Douglas wrote:
How on God's earth can you expect to be taken seriously when you print
drivel like this? Where are the spectrometer results?

I don't do spectrophotometer tests. That does not make my impressions of
print quality, etc less meanful, just what they are, impressions and
observations from use. I've changed the name of the 3800 article from
review to impressions.

The Z3100 is called setup and initial use.

And... What on earth
prompted you to even attempt to compare an industrial printer like the HP
with an Epson destined for the desktop?

I did say in the first paragraph "This is not an even comparison, as the
Epson 3800 and the HP Z3100 are very different printers. But I could not
resist it. I’ll leave out the obvious differences in size and paper
handling and concentrate on the print quality." I think that spells it
out, these are the two latest printers from these two companies, they
were here at the same time and I wanted to compare PRINT QUALITY,
nothing else.

I suppose you never thought to compare apples with apples? Next time you try
to gain some credibility, try testing two industrial printers instead of a
desktop and a free standing industrial machine.

Of course, and that's why I said I was only looking at print quality.

Where too are the comparisons of ink tank capacity? Just because Epson put
"Pro" after the description of a printer doesn't make it an industrial
machine. 80 ml. is hardly enough to start a production run of full width
canvas panorama's is it?

You just went down 5 points in my assessment of your ability to even write a
credible report, much less a concise one.



--
Wayne J. Cosshall
Publisher, The Digital ImageMaker, http://www.dimagemaker.com/
Blog http://www.digitalimagemakerworld.com/