Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/10/05

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: RE: [Leica] Epson paper/ink question
From: "B. D. Colen" <bdcolen@earthlink.net>
Date: Tue, 5 Oct 1999 15:03:05 -0000

Jonathan, Jonathan, Jonathan...If you really want to tell the difference
between the two, go look at the real things side by side, don't look at them
on a computer screen....And yes, they are different. But different isn't
bad, nor does different necessarily imply superiority and inferiority. It
just means they're not the same.



> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us]On Behalf Of Lee,
> Jonathan
> Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 1999 6:47 PM
> To: 'leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us'
> Subject: RE: [Leica] Epson paper/ink question
>
>
> I've been mulling over digital darkroom stuff for a while, and I was
> wondering whether there is a site anywhere out there which has silver
> printed and scanned and inkjet printed images of the same b+w
> negative?
>
> Jonathan Lee
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tina Manley [mailto:images@InfoAve.Net]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 1999 2:16 PM
> To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> Subject: Re: [Leica] Epson paper/ink question
>
>
> At 01:07 PM 10/5/99 -0400, you wrote:
> >Tina,
> >
> >I'm going to upgrade my printer soon, as well.  Have you
> compared the
> >output between the 1200 and the 3000?  Are you satisfied that the 3
> >color+B&W inks of the 3000 equal the performance of the 4
> color+B&W of the
> >1200.  Any other considerations than the capacity of the ink
> cartridges?
> >
> >I have to drive to Washington DC (about 3 hrs) to see this
> stuff in the
> >flesh, as it were, but your website tells me that your
> judgment in what
> >makes a good print and mine can't be too far apart.
> >
> >Thanks for any feedback that you can give me.
> >
> >Chandos
>
>
> Hi, Chandos -
>
> It's my understanding that the upgrade will have the ink
> capacity of the
> 3000 but the 6-color inks of the 1200.  The 5000 and 9000
> work like that
> now, but I can't afford $10,000 for a printer!!!  I have the
> Photo EX now
> and am tempted to go ahead and upgrade to the 1200, but the
> inks are so
> expensive in the tiny amounts for the 1200's cartridges.
> Somebody figured
> out that it costs $8000 a gallon!  There is a comparison of
> the output of
> all of the printers here:
>
  http://www.tssphoto.com/sp/dg/news/dot_comp.html

The 17x enlargements really show a difference.  There is no doubt that the
1200 looks more photographic but a lot of fine-art photographers are using
the 3000 because it will accept any inks in refillable tanks and all kinds
of papers.  I'd like to have a combination of the two.  As with anything
related to computers, I'm afraid whatever I buy today will be obsolete
tomorrow!  They are coming out with new inks and papers everyday.  So many
choices, so little time!

Tina


Tina Manley, ASMP
http://www.tinamanley.com