.
• Terms of Use
• Accessibility
• CA Supply Chains Act
• CA Privacy Rights
• Privacy Policy
• Your Privacy Choices

• Moscow Oblast
•  » 
• Elektrostal

Black Raptor Pro

Phone 8 (915) 269-29-39 8 (915) 269-29-39

Construction of buildings near Black Raptor Pro

• Office Products
• Office & School Supplies
• Copy & Printing Paper
• Photo Paper

No featured offers available

• Quality Price,
• Reliable delivery option, and
• Seller who offers good customer service

Sorry, there was a problem.

Image Unavailable

• To view this video download Flash Player

Epson Premium Presentation Paper MATTE (8.5x11 Inches, Double-sided, 50 Sheets) (S041568),Bright White

50 Count (Pack of 1)

50 Count (Pack of 2)

About this item

• Perfect for non-glare photographs, craft projects and signage.
• Resists fading up to 72 years.
• Guaranteed to work with all inkjet printers.
• Pack of 50 Sheets

Product information

Technical details.

Additional Information

Warranty & Support

Fields with an asterisk * are required

From the manufacturer

Looking for specific info?

Videos for this product.

Click to play video

6 Month Review! Epson Paper!

✅ The Dixons

Epson Genuine Ink and Paper

Epson America Inc.

What's in the box

• Cardstock & Business Communication Paper (Paper)
• Brochure Paper

Product Description

Perfect for non-glare photographs, craft projects and signage. Resists fading up to 72 years. Guaranteed to work with all inkjet printers. Form Type: N/A; Global Product Type: Office Paper; Paper Type: Presentation; Sheet Size (W x H): 8 1/2 in x 11 in.

This double-sided matte paper from Epson is designed for use with inkjet printers and is ideal for printing sales brochures, greeting cards, newsletter, and photographic portfolios that require both photographic image quality as well as the versatility of two-sided printing with no show-through. The 8.5-by-11-inch sheets have a 93% opacity and an ISO brightness of 103, resulting in bright whites that help make your prints stand out. The 47 lb. basis weight and 9.7 mil thickness means that your prints have a sturdy, professional feel to them. Each package contains 50 sheets of paper.

From the Manufacturer

Double-Sided Matte Paper is the ideal paper for printing sales brochures, greeting cards, newsletters and photographic portfolios that require both photographic image quality as well as the versatility of two-sided printing with no show-through. Produces bright, vibrant images and crisp dark text. Heavyweight, two-sided, coated paper has a smooth finish and is compatible with all inkjet printers.

Similar brands on Amazon

Customer reviews

• 5 star 4 star 3 star 2 star 1 star 5 star 83% 10% 4% 1% 2% 83%
• 5 star 4 star 3 star 2 star 1 star 4 star 83% 10% 4% 1% 2% 10%
• 5 star 4 star 3 star 2 star 1 star 3 star 83% 10% 4% 1% 2% 4%
• 5 star 4 star 3 star 2 star 1 star 2 star 83% 10% 4% 1% 2% 1%
• 5 star 4 star 3 star 2 star 1 star 1 star 83% 10% 4% 1% 2% 2%

Customer Reviews, including Product Star Ratings help customers to learn more about the product and decide whether it is the right product for them.

To calculate the overall star rating and percentage breakdown by star, we don’t use a simple average. Instead, our system considers things like how recent a review is and if the reviewer bought the item on Amazon. It also analyzed reviews to verify trustworthiness.

Customers say

Customers like the performance, value, and print quality of the print copy paper. They mention that it works fantastic, saves them money, and produces beautiful prints. They also like the versatility, and color. That said, opinions are mixed on double sided printing, thickness, and quality.

AI-generated from the text of customer reviews

Customers are satisfied with the print quality of the paper. They mention that it is fantastic, vibrant, and crisp. Some say that it's lower in quality than photographic paper, yet higher in qualitythan card stock. However, most say that the paper serves their needs very well and is a great way to print matte photos.

"...Perfect for professional or creative projects requiring high-quality prints . Highly recommended!" Read more

"...It is bright but has a slightly cool cast to it.So the paper is great , but DON'T EVER BUY IT FROM AMAZON! They shipped it in a plastic bag...." Read more

"Almost like a cardstock on it's thickness. Great prints ...." Read more

" prints great as long as you have the right settings. will buy again, I use this paper for cards and cake toppers prints" Read more

Customers are satisfied with the performance of the print copy paper. They mention that it works well in their inkjet printer, produces beautiful results, and is of excellent quality. Some say that the paper has a decent weight, making it great for card making and papercraft projects. It also works well with vector-based text programs like Microsoft Word and Adobe Illustrator.

"The Epson Premium Presentation Paper MATTE delivers outstanding results for both printing and presentations...." Read more

"...of the people, and it held the ink without smearing and made for a great presentation of in the folders we bought on Amazon...." Read more

"...I use it to make pictures to color with gel pens. It works very well . Once I adjusted the paper thickness on my printer it was perfect." Read more

"I've used this cardstock for quite a while now. It works well with my Epson printer for all my printing needs and the quality is great...." Read more

Customers like the color of the paper. They say it gives beautiful color, and the printouts resulted in very vivid color. They also find the color consistent, and say the brilliance and color accuracy far exceed that of a glossy finish paper. Customers also say that the photos look terrific printed on it, and that it makes the colors pop.

"...It holds sharp detail and bright color . It is a light cover weight. About 10 mil. It is bright but has a slightly cool cast to it...." Read more

"...jigsaw puzzles as assembly guides (Pandemic times), because the color is accurate , and also to make copies of visa documents, because they survive..." Read more

"The colors are so vibrant ! Got the job done and exceeded my expectations!" Read more

"I do a lot of color printing and this paper really makes the colors pop !..." Read more

Customers like the value of the print copy paper. They say it's the best and most affordable 192 gram professional photography paper out there, and it consistently makes rich beautiful prints. They also say it saves them a lot of money and is very worth it.

"...paper holds ink better than regular paper, and it's less expensive than photo paper ...." Read more

" Excellent value for great paper . It works perfectly with my Epson printer." Read more

" Love the quality and price . Will continue to purchase." Read more

"...This will end up saving me a lot of money as the other paper I use is expensive." Read more

Customers like the versatility of the print copy paper. They mention it's good for making greeting cards, fine art portfolios, DIY photo gifts, wedding stationery, posters, and a variety of projects.

"...These print nicely, have a great weight, and are good for a variety of projects " Read more

" Perfect for making wall calandars ...." Read more

"...High quality double sided matte photo paper is great for many uses . Thick and durable. Prints look great. Highly recommended." Read more

"...Much better and more personal than store-bought cards ." Read more

Customers have mixed opinions about the quality of the print copy paper. Some say that it can handle high quality graphics and produces amazingly crisp text. The matte finish allows good print quality on both sides of the paper. However, some customers feel that it is not poster quality and that the pictures don't come out any better than everyday print paper. They also mention that one of the corners was bent.

"...double-sided feature is convenient, and the bright white finish enhances the clarity of text and images ...." Read more

"...and also to make copies of visa documents, because they survive the stress of packing ..." Read more

"...well with my Epson printer for all my printing needs and the quality is great ...." Read more

"...Just a plastic bag. So, of course, the corners were smashed . It's obviously not going to feed through my printer, so I sent it all back...." Read more

Customers are mixed about the thickness of the print copy paper. Some mention it's double sided, thick matte, and just feels good in your hands. The texture and thickness is great for art prints, while others say it'll barely thicker than copy paper and feels like thin cardstock.

"...I print a lot of cold laminated stickers, and the best sticker paper is matte because it absorbs more ink so less fading...." Read more

"...It IS a little thin though, and feels like thin cardstock . If you want sturdier art prints, you'll want to find something thicker...." Read more

"The paper is thicker than what I expected . I use it to make pictures to color with gel pens. It works very well...." Read more

"...order when the top sheet printed with a semi gloss sheen and was a lot thicker and did not have the same tooth as the last package...." Read more

Customers are mixed about the double sided printing. Some mention that it works great for two-sided printing, and is double-sided so you never print on the wrong side. However, others say that it doesn't print both sides and only prints on one side.

"...Although I did not print on both sides, the paper is double-sided ." Read more

"Got it because my new printer did not print , Still does not use the paper in another printer" Read more

"...This photo paper is phenomenal! You can print on both sides without bleed through , and it's very thick just like cardstock...." Read more

"...however as it appears that the 100 count package is NOT suitable for 2 sided printing . This 50 count package is 2 sided...." Read more

Reviews with images

• Sort reviews by Top reviews Most recent Top reviews

Top reviews from the United States

There was a problem filtering reviews right now. please try again later..

Top reviews from other countries

• About Amazon
• Investor Relations
• Amazon Devices
• Amazon Science
• Sell products on Amazon
• Sell on Amazon Business
• Sell apps on Amazon
• Become an Affiliate
• Advertise Your Products
• Self-Publish with Us
• Host an Amazon Hub
• › See More Make Money with Us
• Amazon Business Card
• Shop with Points
• Reload Your Balance
• Amazon Currency Converter
• Amazon and COVID-19
• Your Account
• Your Orders
• Shipping Rates & Policies
• Returns & Replacements
• Manage Your Content and Devices

• Conditions of Use
• Privacy Notice
• Consumer Health Data Privacy Disclosure
• Your Ads Privacy Choices

Current time by city

For example, New York

Current time by country

For example, Japan

Time difference

For example, London

For example, Dubai

Coordinates

For example, Hong Kong

For example, Delhi

For example, Sydney

Geographic coordinates of Elektrostal, Moscow Oblast, Russia

Coordinates of elektrostal in decimal degrees, coordinates of elektrostal in degrees and decimal minutes, utm coordinates of elektrostal, geographic coordinate systems.

WGS 84 coordinate reference system is the latest revision of the World Geodetic System, which is used in mapping and navigation, including GPS satellite navigation system (the Global Positioning System).

Geographic coordinates (latitude and longitude) define a position on the Earth’s surface. Coordinates are angular units. The canonical form of latitude and longitude representation uses degrees (°), minutes (′), and seconds (″). GPS systems widely use coordinates in degrees and decimal minutes, or in decimal degrees.

Latitude varies from −90° to 90°. The latitude of the Equator is 0°; the latitude of the South Pole is −90°; the latitude of the North Pole is 90°. Positive latitude values correspond to the geographic locations north of the Equator (abbrev. N). Negative latitude values correspond to the geographic locations south of the Equator (abbrev. S).

Longitude is counted from the prime meridian ( IERS Reference Meridian for WGS 84) and varies from −180° to 180°. Positive longitude values correspond to the geographic locations east of the prime meridian (abbrev. E). Negative longitude values correspond to the geographic locations west of the prime meridian (abbrev. W).

UTM or Universal Transverse Mercator coordinate system divides the Earth’s surface into 60 longitudinal zones. The coordinates of a location within each zone are defined as a planar coordinate pair related to the intersection of the equator and the zone’s central meridian, and measured in meters.

Elevation above sea level is a measure of a geographic location’s height. We are using the global digital elevation model GTOPO30 .

Elektrostal , Moscow Oblast, Russia