Roll versus Cut Paper; Ilford Gold Silk

[andrew_hull]

I have been contemplating a Epson 3800 versus an Espon 4880, and looked into some math for savings using roll

versus cut paper. I check B&H because it is local and found the following, to my suprise.

 

Cut 17x22 is app. 2.6 sq. ft. A pack of 50 gives you 130 sq. feet, at a cost of $164.50, or about $1.26 per sq. ft.

Roll paper is 17" by 40', or 1.42 ft. by 40 ft. for a total of 56.7 sq. ft. at a cost of $87.95, or $1.55 per sq. ft.

 

Is this right? that roll paper costs more than cut paper? Is this typical of all papers? When people speak of

efficiencies using roll paper, are they referring to being able to only print off what one needs versus a whole sheet of

paper?

 

Thanks,

 

Andrew

[kory gunnarsen]

In this particular case the sheet is cheaper, but most of the time roll is less. You must also calculate shipping and tax into

your price (gas or fare to get there etc.) if you want to be exacting about it. Yes, with roll you just print on what you need.

 

Kory

[colin_mattson1]

<p>Like Kory said, for <i>most</i> papers it's going to be cheaper. From memory, Hahnemuehle and (fake) Ilford are the

two biggies who felt it necessary to turn pricing on its head and often charge more for the rolls. (If you want to see really

ugly pricing, compare Hahn's 11x17 sheets to the rest of their sheets -- bam, right in the kisser.) You're also going to run

into differences induced by vendor pricing; rolls may be cheaper than sheets at MSRP, but if the retailer decides rolls are

a hassle, they may discount sheet prices lower than they do roll prices.

</p>

<p>

And yeah, if your prints don't typically fill the entire length of a sheet, you're getting more mileage out of a roll, which

counts for something since you can <i>use</i> all that whitespace instead of sending it naked into the world.

</p>

[mike_earussi1]

I have also read several people complaining about not being able to remove the curl from the latter half of the roll, so just be aware of that potential problem.