Amazon.com: Customer Reviews: Canon Luster Photo Paper, 13" x 19" (50 Sheets) (LU-101 13X1950)
Your Garage botysf16 Amazon Fashion Learn more nav_sap_plcc_ascpsc Adele Fire TV Stick Subscribe & Save Patriotic Picks Shop-by-Room Amazon Cash Back Offer AnnedroidsS3 AnnedroidsS3 AnnedroidsS3  Amazon Echo  Echo Dot  Amazon Tap  Echo Dot  Amazon Tap  Amazon Echo Starting at $49.99 All-New Kindle Oasis Best Camping & Hiking Gear in Outdoors

Your rating(Clear)Rate this item


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

on October 19, 2012
I have finally purchased a box of the Luster paper and think it is great. I love the Canon Semi Gloss paper Canon Photo Paper Plus Semi-Gloss 13" x 19" (50 Sheets) (SG-201 13X19) and I see little difference between the two. Since I think Semi Gloss is five stars, I give this paper the same rating.

I have attached an image to this review. (Reducing its resolution and making it a jpg makes it a little sucky but that's life on Amazon.) The image has a good range of colors and deep blacks with some details that are just visible. I used a handheld magnifier and one of those large desk-mounted magnifiers with built-in light ring to examine the two prints: one on Semi Gloss and the other on Luster, both 13x19 and made on my Pro9500 Mark II.

My conclusions after examination are 1) whiteness, texture, and sheen of the two papers are virtually the same but see below, 2) colors are virtually the same, 3) details in highlights are virtually the same, 4) depth of black areas are virtually the same, and 5) discernible details in black areas are virtually the same. When I say "virtually the same" I mean identical to me but I admit that there may be some differences that have escaped me or might be more visible using a different printer. [By the way, the word "Canon" is printed on the back of Semi Gloss but not on Luster. This is fortunate since otherwise I would believe I had made the two prints on the same paper.]

I'm not likely to buy much of this paper unless the price falls to match or better the Semi Gloss. Since I can't see any difference, I'll buy the less expensive. Further, I use 4x6 Semi Gloss for proofs and there is no small version of the Luster.

This is below: With more careful examination, it seems that the Luster paper might be whiter but that difference is slight and only visible when 1) the two papers abut, 2) you move your head side to side, and 3) you exchange the positions of the papers a few times in case the light isn't perfectly even. As I said, the difference is very slight.

Additional test: I increased the number of test subjects to three: 1) Semi Gloss paper using its own ICC profile, 2) Luster paper using the Semi Gloss profile, and 3) Luster paper using the Pro Glossy II profile. The third subject - number 3 - was motivated by the fact that Ilford recommends using Canon's Pro Glossy II profile with their Luster papers and Canon support recommended using the Pro Glossy II profile when I contacted them before ordering the Luster paper. The instructions included with the Luster paper said to use the Semi Gloss profile so I contacted Canon again and they confirmed using the Semi Gloss profile. Be all that as it may ...

My conclusions after examination of the three test subjects are 1) whiteness, texture, and sheen of the two papers are virtually the same, 2) colors are virtually the same, 3) details in highlights are virtually the same, 4) depth of black areas are virtually the same, and 5) discernible details in black areas are virtually the same. When I say "virtually the same" I mean identical to me but I admit that there may be some differences that have escaped me or might be more visible using a different printer.

So my recommendations are to buy whichever of Canon Luster or Semi Gloss that is least expensive at the time. They are both excellent papers and virtually identical. If you run tests like described above, please mention them in your reviews or attach as comments to this review. Please include printer information - I used a Pro9500 - since different printers might emphasize differences not apparent to me.
review image
2222 comments|87 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on May 26, 2015
I find this paper to be very close to Canon's Photo Paper Pro Semi-Gloss. Looking at two printings of the same image, one on this Luster and the other on Canon Semi-Gloss, it is really difficult to notice which one is which. The differences are there, but they are subtle and will likely not be noticeable without careful scrutiny. IMHO, hanging in a frame, 99% of people will not note any differences between the papers whatsoever. The back of the paper is where you can easily tell because the Semi-Gloss has the Canon logo all over it, while the Luster has nothing printed on the back.

The texture of the Luster paper is slightly more pronounced than the texture of the Semi-Gloss. Emphasis on "slightly." Examining one of each blank sheet closely side-by-side is more revealing of any differences than after they have been printed on. The whiteness and tone of the papers look the same to me. Neither is warmer or cooler than the other.

I've uploaded some pics of the papers to compare. The first two pictures, each showing only one type of paper close up, have been adjusted in Photoshop so that the highlights are boosted 33% to better show off the surface texture. The rest of the pics have not had any adjustments made to them.

Pros: The quality of this product is every bit as good as Canon Semi-Gloss. I like the fact that the Luster doesn't have Canon's logo all over the back like other Canon papers. This is more in line with higher-end brand papers made for professional artwork, e.g., Hahnemuehle, Ilford, Red River, Moab, Inkpress, Innova, etc. In fact, this Canon Luster is actually manufactured by Hahnemuehle.

Cons: It isn't different enough from the Semi-Gloss to be worth it, to me. Also, the Luster paper lacks the sturdy and convenient flip-up container that comes with other Canon stock. This is a very minor complaint and further illustrates how little difference I can find between the two.
review image review image review image review image
0Comment|24 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on May 31, 2015
I'm a photographer and I used this paper for my portfolio prints. I didn't scrutinize with a magnifying glass like some of the others, but I can tell you that this is good paper. You get what you pay for and this certainly isn't anything mind blowing, but It's just as good as the other brands at this price point. Most people will never even notice the difference between this paper and a high-end luster paper that costs 3 times as much; especially clients. Probably only other photographers.
review image
0Comment|7 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on October 10, 2012
Canon Luster photo paper is a good improvement over the semi-gloss paper. Colors are richer, prints "pop" more, and as expected no annoying glare.
Expensive though.
0Comment|14 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on September 6, 2012
I was going to order the high end glossy paper since I have always liked the glossy look on photos but
decided to try luster. I was amazed at the quality of the prints and the way the colors pop out. If you
want your pictures to look better than the lab ones give this paper a try, especially if you have a Canon
Pro series printer. I have a Canon Pro 9000 Mark II and the prints are amazing. I don't think I would go
back to glossy unless I do landscapes so I can have slight whiter whites like on the Pro Platinum.
44 comments|11 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on February 22, 2015
This paper is pricey but the pictures look fantastic. I print on the Canon Luster paper using a Canon Pixma Pro 100 printer using a Canon Supplied printer profile.

If you are considering this paper you might also want to consider Red River Paper.
review image
0Comment|5 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
இ Fuzzy Wuzzy's Summary:
ѾѾѾѾѾ Highly recommended with warm fuzzies!

փ Positives:

փ This printer can output superb gallery-quality prints with exceptional detail and resolution, while being significantly less expensive than the higher-end Pro-10 and Pro-1 printer models.
փ This Pro-100 prints better blacks and grays on monochrome prints than the older Pro9000 printer that it replaces.
փ The new wireless connectivity options of using 802.11b/g/n Wi-Fi or Apple's AirPrint, along with a wired Ethernet option, provide flexibility of shared usage and printer placement by not needing to be physically connected to a USB cable.
փ The dye-based inks used in this Pro-100 can retain their colors for 100+ years.

ჯ Negatives:

ჯ While black-and-white prints are better than the previous Pro9000 printer, monochrome output is still inferior to the pricier Pro-10 and Pro-1 printers.

If you have never used a prosumer-level dedicated photo printer like this before, prepare to be surprised... both by the size and weight of this printer's box and by the stunning quality of color photos that you can print out, with exceptional detail and resolution even if you press your nose close to a 13"x19" print. Weighing a very hefty 56 pounds in its shipping box, the box that this printer is shipped in resembles a two-drawer file cabinet laying on its side (and it is heavier than most empty two-drawer file cabinets). This printer was shipped to me in its original Canon box package; the big box was not placed inside another bigger Amazon box.

Having previously used Canon's excellent PIXMA Pro9000 Mark II printer, this Pro-100 printer has a number of differences and improvements over that older model. First of all, this Pro-100 is bigger in size and about 10 to 12 pounds heavier than the Pro9000. Along with the USB 2.0 cable connection and Wireless PictBridge connection to Canon cameras that are also used in the older Pro9000 printer, this Pro-100 also adds wireless AirPrint printing from iPad/iPhone/iOS devices and, most significantly, both wireless 802.11b/g/n Wi-Fi and wired Ethernet printing from your LAN. While the ability to print directly and wirelessly from an iPad or Canon camera is useful, I think that for a professional-grade photo printer like this, most people will want to view, edit, adjust, and tweak their photos on their computer first before printing them, so being able to add this printer to my router's wireless LAN is a huge convenience, making it easy to both share the printer between different laptop and desktop computers on the LAN, and to have extra freedom in placing this large printer in an optimum location.

While both the Pro9000 and this Pro-100 use eight ink cartridges, the Pro9000's black/cyan/photo-cyan/magenta/photo-magenta/yellow/red/green colors are now represented as black/gray/light-gray/cyan/photo-cyan/magenta/photo-magenta/yellow in this Pro-100, with three inks dedicated to blacks and grays instead of just the one black ink cartridge on the Pro9000, resulting in noticeably better black-and-white monochrome prints on this Pro-100 when compared to the Pro9000.

The 10-cartridge Pro-10 printer also has three black/gray colors along with adding a red color back into the mix, while the 12-cartridge top-of-the-line Pro-1 dedicates five ink cartridges to black/gray colors. If you mainly print a lot of black-and-white photos, you should seriously consider spending the extra money on the Pro-1. While the Pro-1 has better overall color resolution than this Pro-100, one of the Pro-1's greatest strengths is in the range of blacks and grays that it can accurately print. High-resolution monochrome prints are one of the toughest tests of photo printers since some inkjet printers leak a slight bit of color cast onto black-and-white prints while other inkjets do not offer enough grayscale resolution, and this Pro-100 is not consistently perfect with its black-and-white output and its printing of the deepest black regions. While this Pro-100 prints better grays and blacks than what the Pro9000 prints, both Canon's Pro-1 and Epson's R3000 can print noticeably superior black-and-white prints when compared to this Pro-100 monochrome prints. These are not glaring deficiencies in the print quality, but there are subtle differences in the accuracy and resolution of black and gray color gradations when you compare an image printed on this Pro-100 with the same image printed on the Pro-1.

Although I have not precisely measured how long each ink cartridge lasts when printing the same photo each time, I have always believed that Epson's printers drink up their ink faster than either Canon or HP inkjet printers, and Epson ink cartridges seem to be more prone to clogging, both on Epson's photo printers and their printer/copier/fax multi-function printers. On average, I get about 7 to 10 large 13"x19" color prints from this Pro-100 before I have to replace some of the color ink cartridges. This is comparable to the previous Pro9000 printer. The more expensive Pro-1 uses ink cartridges that are almost three times larger in ink volume, and its colors are distributed across 12 ink cartridges versus the 8 cartridges used by this Pro-100. So this Pro-100 needs more frequent ink replacements than the Pro-1 printer, although it uses up the ink at a rate that is comparable to the older Pro9000 printer. But I seem to replace ink cartridges more frequently on Epson inkjet printers than on Canon printers. As with "razor blade marketing", I think that all inkjet printer manufacturers earn the bulk of their printer hardware profits from the ink cartridge refills. If you regularly print 11"x14" or 13"x19" prints with this Pro-100, at the current price of about $17 per ink cartridge, using up a set of all eight ink cartridges will cost you about $125 to $135 to replace all eight refills.

When using a sophisticated photo printer like this to print 13"x19" photos, you should likewise use a camera that is better than a $200 point-and-shoot camera. This printer's output quality is ideally suited for photos shot using a better SLR camera. And instead of printing photos directly from an iPad via AirPrint or directly from a Canon camera via PictBridge, you should carefully review and select your photos on the computer first, applying post-processing edits, aligning/straightening/cropping, sharpening, and other enhancements as needed. As with the computer lingo of "garbage in, garbage out", if your photo is not sharp or if your camera's autofocus locked onto a tree that was behind the person you were photographing, this printer will expose those problems far more if you output a 13"x19" print than what can be noticed on a 4"x6" print. I never print smaller than 8"X10" prints using this Pro-100 printer, and I certainly do not print text documents on this Pro-100, because printing small 4"x6" photos is both a waste of this printer's capabilities and is a waste of its beautiful pricey inks. For printing 4"x6" photos that I share with other people, using a less fancy inkjet photo printer or a printer/copier/fax multi-function inkjet printer suits me just fine. I only use this Pro-100 for printing photos that will be framed, and my favorite sizes have been 8"x10", 11"x14", and 13"x19". Once I became addicted to printing beautifully colored and richly detailed 13"x19" photos from this Pro-100, it is hard for me to go smaller than 8"x10" now :-)

Since you will likely be editing and adjusting your photos from your computer prior to printing them on this Pro-100, you should invest in some color calibration hardware if you are not already calibrating your monitor and printer. So along with spending money on ink refills, expect to pay at least several hundred dollars for calibration hardware. If you edit your photos on your computer, viewing them on an uncalibrated laptop/display screen, and then send the images to this printer, the coloration of the resulting prints may be different from the images that you were looking at on the screen. Datacolor and X-Rite both make excellent color calibration tools. Both the Datacolor Spyder Studio S4SSR100 and X-Rite CMUNPH ColorMunki Photo are great for ensuring that the display screens, printer, printer ink, and printer paper that you use are all calibrated together so you get exacting control over the how the image will look in going from your computer onto the printed page. Although I have both Spyder and ColorMunki calibration tools, I prefer Datacolor's Spyder more than X-Rite's ColorMunki. X-Rite's hardware, overall, is faster than Datacolor's hardware, but I think that Datacolor's software is far better than X-Rite's software with respect to software features, quality, and stability.

If you are thinking: "Whoa, this display and printer calibration gear can cost more than a new Pro-100! I just want to print my photos the way that my camera captured them!", you can still usually get excellent print results without calibration by using Canon inks and Canon papers with this printer. You can also get a visual feel for how light/dark/red/green/blue/yellow your images appear on the screen when compared to how they print out by holding a large print next to your monitor displaying the same image. Some people adjust color hues and temperatures by visually comparing printed output to the screen display, using a combination of soft-proofing and hardcopy proofing. This is combined with using the paper profiles supplied by Canon or the manufacturer of the printer paper you are using. While that approach helps to prevent too much discrepancy between what is displayed on screen and what is printed, it is also fraught with potential human error and variations as you switch papers and inks, as your monitor ages and shifts in its color response, and as the brightness and subtle hues of the ambient room lighting change in between each visual screen-to-print comparison. In addition, an image on a monitor projects additive colors through its pixels, whereas an image on a print is subtractive in that it absorbs and reflects ambient light, and this can significantly alter your visual comparison of hues and contrast when comparing the same image between display and print.

If you are a graphic artist or you want to control the colors/hues/saturation/brightness in Photoshop, calibrating your display screen to produce custom monitor profiles and calibrating the printer to get a custom ICC printer profile is the best way to ensure that what you see on screen is what you end up printing. Only by generating a custom printer profile can you accurately connect the dots between your display, your printer (which can also have variations in print output even between two printers of the same model), your ink, and your paper. Because a display monitor's color response slowly shifts as it ages, you should calibrate a newer display every one or two months and calibrate an older display every two weeks. As anyone who has ever painted the inside of a house realizes, each gallon can or custom-mix of a specific paint color can have slight variations that make it visibly different in between batches. The same variation can happen in between batches of printer paper and ink cartridges made by the same manufacturer. So to take into account these variations in printer-ink-paper combinations, you should generate a new custom printer profile every time that you switch to a new package of paper and every time that you replace ink cartridges.

Also introduced in this Pro-100 is a new "Print Studio Pro" plug-in that provides a printer interface to Photoshop CS/Elements/Lightroom and Canon's own Digital Photo Professional (version 2.1 or later). If you are printing from either Adobe's or Canon's software, this plug-in lets you adjust printer settings, manage color settings (e.g. via an ICC profile), etc. If you mainly just change some common print options using the standard Microsoft Windows printer pop-up windows, the large number of options available in this "Print Studio Pro" plug-in may be a bit bewildering. After all, both this printer and the "Print Studio Pro" plug-in are targeted towards professional-level photographers. Luckily, most of the default settings in this plug-in provide for a good starting point. But for people who are accustomed to tweaking specific color profiles and printer profiles, these available adjustments should be reasonably easy to set up and the options are nicely grouped together in logical functionally related layouts.

Other software packaged with this printer include a "Easy Photo Print" and an image filters application that lets you apply basic special effects to your photos, along with tools to print onto CDs and CD/DVD case covers. This printer includes a tray to hold a CD or DVD so you can use this printer, along with the included "Easy Photo Print" software, to easily print professional-looking disc labels. The color labels that are directly printed onto the CD/DVD may have the inks smear and smudge if they get wet, unless you use a water-resistant disc like Taiyo Yuden/JVC WaterShield (in fact, *all* of Taiyo Yuden/JVC CD and DVD media are excellent in general).

Upon opening this printer's large shipping box, I was able to fully set up this printer for wireless Wi-Fi printing, including installation of all software, after a little over one hour's time. All of the contents inside the shipping box were neatly packed together with lots of tape holding various parts and pieces in place. This printer has impeccable build quality, with an excellent fit and finish, and it is a very solid piece of equipment. Any large-format photo printer like this will not be compact in size, and this Pro-100's size of 27.2"x8.6"x15.2" (Width-Height-Depth) needs extra room on a desk or table. In particular, the 27-inch width is wider than many large-format photo printers that can output 13"x19" prints. And Canon's Pro-1 is still even larger in size. I have my Pro-100 placed sideways on top of a two-drawer file cabinet.

After installing the included software, you should go to Canon's Web site to check if there are updated versions of firmware, drivers, and software. This really applies to any kind of software that you install; periodically check for new updates or patches that can be downloaded from the software company's Web site, first verifying that the updates are newer than what you have installed and that the updates apply to your specific setup. Whenever I install new software, I immediately check for new software, firmware, or driver updates or patches before I begin to use the software. Some software updates are major and can overwrite or reset any changes that you have configured in the software, so it is best to download and apply all new updates before proceeding to use the software. As with the software and firmware for their cameras, Canon frequently releases updates that may include bug fixes or extra features. For example, there are Pro-100 software updates on Canon's Web site that add support for Windows 8 and Windows 8.1 along with support for more paper types.

Connecting this printer using the supplied USB cable is the easiest setup method. My iPad also easily detected this printer's AirPrint capability. The included software guides you through either the USB or network connection menus. To initiate the connection to the printer, you press and hold down the [Resume/Cancel] button and then let it flash 6 times for a wireless WPS connection or let it flash 11 times for a wired USB connection. This printer connection setup process is quite cumbersome, but its wireless printing is very reliable once it has been configured. Canon needs to make the setup software and connection configuration easier and quicker to use. If your wireless access point or router is not able to connect to this printer using the WPS (Wi-Fi Protected Setup) mode, a more reliable approach is to choose the "Wireless Setup Using the USB cable" connection method that Canon's software also offers as a setup option. If you do encounter problems during setup of the printer or configuration of the printer's network connection, you can phone Canon's customer service at 1-800-OK-CANON (1-800-652-2666) Monday through Friday 10:00AM to 10:00PM EST, and you can talk to their knowledgeable staff who have good English skills.

The print quality of this printer is excellent, even when compared to other dedicated photo printers. A dye-based printer like this will naturally produce better color saturation than a pigment-based printer such as Canon's Pro-1 or Pro-10, or Epson's R3000. But a pigment-based printer will usually produce deeper blacks and dark tones. This Pro-100 is an excellent printer especially for landscape and nature photography because the colors are very rich and saturated. However, when printing portraits, skin tones can sometimes appear a bit ruddy or suntanned. I think that this is more due to the natural characteristics of dye inks, and not an issue with the color accuracy of the printer itself. The printer is not changing the hues of the skin by adding too much red color, but the existing flesh tones, and all colors in general, may be slightly more saturated than what is depicted in the actual images when using a dye-based inkjet printer. Slightly oversaturated skin colors in people are more noticeable than extra saturation of colors in animals, objects, landscapes, and nature scenery. In fact, if you show people two landscape/nature/floral photos where one photo accurately depicts all colors and the other photo shows the same scene but with more color saturation, most people will prefer the more colorful saturated photo than the photo with accurate colors. But the "more colorful is better" preference does not apply to extra saturation of skin colors. By slightly toning down the saturation of my photos that contain people in them prior to printing, I can get more natural skin tones on my prints from this Pro-100. For printing portraits and photos that include people in them, I reduce the saturation of the skin areas by about 5% to 10%. But for printing landscape and nature photos, the rich coloration is quite appealing, so I usually do not reduce the saturation levels on most of my landscape and floral images. For a photo of people surrounded by colorful scenery, I often slightly decrease the saturation just on the skin areas while letting the surrounding background stay the same. For photos that I have processed through HDR, which are usually a bit more saturated, I may reduce saturation by 5% or as much as 10% prior to printing them on this Pro-100. And most of my HDR-processed photos are far less saturated than many people's HDR processing since I prefer more natural and realistic-looking HDR-processed images instead of the wildly colored HDR images of some people that I think are tiresome to look at. If you normally post-process your photos to have extra color saturation, keep in mind that a dye-based printer like this Pro-100 will slightly bump up the saturation even more when compared to a pigment-based printer.

௫ Fuzzy Wuzzy's Conclusion:

Dye-based inks previously were not as colorfast as pigment-based inks over the long term. But the technology has improved so the dye-based inks used in this Pro-100 can retain their colors for 100+ years. You can expect excellent results for both image quality and color longevity if you use Canon's Pro Platinum, Luster, or Premium Photo Gloss or Semi-Gloss papers with this Pro-100 printer. Dye-based inks do not perform as well on porous matte photo papers and other uncoated fine art papers. If that is your preferred printer paper, instead of using a semi-gloss or gloss paper, then a pigment-based ink printer like the Pro-10 or Pro-1 may be better suited for your photo paper preferences. The longevity of all printed photos depends upon various factors such as whether the photo is protected in a frame or photo album (longer life) or is frequently handled (shorter life), whether the photo is framed (shorter life) or stored inside a photo album (longer life), and whether the framed photo is exposed to bright light (more fading) or displayed more in the shade (less fading). Dye inks are absorbed into the paper, whereas pigment inks stick to the surface as small pigment particles that are not absorbed into the paper. Using a t-shirt analogy, dye printer inks are like a t-shirt design that has dyes soaked into the cotton while pigment printer inks are like a t-shirt design that uses an iron-on applique. Because of this, pigment inks are more easily damaged due to scratches, chipping, or flaking, whereas a dye ink photo can be framed or mounted without glass covering it and it will be more resistant to mechanical damage. However, if a dye-printed page is exposed to water or high humidity, since dye inks easily dissolve in water, the dye ink photo can smear, bleed, or fade, whereas pigment inks are more resistant to water because they stick tighter to the surface of the page and will bleed less if exposed to moisture. The appearance of dye-ink prints can be affected by the texture of the paper being used, taking on some of the characteristics of the paper, whereas pigment-based prints look more consistent across all kinds of printer paper. Dye-based inks previously could produce a much wider color gamut than pigment-based inks. But just as dye inks have caught up to the colorfast longevity of pigment inks, pigment inks have now caught up to the wide color gamut that was previously an exclusive advantage of dye inks.

Overall, the detail, resolution, and color accuracy of this Pro-100 are superb, worthy of gallery displays and at least as good as, or better than, prints that you order from a drug store or retail department store. I print a lot of 11"x14" and 13"x19" photos of my nature, landscape, and macro photography that I frame, give as gifts, and hang on walls around my house, and visitors are often surprised that I printed these photos at home instead of using a commercial service. With a simple black frame and a white wall background, each large print looks glorious with its rich colors and fine detail. From a cost perspective, if you also take into account the cost of display and printer calibration hardware and replacing expensive ink cartridges, using this Pro-100 to get professional lab-quality large-format prints may not be much cheaper than paying a high-quality commercial photo lab. But printing at home does offer a more immediate and convenient printing of photos and, if you calibrate both your display and printer, you can have more precise control over how your prints will look with the specific papers you are using. Even if you do decide to send most of your images to commercial photo labs for printing, calibrating your monitor will assure that the colors you are viewing and editing are accurately displayed. So if color accuracy is important to you, monitor calibration is a must.

As mentioned, if you want incrementally better color accuracy and resolution and better black-and-white prints that compare favorably to the high-end prints offered by photo labs, you have to step up to the Pro-10 or Pro-1 printers. But those two printers cost two to three times more than this Pro-100, so this Pro-100 may be totally sufficient for most amateur photographers unless, again, most of your photography is black-and-white, in which case I would recommend the Pro-1. If most of your photography involves portraits and weddings, you may also want to consider the Pro-10 or Pro-1 because their pigment-based inks produce slightly more natural-looking skin tones, unless you sometimes slightly reduce the saturation on the skin areas prior to printing on this Pro-100, or you can also create custom profiles by calibrating this printer's output along with the display monitor and printer paper being used. I should emphasize that the slightly deeper saturation of colors on this dye-based inkjet printer is not very noticeable on the skin colors of all photos that I print out, but the subtle differences are more noticeable if I compare an image showing close-ups of faces printed on this Pro-100 and place the Pro-100 print right next to the same image printed on Canon's Pro-1 pigment-based inkjet printer. And you may actually prefer the slightly richer skin tones printed by the Pro-100 when compared to a pigment-based printer like the Pro-10 or Pro-1. Dye-based printers just have a slightly different look and feel than pigment-based printers. Other than those two caveats, the quality of the photo prints from this Pro-100 should satisfy all but the most discerning amateur photographers. I rely both on my own research and the opinions of others to help me make informed buying decisions. I hope that this review helped you to be a wise shopper! :)
22 comments|33 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on February 22, 2015
This paper is amazing. I use with with our Canon Pixma 100 printer and it is mind blowing how good the quality of the prints are. It's got the feel of a matt photo paper but is somehow even better looking and higher quality feeling to the touch. Soaks up the ink and dries very quickly.
0Comment|2 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on January 10, 2015
This paper makes beautiful prints, and the luster finish gives good saturation and excellent detail. If you print large format images from quality photos, I think you will be pleased with the Canon Luster paper.
0Comment|2 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
Wow, I am just so pleased with this paper. We enter a fair number of photo shows each month and depending on the image we'll go with gloss, semi-gloss, metallic, etc. I decided to give luster a try to see if we could add it into the mix.

We love it! Sure, for some photos it wouldn't be appropriate, but there are others that this just shines for. Florals seem to be the ones I adore on luster. It gives them almost a painterly feeling. Yes, it's similar to semi-gloss but it's still not quite the same. Maybe more pearlescent? This gets down into the realm of personal preference and attention to detail, but isn't that what art is all about?

Paper holds up well, frames well, and the colors are just right. We've won awards printing on this paper.

Here's the type of image we'll print on luster. I didn't try to take a photo of the image ON luster - that gets into a messy world of the camera focus and lighting and then Photoshop's settings and so on. It's nearly impossible to show the differences on any computer screen. If you really have to know exactly how this differs from semigloss I recommend talking to a local camera club and seeing the printouts on them first hand. That's your best way of knowing what it actually looks like in real life. Or heck I would, myself, just buy a box and play with it. If you don't end up using it there are always countless photographers around who would gladly buy the rest off of you on the used market.

Highly recommended.
review image
0Comment|Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse

Questions? Get fast answers from reviewers

Please make sure that you've entered a valid question. You can edit your question or post anyway.
Please enter a question.
See all 31 answered questions


Send us feedback

How can we make Amazon Customer Reviews better for you?
Let us know here.