# Lustre or Glossy?



## LateModelSedan

just wondering what most of you prefer when ordering prints. did a very little bit of research and it appears pros prefer a lustre or matte finish over glossy due to its durability, etc. if any of you could give some pros and cons for each that would be cool. thanks.


----------



## Village Idiot

Lustre/Matte. 

It just looks so good. Glossy tends to look cheap and I'll only order it if some one specifically asks for it. Plus you get a lot more glare with glossy paper.


----------



## Bandit

I find Lustre reflects light less and does not mark or show finger prints as much. Glossy is naturally more contrasty and makes images "pop" a little more.


----------



## frXnz kafka

If you're planning to frame the print, definitely go lustre/matte. Otherwise, I think it's a personal preference. I like glossy paper because it's a bit more contrasty, and I think you get a little more shadow detail. On the other hand, as VI said, it can look a little cheap. But I think this depends on the paper. The glossy paper I use for film prints doesn't look bad, but most glossy inkjet paper I've seen looks pretty awful.


----------



## Iron Flatline

Glossy shows more contrast.


----------



## Mystwalker

I prefer "lustre" because colors just look better to me.

"glossy" is just that too shiny for me - my wife prefers glossy though

I guess there is no right/wrong answer.


----------



## shorty6049

i like matte or lustre paper just because theres less glare, and to me, it looks more professional, mostly because thats what i've always seen pros use, so i have come to recognize that as something professional grade. I've also seen prints done by a professional wildlife photographer printed on glossy paper which looked absolutely amazing. It probably has more to do with personal preference than anything.


----------



## Garbz

Glossy. I don't know why, I just think it looks better. I don't handle photos in a way that leaves fingerprints anyway.


----------



## mamadada

It seems that when I see proofs from some photographers, the photo paper almost has a grain or texture to it.  Am I imagining it or is there a treatment or another paper out there to ask for?


----------



## mrodgers

mamadada said:


> It seems that when I see proofs from some photographers, the photo paper almost has a grain or texture to it. Am I imagining it or is there a treatment or another paper out there to ask for?


I like the paper with that texture you are talking about.

I recently had prints done at Adorama and MPix (same prints to compare).  I had matte done and 2 8x10s in Lustre at Adorama and whatever MPix's E-surface is.  They were all stated as Kodak Endura papers.

I liked the paper from MPix because it had this texture.  The Lustre 8x10's from Adorama was smooth.  Though, I liked the colors from Adorama much better.  They matched my monitor perfectly as opposed to being oversaturated from MPix.  I have no idea if that was the difference in paper, a difference in the color correction (had color correction marked at both places) or what.

Like I said, I really liked the texture on the MPix prints.  Just wasn't as happy with the actual prints as I was with Adorama.

My Snapfish prints seem to be lost somewhere out in the US Postal Service world


----------



## Joves

I prefer the glossy for B&W and, lustre/matte/satin for color.


----------



## mrodgers

To add to my post above, my Snapfish prints arrived today.  Absolutely terrible.  They were printed on paper similar to MPix's paper, which I like.  But asside from the same over saturation that MPix was, some of them look like they were from a forum avatar size photo blown up to a 4x6 print.  Terrible.

I am wondering if the oversaturation thing with the MPix vs. the perfectly colored Adorama has to do with the glossy (MPix) vs. matte (Adorama).  I'm going to have to have them print the same 3 photos, but reverse the glossy/matte papers at each place.


----------



## Patrick

mrodgers said:


> To add to my post above, my Snapfish prints arrived today.  Absolutely terrible.  They were printed on paper similar to MPix's paper, which I like.  But asside from the same over saturation that MPix was, some of them look like they were from a forum avatar size photo blown up to a 4x6 print.  Terrible.
> 
> I am wondering if the oversaturation thing with the MPix vs. the perfectly colored Adorama has to do with the glossy (MPix) vs. matte (Adorama).  I'm going to have to have them print the same 3 photos, but reverse the glossy/matte papers at each place.



Just out of curiosity, did they "color correct"?  
I know Mpix has the option of them not color correcting.

I've used snapfish once.  And yes they do suck!


IMHO I think glossy looks tacky.


----------



## mrodgers

Yes, I left the option to color correct on all 3 sites.  I thought I mentioned that, but I also posted on another forum too so may have only mentioned it there.  Adorama came back with the ability to hold every photo printed next to my monitor and have an exact image as seen on the monitor.

I have to note also that I do not have a calibrator for my monitor.  I have gone through the soft calibrations that you can find on the web.  My photos to me always look great on my monitor as do everything I see people post here (in a web browser, thumbnail viewer, Photoshop, or any other image software I look at).  I never play with saturation and colors with my photos as they look perfectly fine to me.  I only do mild levels and mild curve adjustment, then everything else is cropping, resizing, and sharpening.

I do know what my photos can look like on a poor looking monitor.  Both my work laptop and my equipment control PC at work show photos horrible, whether they are mine or photos I see posted here on the forum.  My laptop is too dark on the CRT on my desk, and way too light an noncontrasty with the LCD.  The control PC I use on the equipment I run also is very dark much like my CRT at my desk.  I can't seem to get my work computers looking good perhaps because of the crappy graphics chips in them.


----------



## IslandShooter

I am going to start printing a lot of my pictures. I seen this option between lustre or glossy. After doing some research it says lustre is more of a matte finish which would look better when framed. Glossy, is well glossy, and is a bit sticky. It goes good in portfolios and such. I guess for my printing situation I will go lustre.

Answer Ground » Glossy vs Lustre Prints, Which is Better?


----------



## kathyt

I stay away from glossy. Unless it has to do with my lips.


----------

