Quote:
Originally Posted by steve B
Hard to tell coated from uncoated from a scan, but I'd go with uncoated and a spill that hit the front and both partly soaked through and likely was bad enough to puddle on the table and soak in from the back.
The front has a more well defined stain, while the back is less clear and more "blurry" at the edges.
The uncoated stock is more like finished cardstock, where one surface is smooth and a bit pressed from a roller in the paper making machine. It has no real coating, but absorbs most things better on the reverse side. It's good for printing on, since that finished side makes the ink stay on the surface making for brighter colors and crisper images.
If you look at a coated stock T206 under high magnification you can see the cracks in the coating.
|
Thanks Steve. Another side question. The T206 Manning I shared is a Piedmont 350. I have heard (and noticed) that for the Piedmont cards in the 150/350 print group, the cards with the 150 backs are typically bolder and more colorful than their 350 counterparts.
Are the 150 cards typically uncoated, which is why they usually look bolder and more colorful? And which surface that you refer to is smooth and roller pressed on uncoated stock...the front or the back?
Brian