New Nikon?s ?NIKKOR & ACC? app released

On 8/24/2015 3:36 PM, Tony Cooper wrote:
On Mon, 24 Aug 2015 11:12:40 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

On 2015-08-24 17:51:07 +0000, PeterN said:

On 8/24/2015 12:05 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2015-08-24 15:24:37 +0000, PeterN said:

On 8/23/2015 7:02 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On Aug 23, 2015, PeterN wrote
(in article
Le Snip

What is the printer you currently use?

Mostly Costco for competition submissions.

That much I understood, so let me try again.
Do you actually have quality photo printer at home, or are you totally
dependant on Costco?

For family type stuff I have an Epson all in one. The photo quality is
good enough to make everybody happy. The 8x10 is OK, but most of the
time they just want 4x6, or smaller.

If you are looking for real quality in your prints, and you are
prepared to spend what you do on cameras, glass, and monitors, then
adding a good photo printer is something you should consider. The
rewards are well beyond your imagination.
If I were you I would take a look at the new Epson photo printers, the
13" P600 and the 17" P800.
http://www.epson.com/cgi-bin/Store/jsp/Product.do?sku=C11CE21201&UseCookie=yes#0
http://www.epson.com/cgi-bin/Store/jsp/Pro/SeriesSureColorP800/Overview.do?UseCookie=yes

If

you are interested (let me know via email) I can mail you an example
print from my R2880 on Red River Polar Pearl Metallic I think you will
be surprised.

Dunno about Peter, but with young grandchildren I do a lot of 4x6
prints. The difference in quality between prints done on my Epson
All-In-One or by Costco and what I'd get from a top of the line
printer plus profile matched paper would be indistinguishable.

The few times I want an large-size print for framing I send out. The
local camera shop has a source they use that does very good work.


You hit the nail on the head.


--
PeterN

On 8/24/2015 3:37 PM, Tony Cooper wrote:

snip

Meant to add...what I really need is wall space, not better prints.


If anyone ever invents a practical wall expander, they will make a
fortune. According to Einstein, it is theoretically possible. ;-)

--
PeterN

In article , Tony Cooper
wrote:

For family type stuff I have an Epson all in one. The photo quality is
good enough to make everybody happy. The 8x10 is OK, but most of the
time they just want 4x6, or smaller.

Ditto. I print family 4x6s and 5x7s on my Epson XP-410. I'll order
the prints from Costco if more than around 10 are needed because large
runs use inkjet ink. It's not cost comparison thing, it's a
convenience thing since if an ink color runs out it's always when you
need that print now.

keep a spare on hand. it's not hard to check the levels.

On 2015-08-25 00:34:02 +0000, nospam said:

In article , Tony Cooper
wrote:

For family type stuff I have an Epson all in one. The photo quality is
good enough to make everybody happy. The 8x10 is OK, but most of the
time they just want 4x6, or smaller.

Ditto. I print family 4x6s and 5x7s on my Epson XP-410. I'll order
the prints from Costco if more than around 10 are needed because large
runs use inkjet ink. It's not cost comparison thing, it's a
convenience thing since if an ink color runs out it's always when you
need that print now.

keep a spare on hand. it's not hard to check the levels.

A spare!?
I have spares of each color for my R2880; 2xMatte Black, 3xPhoto
Black, 3xLight Black, 3xLight Light Black, 3xCyan, 3xLight Cyan,
3xVivid Magenta, 3xVivid Light Magenta, and 3xYellow.

For my XP-610 I have a full spare set and an additional double capacity
black, and Photo Black.
https://db.tt/mDrYPgxy

--
Regards,

Savageduck

In article 201508241807222012-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom, Savageduck
wrote:

For family type stuff I have an Epson all in one. The photo quality is
good enough to make everybody happy. The 8x10 is OK, but most of the
time they just want 4x6, or smaller.

Ditto. I print family 4x6s and 5x7s on my Epson XP-410. I'll order
the prints from Costco if more than around 10 are needed because large
runs use inkjet ink. It's not cost comparison thing, it's a
convenience thing since if an ink color runs out it's always when you
need that print now.

keep a spare on hand. it's not hard to check the levels.

A spare!?

I have spares of each color for my R2880; 2xMatte Black, 3xPhoto
Black, 3xLight Black, 3xLight Light Black, 3xCyan, 3xLight Cyan,
3xVivid Magenta, 3xVivid Light Magenta, and 3xYellow.

For my XP-610 I have a full spare set and an additional double capacity
black, and Photo Black.
https://db.tt/mDrYPgxy

that works.

tony will run out of ink and you won't.

On Mon, 24 Aug 2015 05:00:24 -0700 (PDT), Whisky-dave
wrote:

On Sunday, 23 August 2015 23:23:35 UTC+1, peterN wrote:


I have pretty much narrowed my choice:
Probably this one. unless I see a compelling reason to make a different
choice.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?N=11058076&InitialSearch=yes&sts=pi

Human and Ambient Light Sensors


Yep! I believe in monitor calibration.


is this what the "Human" part means never seen it refered to like this before.

This is what got me:

"Carbon Footprint Meter
Records and tracks the conservation of greenhouse gases while
using this monitor."

Is it coal burning?
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On 2015-08-23 10:12, PeterN wrote:
On 8/22/2015 8:25 PM, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2015-08-22 10:53, PeterN wrote:

EOD Asshole. Wallow in your mother's basement.


You stepped in it Peter by saying "I tend not to pay too much attention
to rumors." and now you look like an incredible bitter ass.



In my experience I have seen that rumors in general tend not to be true.


Now you're deflecting as you did with nospam.

He referred to a site called Nikon Rumors which is not a site that is
about rumors but about Nikon Camera news. Yes, the name misled you, but
that was pointed out to you and then you dug your heels in and went on
another tedious nospam attack.

On 8/25/2015 4:56 PM, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2015-08-23 10:12, PeterN wrote:
On 8/22/2015 8:25 PM, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2015-08-22 10:53, PeterN wrote:

EOD Asshole. Wallow in your mother's basement.


You stepped in it Peter by saying "I tend not to pay too much attention
to rumors." and now you look like an incredible bitter ass.



In my experience I have seen that rumors in general tend not to be true.


Now you're deflecting as you did with nospam.

He referred to a site called Nikon Rumors which is not a site that is
about rumors but about Nikon Camera news. Yes, the name misled you, but
that was pointed out to you and then you dug your heels in and went on
another tedious nospam attack.

Possibly things have changed. The last time I looked at Nikon Rumors, it
was a rumor mill.
Notwithstanding the above, would you have been happier if I simply said
Nikon Rumors is not on my reading list.
It's a safe bet that nospam would have said the same thing.
My principle holds, I don't read something unless the subject interests me.

--
PeterN

In article , PeterN
wrote:


In my experience I have seen that rumors in general tend not to be true.

Now you're deflecting as you did with nospam.

He referred to a site called Nikon Rumors which is not a site that is
about rumors but about Nikon Camera news. Yes, the name misled you, but
that was pointed out to you and then you dug your heels in and went on
another tedious nospam attack.

Possibly things have changed. The last time I looked at Nikon Rumors, it
was a rumor mill.

bull****. you're weaseling.

nikonrumors does sometimes include rumours as part of their coverage
(and ones that are well sourced), but that's not its sole purpose in
life.

Notwithstanding the above, would you have been happier if I simply said
Nikon Rumors is not on my reading list.

nobody said you had to read it, however, your reasons for doing so are
completely bogus.

It's a safe bet that nospam would have said the same thing.

the problem was that you claimed that an official nikon product
announcement with an official press release was a rumour.

saying you don't read a particular site is an entirely different thing.

My principle holds, I don't read something unless the subject interests me.

nikon doesn't interest you?

On 8/25/2015 6:33 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , PeterN
wrote:


In my experience I have seen that rumors in general tend not to be true.

Now you're deflecting as you did with nospam.

He referred to a site called Nikon Rumors which is not a site that is
about rumors but about Nikon Camera news. Yes, the name misled you, but
that was pointed out to you and then you dug your heels in and went on
another tedious nospam attack.

Possibly things have changed. The last time I looked at Nikon Rumors, it
was a rumor mill.

bull****. you're weaseling.





nikonrumors does sometimes include rumours as part of their coverage
(and ones that are well sourced), but that's not its sole purpose in
life.

Notwithstanding the above, would you have been happier if I simply said
Nikon Rumors is not on my reading list.

nobody said you had to read it, however, your reasons for doing so are
completely bogus.

I deeply apologize for not letting you decide what I should and should
not read.


It's a safe bet that nospam would have said the same thing.

the problem was that you claimed that an official nikon product
announcement with an official press release was a rumour.

saying you don't read a particular site is an entirely different thing.

My principle holds, I don't read something unless the subject interests me.

nikon doesn't interest you?



--
PeterN