A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Photo Equipment » Large Format Photography Equipment
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Epson printers - 2400 vs. 4800 ??



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old January 3rd 06, 11:34 PM posted to comp.periphs.printers,rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.equipment.large-format
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Epson printers - 2400 vs. 4800 ??

Do you NOT know what 'Large Format' means?

This is a group for large-format cameras...

SHEET film

4x5 INCHES or more....

WTF......?

Mark Anon wrote:
Aside from the obvious difference in print output size, what are the _real
quality_ differences between the new Epson 2400 and 4800 printers?

The 2400 advertises much higher 5760x1440 dpi printing, but the 4800 at
2880x1440 is listed as a "Pro" model. What gives?

Both use the new K3 inks.

TIA for any help...

Mark


  #22  
Old January 3rd 06, 11:40 PM posted to rec.photo.equipment.large-format
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Epson printers - 2400 vs. 4800 ??

Dear WTF Uranium,

Thanks for the astounding revelation...

Mark


wrote in message
oups.com...
Do you NOT know what 'Large Format' means?

This is a group for large-format cameras...

SHEET film

4x5 INCHES or more....

WTF......?

Mark Anon wrote:
Aside from the obvious difference in print output size, what are the
_real
quality_ differences between the new Epson 2400 and 4800 printers?

The 2400 advertises much higher 5760x1440 dpi printing, but the 4800 at
2880x1440 is listed as a "Pro" model. What gives?

Both use the new K3 inks.

TIA for any help...

Mark




  #23  
Old January 3rd 06, 11:53 PM posted to rec.photo.equipment.large-format
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Epson printers - 2400 vs. 4800 ??


Mark Anon wrote:
Dear WTF Uranium,

Thanks for the astounding revelation...


Then why are you talking about digital printers?

****ing moron.....

Mark


wrote in message
oups.com...
Do you NOT know what 'Large Format' means?

This is a group for large-format cameras...

SHEET film

4x5 INCHES or more....

WTF......?

Mark Anon wrote:
Aside from the obvious difference in print output size, what are the
_real
quality_ differences between the new Epson 2400 and 4800 printers?

The 2400 advertises much higher 5760x1440 dpi printing, but the 4800 at
2880x1440 is listed as a "Pro" model. What gives?

Both use the new K3 inks.

TIA for any help...

Mark



  #26  
Old January 4th 06, 12:49 AM posted to rec.photo.equipment.large-format
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Epson printers - 2400 vs. 4800 ??

Wow, UnarniumHead knows dirty words!!!! What next will he regale us with??

Of course, I'm sure his obscene language has SOMETHING to do with LF
photography...



wrote in message
oups.com...

Mark Anon wrote:
Dear WTF Uranium,

Thanks for the astounding revelation...


Then why are you talking about digital printers?

****ing moron.....

Mark


wrote in message
oups.com...
Do you NOT know what 'Large Format' means?

This is a group for large-format cameras...

SHEET film

4x5 INCHES or more....

WTF......?

Mark Anon wrote:
Aside from the obvious difference in print output size, what are the
_real
quality_ differences between the new Epson 2400 and 4800 printers?

The 2400 advertises much higher 5760x1440 dpi printing, but the 4800
at
2880x1440 is listed as a "Pro" model. What gives?

Both use the new K3 inks.

TIA for any help...

Mark




  #27  
Old January 4th 06, 01:17 AM posted to rec.photo.equipment.large-format
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Epson printers - 2400 vs. 4800 ??



Mark Anon wrote:

I beg to differ. As much as I love traditional processes, MANY large format
photographers are now printing on digital printers.


Get over it. THis newsgroup is about LARGE FORMAT EQUIPMENT.

That is, camera equipment...

A post about Epson
printers is just as viable in the LF world as one about Durst enlargers...


Nope. Sorry, crossposter...


"Tom Phillips" wrote in message
...


wrote:

Mark Anon wrote:
Dear WTF Uranium,

Thanks for the astounding revelation...

Then why are you talking about digital printers?



Snipping vulgarity...I hate to agree with our most
infamous troll (what am I saying?), but he's right.
This is not a nsg about printers...

.

Mark


wrote in message
oups.com...
Do you NOT know what 'Large Format' means?

This is a group for large-format cameras...

SHEET film

4x5 INCHES or more....

WTF......?

Mark Anon wrote:
Aside from the obvious difference in print output size, what are the
_real
quality_ differences between the new Epson 2400 and 4800 printers?

The 2400 advertises much higher 5760x1440 dpi printing, but the 4800
at
2880x1440 is listed as a "Pro" model. What gives?

Both use the new K3 inks.

TIA for any help...

Mark

  #28  
Old January 4th 06, 01:31 AM posted to rec.photo.equipment.large-format
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Epson printers - 2400 vs. 4800 ??

Dear Tom,

Tell that to Steve Simmons. Last I checked he publishes a LARGE FORMAT
magazine of some repute, and even he has included articles about a wide
variety of digital technologies.

Does that mean I should give up my Pentax DIGITAL Spotmeter. Or give up my
darkroom timer with a DIGITAL timer in it?

All I did was ask a simply question about a printer that I was considering
buying to make prints from my LARGE FORMAT camera.

GET OVER IT, Tom.



"Tom Phillips" wrote in message
...


Mark Anon wrote:

I beg to differ. As much as I love traditional processes, MANY large
format
photographers are now printing on digital printers.


Get over it. THis newsgroup is about LARGE FORMAT EQUIPMENT.

That is, camera equipment...

A post about Epson
printers is just as viable in the LF world as one about Durst
enlargers...


Nope. Sorry, crossposter...


"Tom Phillips" wrote in message
...


wrote:

Mark Anon wrote:
Dear WTF Uranium,

Thanks for the astounding revelation...

Then why are you talking about digital printers?


Snipping vulgarity...I hate to agree with our most
infamous troll (what am I saying?), but he's right.
This is not a nsg about printers...

.

Mark


wrote in message
oups.com...
Do you NOT know what 'Large Format' means?

This is a group for large-format cameras...

SHEET film

4x5 INCHES or more....

WTF......?

Mark Anon wrote:
Aside from the obvious difference in print output size, what are
the
_real
quality_ differences between the new Epson 2400 and 4800
printers?

The 2400 advertises much higher 5760x1440 dpi printing, but the
4800
at
2880x1440 is listed as a "Pro" model. What gives?

Both use the new K3 inks.

TIA for any help...

Mark



  #29  
Old January 4th 06, 02:38 AM posted to rec.photo.equipment.large-format
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Epson printers - 2400 vs. 4800 ??



Mark Anon wrote:

Dear Tom,

Tell that to Steve Simmons. Last I checked he publishes a LARGE FORMAT
magazine of some repute, and even he has included articles about a wide
variety of digital technologies.


Don't drag Steve into this...

Does that mean I should give up my Pentax DIGITAL Spotmeter. Or give up my
darkroom timer with a DIGITAL timer in it?

All I did was ask a simply question about a printer that I was considering
buying to make prints from my LARGE FORMAT camera.


Has nothing to do with large format camera equipment
though. Espon printers work from digital scans (i.e,
the format could be anything from digital point & shoot
to any size film) But this newsgroups is, in fact, about
large format film equipment, not digital output. In other
words there's nothing wrong with your post other than
you crossposted it to the wrong newsgroup.

BTW, just FYI, there will never be a large format digital
newsgroup because 1) silicon wafers can't be manufactured
that large, and 2) photodetectors can't get that small.
Meaning the difference between the comparitive pixel
resolutions of even Better Light or Sinar digital imaging
backs vs. actual large format films isn't even a contest...


"Tom Phillips" wrote in message
...


Mark Anon wrote:

I beg to differ. As much as I love traditional processes, MANY large
format
photographers are now printing on digital printers.


Get over it. THis newsgroup is about LARGE FORMAT EQUIPMENT.

That is, camera equipment...

A post about Epson
printers is just as viable in the LF world as one about Durst
enlargers...


Nope. Sorry, crossposter...


"Tom Phillips" wrote in message
...


wrote:

Mark Anon wrote:
Dear WTF Uranium,

Thanks for the astounding revelation...

Then why are you talking about digital printers?


Snipping vulgarity...I hate to agree with our most
infamous troll (what am I saying?), but he's right.
This is not a nsg about printers...

.

Mark


wrote in message
oups.com...
Do you NOT know what 'Large Format' means?

This is a group for large-format cameras...

SHEET film

4x5 INCHES or more....

WTF......?

Mark Anon wrote:
Aside from the obvious difference in print output size, what are
the
_real
quality_ differences between the new Epson 2400 and 4800
printers?

The 2400 advertises much higher 5760x1440 dpi printing, but the
4800
at
2880x1440 is listed as a "Pro" model. What gives?

Both use the new K3 inks.

TIA for any help...

Mark

  #30  
Old January 4th 06, 03:39 AM posted to rec.photo.equipment.large-format
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Epson printers - 2400 vs. 4800 ??



Mark Anon wrote:

I beg to differ. As much as I love traditional processes, MANY large format
photographers are now printing on digital printers. A post about Epson
printers is just as viable in the LF world as one about Durst enlargers...


BTW, they may be printing digital output, but
it ain't a photograph. If it's Epson it's an
inkjet and an inkjet is an ink reproduction,
not a light-actuated optical image, which is
what a photograph is.

So with regard to a durst, there's no real
comparison. Sorry Mark. That's the truth. I
would never print inkjet and then try to pass
that off as a actual photograph.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Epson printers - 2400 vs. 4800 ?? Mark Anon Digital Photography 99 January 12th 06 02:29 PM
EPSON PRINTERS - COST OF INKS! chabotphoto Digital Photography 7 February 1st 05 06:24 PM
The film won't die first Quest0029 Medium Format Photography Equipment 77 November 3rd 04 10:58 AM
Do the New Epson Printers Still Clog? Poindexter Digital Photography 74 August 23rd 04 12:09 AM
Choosing a printer Morton Klotz Digital Photography 16 August 7th 04 12:22 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:31 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.