How thick is thick enough....

[dafrca]

I have been having a blast reading through various threads. Some great stuff. 


I started to mount a few figures trying various methods to find the one I like the best for me. One question that has come up is how thick is good enough for the normal 28mm-32mm figures? 


I know I don't want them too floppy (just photocopy paper folder in half) but where is the line that makes sense? 80# cover, 110 cover? Index card? Thicker?


Any advice or opinions would be appreciated.

[mproteau (Paper Realms)]

I've used 110lb cardstock, which is super rigid, but doesn't print all that well.
Now I normally use matte photo paper, and it's been varying weights over the years. Currently I'm using this: shop.usa.canon.com/shop/en/catalog/matte-photo-paper-letter-size-50-sheets

[Vermin King]

I generally work with 67# and 110#. 67#, for me, is fine for average human-sized and smaller. If it is twice human-sized, I will either sandwich another layer of 67# in between the two sides or use 110#. Some folks use 110# for everything.

I'm probably not the one to answer this question

[alloydog]

I use either cardboard from food packaging, such as cereal boxes, or water-colour paper which is about 180 to 220 g/m². Now, because my current printer cannot seem to be to feed such thick paper, I print to normal paper and glue on the heavy card/paper. After printing the figures (either directly to the card or onto paper, then gluing to the card), I then score the middle line and fold and glue.

For me, it's a trade-off between durability and practicality to build. Too thin, and the figures bend to bend and get ruined to easily, but too thick and they are hard to cut out neatly.

I would suggest trying different cards/paper types and techniques - you find one that suits you best.

[glennwilliams]

I find that for figures, 110# works fine. Photo paper while often thinner always seems stiffer, so that's a plus.