Hi Volkart,
My thoughts on printers and scanners.
1. Epson has been the printer of choice at a local Pro Photo shop who caters
to only Professional Photogs. They use them mostly for their portfolios.
I have owned the original Epson "Photo" for about 3+ years and have been
very satisfied. Santa brought me the new Epson 1200 this past Xmas. The
only advantages are a. a little faster b. the ink cartridge is larger but
more expensive and c. it will print 11x17". The 1200 sells for about $500
but you can buy the smaller (8x10") #700 or newer #750 for much less $150 -
$300 here in the US.
2. Cost of paper and Ink is very high. I have tried several different
brands of photo paper and film. The Epson "Film" @ $2.00 per 8x10" sheet is
by far the best I have tried.
The Ink can eat your lunch at times. If I were to guess, you can only
expect about 20 - 25 8x10 photos from a cartridge (in the smaller models -
the larger 1200 will do a little more).
Print quality is fantastic with the better film.
The archival Inks have hit the Ink Jet scene, but there are a few things you
should know that I just recently found out myself.
a. You must purge your system of the old inks before you use the archival
inks.
b. You must use BOTH archival Paper & Inks.
c. You are limited to Matte finish paper only - NO Glossy papers.
d. The quality is not that good, considerable banding and streaks.
IMO we are still a few years away from perfecting the Ink Jets for archival.
3. I do not have a darkroom, thou sometimes I wish I did. I think in a few
more years we will be printing archival prints on our home/priced printers
that will rival the best darkroom media. It is just a matter of time. By
the way, I do not own a digital camera and I have no plans in owning one. A
good scanner will do all I need and more.
4. Slide scanners have not changed much in the past 2 or 3 years other than
a little speed. I have had a Nikon Coolscan II and have been very please
with it. I don't know much about the Canon. I would suggest you check to
see if the full version of Photoshop is still bundled with the Nikon. At
$500+, it helps reduce the cost of the scanner.
I should also warn you about a little, well - lets just say a very BIG &
FRUSTRATING PROBLEM. That is calibrating your, slides on the light table
with your scanner, monitor and PRINTER. This can make you pull your hair
out sometimes. What you see is not always What you get!
Good luck with your new project.
Buddy Walters
-----Original Message-----
From: Volkhart Baumgaertner
Subject: [OM] photo printers
1) if I were to buy a photo printer now I wouldn't know whether
one of the Epson models would be the way to go or whether there are better
alternatives.
2) Of course, the two main considerations would be print quality and cost
(printer, paper, ink/colors).
3) I think it will be a while before digital cameras can challenge the
quality of the photos my OMs deliver, but a digital darkroom with a high
quality scanner and printer would be a nice
thing to have.
4) While I know I would probably go for a Canon 2710 or a Nikon
Coolscan III LS 30 scannerwise, I would appreciate any info on what printers
I should consider.
MtFbwy,
Volkhart
--
Volkhart Baumgaertner email: kyu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
MausNet: @MGN
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|