Inkjet printing both sides

"Arthur Entlich" <e-printerhelp.TakeThisOut@mvps.org> wrote in message
news:UXsEj.99490$pM4.49075@pd7urf1no...
> Hi Burt,
>
> I know this is a sensitive area on this newsgroup, unfortunately, due to
> our neighborhood troll, but I think you may be "killing the messenger" in
> this case.
>
> I think the reason Bob brought this matter up was probably because I made
> a comment in my small treatise on paper types about OEM ink and paper
> combinations being more reliable than mixing and matching. In general,
> this is true, BTW. Most inks and papers made or distributed under the
> name of the OEM will have been tested if not formulated for each other.
>
> However, that doesn't preclude that 3rd party inks and papers can't or
> won't work. It is just that they take more testing to determine which
> work best with one another. For the occasional printer, who wants
> consistent results without a lot of experimentation or wishful thinking,
> using OEM will probably be a better choice, although considerably more
> costly.
>
> For people who do a lot of printing and go through a lot of consumables,
> it may well be worth it to experiment and test to find the best ink and
> paper combinations. It can save well over 50% which can become
> substantial for those who churn out even a couple of prints a day.
>
> Art
>
>
Thanks for the response, Art. My experience with refilling was a very easy
one. I read several articles and visited enough sites to gain a better
understanding of what was available. Fortunately, I stumbled onto Neil
Slade's site, saw his sample photos printed with OEM and MIS inks, bought
the printer he recommended, and had no negative experiences from day one
with the products he suggested. I did print my own sample photos on Canon
and Epson glossy paper with both OEM and MIS inks and actually found that I
liked the MIS results better than he OEM inks! It took very little
experimenting to zero in on what worked for me. If I had blindly bought the
cheapest prefilled carts on ebay or the IMS generic refill kits at Costco I
would have probably had a poor experience and would have decided to stay
with OEM inks. I do have a problem with someone making a gratuitous blanket
condemnation of these products as you and I both recognize there is merit in
considering the use of good quality non-OEM inks if they satisfy your needs.

Arthur Entlich <e-printerhelp.DeleteThis@mvps.org> wrote:

>That's what I was trying to explain via this word description in a
>previous email, perhaps not very effectively...
>
>> Also, if you print the card the right way and do a four way fold, if
>you print the front and back in one direction, and the inside panels
>upside down and fold it, you can print the whole card on one sheet on
>one side. Using a full letter size (8.5" x 11" page, the card will end
>up folded dimensions of 5.5" x 4.25" front surface with the two inside
>panels being 5.5" x 8.5" total.
>>
>> Art
>
>
>
>
>Terry Pinnell wrote:
>
>>
>> Great, thanks Art. Goes into my file for future reference. Meanwhile
>> can anyone recommend a double-sided glossy inkjet paper please, UK
>> online supplied? I want gloss on both sides. Just bought 25 sheets of
>> A4, 150g 'Photo Gloss' from www.photopaperdirect.com, but that is matt
>> on the back.
>>
>> BTW, after much frustration I eventually made my finished card by
>> printing images on the glossy side of my original paper, like this:
>>
>> .-------------------------------------.
>> |.----------------. .----------------.|
>> || Top of image | | Top of image ||
>> || | | ||
>> || | | ||
>> || | | ||
>> || | | ||
>> || | | ||
>> || Back | | Front ||
>> || | | ||
>> || | | ||
>> || | | ||
>> || | | ||
>> || | | ||
>> || | | ||
>> |'----------------' '----------------'|
>> |.----------------. .----------------.|
>> || | | ||
>> || | | ||
>> || | | ||
>> || | | ||
>> || | | ||
>> || Inside Left | | Inside Left ||
>> || | | ||
>> || | | ||
>> || | | ||
>> || | | ||
>> || | | ||
>> || Top of image | | Top of image ||
>> |'----------------' '----------------'|
>> '-------------------------------------'
>>
>> I folded it (vertically and horizontally) *before* printing, which I
>> felt would minimise the risk of spoiling the result by the
>> considerable handling/squeezing necessary for to get decent creases.
>> The disadvantage of this was that the slightly raised creases had a
>> little ink on them in places. (Tipp-Ex to the rescue!)
>>
>> The major problem I had was getting the images and gaps positioned
>> correctly for the folds. I was using PaintShop Pro 8, but I'm darned
>> if I've ever properly understood why the Print Preview can't give a
>> workably accurate representation of what I'll actually get. In the end
>> I resorted to trial/error, using b/w economy mode. If anyone has any
>> practical advice on this aspect I'd appreciate hearing it please.
>>

Ah, so you did, sorry! I must have skated quickly over that. Then used
the time gained by re-inventing the technique But I do admit to
feeling quite pleased with it. The finished card looks pretty good. In
fact I spent another hour or two going back over the various files I'd
used and making a 'template' which I can use in future, hopefully in a
fraction of the time that the original one took. It also positions
each of the 4 sections more symmetrically - that was the main aspect
with which I felt dissatisfied. I had to resort to trial and error
again to achieve these correct margins on each section. In essence, I
pushed each one diagonally out towards its corner.

With a wedding anniversary due soon, I'm thinking I might try the
single-fold alternative, to get a larger card. But I'm still keen to
make both sides glossy, so still hope someone can recommend suitable
(UK-supplied) paper please. And of course that will need a redesign of
all the image sizes and positions. Maybe a trip to WH Smith would be
easier ... but where's the fun in that?!

--
Terry, East Grinstead, UK