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. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#151
|
|||
|
|||
Epson printers - 2400 vs. 4800 ??
Gordon Moat wrote:
HEY YOUR KEYBOARD IS BROKEN . . . THE CAPLOCKS KEY IS STUCK! His keyboard is not broken. His brain (term loosely used) is stuck-on-stupid. Frank |
#152
|
|||
|
|||
Epson printers - 2400 vs. 4800 ??
In article . net,
Nicholas O. Lindan writes "Kennedy McEwen" wrote You don't need to trade one for the other Emphasis on "You". And then: Resolution where its needed and fine tone where its needed You mean like trading one for the other? The difference being that *you* don't need to do it, the algorithm delivers resolution where there is detail in the image and fine tone where there are fine tones. Your statement implied that a choice had to be made between resolution and tonal quality - it is a dynamic process across the image and the number of pixels per inch is *NOT* reduced. -- Kennedy Yes, Socrates himself is particularly missed; A lovely little thinker, but a bugger when he's ****ed. Python Philosophers (replace 'nospam' with 'kennedym' when replying) |
#153
|
|||
|
|||
Epson printers - 2400 vs. 4800 ??
Well, certainly not the ones mentioned below which are wide carriage
professional printers costing thousands of dollars. But to be more serious, you raise a very good question, to which the answer is - it depends. Although the learning curve is getting a bit less steep, if you aren't interested in having the personal control factors, if you aren't printing a ton of prints, where even small savings add up, if you are either nearby a store or have internet access, then it may be hard to justify. You have to pay for the printer, software, wear and tear on the computer, inks paper, and waste in getting the print right. It also costs time and for some, frustration. Just the other day, I was speaking to someone about this, and I mentioned that the photo industry has discovered how to re-engage digital photographers by offering very competitively priced prints. The nice thing is that even going to a relatively non-professional lab can provide reasonable results, as things become more automated, and the worst that happens is they have to reprint for you. There are no longer original negs or slides to ruin during processing or handling. So, unless you enjoy the creative process, you may be better off having it done for you. Art Paul Rubin wrote: Arthur Entlich writes: cartridges. Epson uses 8 cartridges in the 4000. They also use 8 in the 4800, 7800, 9800. The 4000 uses CcMmYKKk, the two uppercase K's are for the photo black and the matte black, as you state.... So when all is said and done, how do these epson prints compare with Fuji Frontier prints? I can get those done at my local walgreens for something like 3 bucks for an 8x10. I'm wondering if there's really any reason (other than perhaps risque shots or something like that) for a low-volume home user to buy a photo printer. |
#154
|
|||
|
|||
Epson printers - 2400 vs. 4800 ??
Yes, Bill, "another person" doesn't like me... but he's back in two
groups I regularly frequent, isn't he? In fact, he seems to have a posting right under yours here on comp.periphs.printers... You know what, there are at least a half dozen people on this very group who I know don't like my politics; think that bothers me? They too have detractors (besides me) in numerous other groups. After one person on another list I am on didn't like something I wrote and suggested I leave, I ran a survey asking people to let me know via private mail if they found my presence helpful on the group. My mailbox was overrun with over one hundred emails begging me to stay, and many had some pretty nasty things to say about the guy who instigated the situation. I got just two people who responded with anything but praise. One was noncommittal, and he was new to the group, and the other was the original person in question. So you see Bill, I really am beyond worrying about a few detractors, since every group has them. I'm flattered that you stand on guard to lambaste me when I make a factual error. Obviously, you think my opinions have great sway, And the fact that I can so bother a couple of you to the point of having you leave a group because of me, well, that's seems to make me either pretty powerful, or someone pretty thin skinned. I know you and "another person" both have costly Nikon film scanners which I spent time warning people about, along with several other Nikon models, due to fairly considerable design defects and that bothers you, but the information I provided was factual and accurate, verified by other owners, and even finally acknowledged by Nikon (as much as they ever admit to design defects, which isn't much). My ego is not connected to my purchases of tech equipment, and I am quite willing to point out the design issues or customer service issues relating to products I own, as well. It's a service to the community when people can find out before they make the purchase what they may be in for. By the way, my Polaroid Sprintscan 4000+ is doing just fine, thank you, and the company that made it is still in business, and support is even offered by the company that sold it. Sadly, the core Polaroid Corp did go "belly up" as you call it, because they were a company based on the customer service model, and today that isn't what investors are after. They want quick bucks. Polaroid made two mistakes. They didn't respond fast enough to the move to digital, and they continued to believe in the concept of customer service over corporate profits. When you work in a world where everyone is a shark, it's hard to survive as a lone porpoise. And again, just to be clear, I own and use many thousands of dollars of Nikon camera bodies and lenses, and most have been amazingly reliable and of good quality, so I would hardly say I had it out for Nikon. I'm even considering buying a Nikon D-SLR (since I own all those lenses). Similarly, if I truly had it "out" for Epson, I would not spend time defending the product line, owning their products and spending hours every day helping people who use their printers, without any financial compensation. However, that doesn't mean I will shut up about their design issues. I have been in the guts of enough Epson printers to know where the good engineering stops and the "stick it to the consumer" begins. As to what I accomplish, you wouldn't have a clue, so again I take no offense to your ignorance. It ain't all about the money Bill. Art Bill Hilton wrote: Arthur Entlich whines ... Thanks for the correction Bill. I bow to your knowledge. ... But you, in all your "wisdom" couldn't hold your typing fingers without making a completely uncalled for, and statistically inaccurate statement about me, could you? No I couldn't, because for about five years I've thought you were one of the most annoying clueless jackasses on the newsgroups Arthur. You seem to have it in for companies that are market leaders and drone on endlessly about all the things they are doing wrong while you've never actually accomplished anything yourself, whether it's Epson printers or Nikon scanners (how's that Polaroid Sprintscan doing for you, now that they went belly up?). I just ignore your endless opiniated replies but when you get your facts wrong I'll feel free to jump in, whether you like it or not. And it's not just me who feels that way, another person in this thread once told me he found you so replusive that he would sometimes abandon a group when you entered. Why is that? Bill |
#155
|
|||
|
|||
Epson printers - 2400 vs. 4800 ??
If your 1270 continues to give you good service, I'm not suggesting
anything. However, if the heads are as gooped up as you suggest, it will probably eventually begin to leave streaks and marks on some heavier weight papers. My experience is that early maintenance can save time later on. As to what is holding things together on this particular model, it may be very tight tolerances on your particular unit, or you live in a high humidity area. Maybe the waste ink pads are giving off so much vapor, it keeps the heads from drying out. I have this one NiCd rechargeable AA battery. It came from a set of about a dozen , the others of which are long ago recycled because they either started to leak, or would no longer hold a charge. But this one seems invincible, and I have no idea why. It was used similarly, and it was one of a group of the same brand, all of which became useless. Who knows why? (that's rhetorical ;-)) Art MarkČ wrote: Arthur Entlich wrote: MarkČ wrote: Arthur Entlich wrote: MarkČ wrote: Your 1270 probably just needs a good cleaning of the cleaning station. The purge pump may be all gummed up as well. Cleaning the cleaning station and ink wiper can make a improvement in the cleaning cycles as well. Actually, there is no problem with my 1270. To the contrary, it has never clogged in over 6 years, which is why I mentioned it in this thread. Perhaps you missed that part... No, I saw that part, but I am not convinced that is what is keeping the head from clogging. Neither am I, though I don't have a better explanation... Do you? I have done absolutely nothing out of the ordinary, and yet it has never ever clogged. Interestingly, it remains wet...NEVER drying--even after long periods on non-use. This means that instead of "cleaning" the head, it simply wipes goo around and ONTO the head. Perhaps this is partly what's helped my 1270 keep from clogging over the years...because the head can't dry out/clog when it's parked in big mess of wet goop! The cleaning station shouldn't be that gooped up. I'm surprised you don't get some black streaks on the paper surface if it has any variation in it. Your printer's waste ink pads may well be so saturated that the ink has nowhere to flow to (not so much that it needs capillary action or wicking, but that it needs a bit more distance to flow out of the waste ink tube, and that distance has been reduced as the pads become saturated. As far as I'm concerned...it doesn't "need" anything at all. It doesn't streak...and it doesn't clog. If it ain't broke...why are you suggesting I fix it? I have a whole storage room filled to the brim with old high-tech products. Me too. -I just threw a bunch of it away as I cleadned the garage yesterday. The problem is we pretty much all have a basement/closet/room filled with lower high tech, and eventually it's all going to be tossed, but where? Consumers, governments and manufacturers need to work together of reducing and eliminating this spiral. California's lame answer to this was to start slapping people with disposal taxes when they purchase monitors and the like. Stupid part is...they give no indication of any particular mechanism this money creates for the actual disposal! That's new for ya... It may...or (more likely) may not...go to anything related to it supposed reason for being imposed. Alberta Canada has a similar law, but I believe the money is being earmarked for take back, take apart and recycle programs. Up front money isn't a bad idea, part of the cost of the product existing, is the reduction of the product back into parts that aren't harmful to nature. There certainly should be money earmarked to make sure the monies collected are reinvented in recycling programs that work. It saddens me to see so much "valuable" stuff get dumped. The items were leading edge at one point, and people paid big money to be "on top" with this stuff. The amount of money I have spent on storage media and devices and memory, all completely obsolete now, is sickening... I try not to think about it! It kills me too, except that I then remind myself of all I couldn't have done without it at the time. It's sort of like gasoline. You can look back at all the gas you've burned over the years...having nothing to show for it...but the alternative would have been going nowhere all those years. Wasted money? Nah. Really just money spent to get where we're going...both on the road, and on the computer. (But OK...on the other hand...it still is a little depressing!) -Mark Sometimes when I think not just about the money, but the time I spent learning to use the cumbersome software So and hardware, I'm not sure I'm that far ahead. Newer users have products that have less steep learning curves, so in some ways they may catch up with those who lived through the dark years. Art Perhaps... |
#156
|
|||
|
|||
Epson printers - 2400 vs. 4800 ??
I have no "personal thing" with Bill, he has a "personal thing" with me,
which is pretty obvious. He came out swinging, not me. I personally could care less what Bill thinks. His post quoted below shows what a "good guy" he is. He just doesn't like his "kit" being criticized, even when there is documented proof of problems. He probably never bought a car he didn't like, either. People who are overly attached to brand loyalty, to the point where it influences their ability to see defects, do no favors to others who may be considering buying the products. I haven't had anything to do with Bill in YEARS, in fact, I really have never had anything to do with Bill, period. I was critical of a product he happens to own, and he took it personally. One thing for sure, he holds a good grudge, however, even when he's wrong. Art MarkČ wrote: Bill Hilton wrote: Arthur Entlich whines ... Thanks for the correction Bill. I bow to your knowledge. ... But you, in all your "wisdom" couldn't hold your typing fingers without making a completely uncalled for, and statistically inaccurate statement about me, could you? No I couldn't, because for about five years I've thought you were one of the most annoying clueless jackasses on the newsgroups Arthur. You seem to have it in for companies that are market leaders and drone on endlessly about all the things they are doing wrong while you've never actually accomplished anything yourself, whether it's Epson printers or Nikon scanners (how's that Polaroid Sprintscan doing for you, now that they went belly up?). I just ignore your endless opiniated replies but when you get your facts wrong I'll feel free to jump in, whether you like it or not. And it's not just me who feels that way, another person in this thread once told me he found you so replusive that he would sometimes abandon a group when you entered. Why is that? Bill I don't know the history involved with the two of you...but to Arthur: -If you've got a thing with Bill, it must be a "personal thing," because I've never seen anything in/from Bill (save for this little heated exchange) that would indicate anything other than Bill being a perfect gentleman. I don't know you, Arthur, and so won't comment with regard to you. What I can say, though, is that around here, Bill is one of the good guys. -Mark |
#157
|
|||
|
|||
Epson printers - 2400 vs. 4800 ??
Prime wrote: measekite posted the exciting message news:vUUwf.26250 : IN TEXAS THEY HAVE DELL In Uranus we have meankite. I THOUGHT DA BEEFER WAS FROM YOURANUS |
#158
|
|||
|
|||
Epson printers - 2400 vs. 4800 ??
Prime wrote: measekite posted the exciting message news:n9Vwf.26256 : I HAVE FOUND OUT THAT WALGREEN, COSTCO ETC PRINTS A LIGHTER WEIGHT AND TEND TO CURL. THAT IS NOT THE CASE WHEN USING A HIGH QUALITY COSTCO/KIRKLAND, EPSON OR CANON PHOTO PAPER PRO MEDIA. I don't know how you could say that. You are against relabled supplies. We certainly don't know who really makes the Kirkland paper. In fact, other posts suggest that the 4x6 size is made by a different company than the Letter size. They are relabeled. You don't know what you are getting so you are stupid if you think this is a good idea. Perhaps your problem in browntown is affecting your reasoning. OOZING FROM DA EARS |
#159
|
|||
|
|||
Epson printers - 2400 vs. 4800 ??
Prime wrote: measekite posted the exciting message news:0aVwf.26257 : YOU ALSO GET A DRAMATIC BOOST IN END RESULT BECAUSE YOU CAN SPEND THE TIME TO EDIT THE PHOTO. You would have a dramatic boost in your butt-end result if you unclogged yourself. IN FAT U ATED |
#160
|
|||
|
|||
Epson printers - 2400 vs. 4800 ??
In message , David
Nebenzahl writes Kennedy McEwen spake thus: In article w9bvf.7874$V.6727@fed1read04, MarkČ writes I contend that there isn't ANY media capable of showing a benefit of dpi that high. There are plenty of such media, they just aren't papers. :-) Like what--stainless steel? Precision-buffed to a high gloss? Printed circuit boards? -- Timothy |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Epson printers - 2400 vs. 4800 ?? | Mark Anon | Digital Photography | 99 | January 12th 06 01:29 PM |
EPSON PRINTERS - COST OF INKS! | chabotphoto | Digital Photography | 7 | February 1st 05 05:24 PM |
The film won't die first | Quest0029 | Medium Format Photography Equipment | 77 | November 3rd 04 09:58 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 |