Kodak Reviews

I've tried numerous papers on my aging HP 970 CXi and HP 930C printers, and for glossy prints Kodak Ultima is by far the best. The paper is thick, heavy, and relatively durable. Even heavy black areas dry quickly. Greyscale looks like greyscale, not like sepia as it does on many other papers. Colors are vibrant with sharp edges, and true to the original, especially when the saturation is boosted one notch in the print driver. I have not been able to test the paper on other printers, but if it's anything like this you won't be dissapointed.

I have had excellent results with this paper. The photos come out perfect and professional. Even the feel of the paper is better than any other ones I have used.
Amazon offers this paper at a great price.
Buy it, you will not regret it!!!

This is very high quality paper. Pictures look just like you had a photo lab develop them. This paper is not as glossy as the Canon Photo Pro, so if you want the glossiest paper buy the Canon Photo Pro. If you like your prints glossy yet not to the extreme this is the paper for you.

The package says this is 4X6 paper, but it isn't. It's actually 4X6.5! I feel ripped off! What's the point of having a printer capable of edge to edge printing when I have to cut off an extra .5 inches on my pictures when using this paper? I've had good luck with Kodak's 8.5X11 paper which was the actual size advertised on the package. Why is this different?

It just doesn't make any sense. Is this a design flaw on Kodak's part?

After comparing the prints on Kodak premium high glossy photo paper and Canon glossy photo paper plus, that came with my Canon i560 printer, I decided to get way from Kodak. It shows very grany texture especially in the dark area and colors are very dull. Canon paper reproduces much vibrant color and texture. After my own experimentation with papers, I searched on internet to find reviews on many different brands of papers. It seems like Kodak papers in general don't have good ratings.

Using my Canon i560s printer, Kodak's recommended printer driver settings, and Kodak's free software for printing, this paper produces near flawless photos. They are semi-gloss (not high-gloss like Canon's Photo Paper Plus Glossy that comes with the printer). This paper has been reformulated recently (according to the packaging) and I will continue to use it for all photos. I have been unable to get Canon's software to print accurate colors on this paper - so use Kodak's! Canon's software (Easy Photo Print) won't print accurate colors even on their own Photo Paper Plus Glossy paper (and there is no way to manually tinker with the color settings in Easy Photo Print - you can in the Kodak software via the Canon print driver). If you run a comparison, you will see that Kodak has got the color thing nailed cold and Canon does not, regardless of paper type.

The only detectable flaw I've seen in any print on Kodak's Premium Picture Paper is on photos with very dark/black areas. If you hold the print at a sharp angle in bright light (you never would unless looking for this flaw) you can see a slight decrease in the reflectivness of these really dark areas that you don't see using the Canon Photo Paper Plus Glossy paper.

Nobody who has looked at my prints (except me) has noticed this flaw - so don't worry about it. By the way, I much prefer the semi-glossy nature of this paper to Canon's Photo Paper Plus Glossy which truly is so glossy it can be annoying in some lighting conditions.

The Canon i560s uses dye-based ink for printing photos. I think pigment-based ink will have different results (Canon mixes the 3 dye-based colors to produce black when printing photos, as the black cartridge is pigment based in this printer).

For borderless 4x6 prints, you will have to cut a half-inch off the paper as it is 4 x 6.5 inches and the Canon printer driver does not allow flexibility at this time. If you want a white border, then no need to trim.

I've tried both Kodak's photo business cards and its photo paper with my new Epson 1280. The printer in general produces spectacular results on Epson's photo papers. Kodak's photo biz cards gave me dull, unsaturated colors with a tendency towards brownish or magenta rendering - very unattractive. Kodak's photo paper produced nice results in light areas, and bizarre blotchy results in dark areas of the image. I actually changed color cartridges, thinking one of the colors had gone dry, but got the same results - until I switched to Epson's photo paper. I've also had unsatisfactory results using Kodak's bizcard photo paper in my old Epson 850.

In our experience, this paper works very well with the HP printers (specifically the 990 cse) We've printed a great number of very professional looking business cards and get requests to print more when supplies run low.

I had very high hopes for Kodak's Ultima Satin, but unfortunately the paper has not lived up to those hopes. I had used Kodak Premium paper before, and liked the output but not the feel of the paper; and it wasn't available in a matte finish. With the new Ultima, I was excited to see the sattin finnish. Unfortunately, rather than going with an e-surface type paper like HP Premium Plus Matte or Epson Premium Luster, Kodak chose to go with a flat semigloss. While this isn't necessarily a bad thing, I was kind of longing for the extra glow that an e-surface gives your prints. Because of this, I somewhat disliked the Kodak paper before even printing with it.

How the prints look is, of course, what really matters. The included instructions recommend turning up the saturation one notch in the print driver for my HP 900 series printers. When I used Kodak Ultima High-Gloss, this provided a perfect match for my prints. The satin paper, however, looks oversaturated even at a reduced setting in the driver. Beyond that, colors loose their accuracy, gaining a magenta tone. Blue skies look slightly purple, and greyscale looks almost sepia or duotoned. This is in stark contrast to the Ultima Glossy paper that matches colors perfectly to my screen and prints greyscales with no perceivable color (the only paper I've found that does this on my HP). Ink dries fairly quickly on the Satin, but not as instantaniously as it does on the Glossy (note that ink never seems to dry on HP premium-plus matte). While I dislike glossy paper in general, I would much prefer the accuracy of Ultima Glossy to Ultima Satin on HP printers.

I will tell you right now, I am not a professional. Just a picture-taking mother of a busy 1 year old. I have tried several different types of paper and have to say I'm quite impressed with the quality of my images with this paper. Feels like a real photo and cuts nicely with my paper-cutter. Some papers don't cut cleanly. This dries quickly and makes wonderful prints. I can't wait to try the Glossy. I can not believe the difference in this paper. It is fantastic. The pictures of my daughter's 1st Birthday turned out better than I ever imagined, thanks to Kodak. Also, Amazon prices on this item can't be beat! I will be adding this to my online shopping list as a regular item to purchase. My next order will be for the Glossy, so I will let you know on that, too!

I love Kodak Ultima paper. It prints great on my lexmark printer. The colors look more vibrant and black prints are even sharper. I've already tried the other kinds photo papers and nothing beats Kodak Ultima. It is way better than kodak premium and well worth the extra money. It has a real professional texture and the gloss makes your pictures stand out more. I believe that Ultima is the exact same paper that is used in the "Kodak Picture Maker".

I recently purchased this paper, in bulk mind you, and found myself to be very disappointed in my purchase. I love to take digital pictures and print them myself and frame them to give as gifts. Well, I bought this brand thinking it was better...but it really took forever for the ink to dry...if I waited for an hour...when I'd place it in the frame, it would look like the picture was wet against the glass. I let the picture dry out for a complete day before I could even frame it...and I think part of that to blame is the thickness of the paper. I guess I'll go back to Epson photo paper, since that one seems to work better for me.

Using my Canon i560s printer, Kodak's recommended printer driver settings, and Kodak's free software for printing, this paper produces near flawless photos. They are semi-gloss (not high-gloss like Canon's Photo Paper Plus Glossy that comes with the printer). This paper has been reformulated recently (according to the packaging) and I will continue to use it for all photos. I have been unable to get Canon's software to print accurate colors on this paper - so use Kodak's! Canon's software (Easy Photo Print) won't print accurate colors even on their own Photo Paper Plus Glossy paper (and there is no way to manually tinker with the color settings in Easy Photo Print - you can in the Kodak software via the Canon print driver). If you run a comparison, you will see that Kodak has got the color thing nailed cold and Canon does not, regardless of paper type.

The only detectable flaw I've seen in any print on Kodak's Premium Picture Paper is on photos with very dark/black areas. If you hold the print at a sharp angle in bright light (you never would unless looking for this flaw) you can see a slight decrease in the reflectivness of these really dark areas that you don't see using the Canon Photo Paper Plus Glossy paper.

Nobody who has looked at my prints (except me) has noticed this flaw - so don't worry about it. By the way, I much prefer the semi-glossy nature of this paper to Canon's Photo Paper Plus Glossy which truly is so glossy it can be annoying in some lighting conditions.

The Canon i560s uses dye-based ink for printing photos. I think pigment-based ink will have different results (Canon mixes the 3 dye-based colors to produce black when printing photos, as the black cartridge is pigment based in this printer).

This is a good paper for the price. It can handle photo print-out alright. It is definitely not the best photo paper, just above average. I mainly use it for color presentation that use color graphics, images, and texts.

I use this paper on an Epson 820 and 1200 and it printed out great. I use this on my Canon i960 and the print-out comes out fuzzy. Maybe Canon uses too much ink and the paper can not soak it up fast enough. I can't recommend this paper for Canon's printers.

You should buy a couple or the 25 sheets and see if it works with your printer. I find this paper best for presentation graphic.

I use this for my everyday photos - the ones that go in my albums I print from my computer's printer (HP 900 series)
Pros:
1. Not-so-glossy finish. Every other brand I've tried is so glossy that they shine and have a glare, unlike the pictures you would get from a professional developer (even the ones that aren't "high gloss") - one exception is the Kodak Ultima Satin which is similar to this with a much heavier weight and higher price. OR they have no shine - watch out for "matte photo paper" which usually has no shine at all.
2. Cheap. Just about the cheapest you can find, even compared to no-name brands.
3. Easy to cut. Since it is a lighter weight, I can cut my sheets of photos easier with less wear on cutting tools.
4. Two sided gloss. I've never used both sides, but it's there if you want it and you don't have to worry about which way to feed the paper, it can print on either side.

Con:
Lighter weight paper. If you want the feel of studio type paper (like you get when you get your family photos done at a professional studio), this is not the paper for you. I like the Kodak Ultima line - the "satin" finish has a similar not-so-glossy finish like this one. These papers are much more expensive, I usually save it for pictures I am going to give away.