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: Greg.Chappell@bankofamerica.com
Date: Tue, 05 Oct 1999 14:52:51 -0500

No, I'm not left with a pad & pencil at all. We're talking now aren't we?
I've got better things to do than go home & set at a Computer after having
done it all day at work (Like watch cable TV!).

Digital printing has saved me big time once, and I'm sure it will again, but
I think I'll rely on my processor to keep making those investments in
equipment & software. If I ever have $1,000 laying around to invest, it'll
be in either additional Leica lenses or accessories, or, even more
constructive, an IRA.

- -----Original Message-----
From: B. D. Colen [mailto:bdcolen@earthlink.net]
Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 1999 10:01 AM
To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
Subject: RE: [Leica] Epson paper/ink question


The problem with your position, Greg, is that you're basically left with a
pad and pencil for all the functions that a computer can handle. Sure, the
technology changes - and thank God it does - but that doesn't mean you've
got to change at each point. Just get the most bang you can afford with your
present buck, and hang onto it for a while. I know people find it hard to
believe, but I'm doing all my digital work on a Pentium I 166 MMX, which, by
today's standards, is barely a hand calculator. Yes, I've added ram, which
is now really cheap, and a second hard drive, also cheap..but I'm in my
third year with the computer, and probably won't upgrade for another year.

As to the printers, my Epson 700 cost $249, and my recently purchased 750
cost $ 299. Which means that if I keep replacing these things annually, I'm
paying about $10 to $15 per week to have a "dark room," and I think that's
cheap at any price - after all, I'd have the computer whether or not I was
doing photo work...



> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us]On Behalf Of
> Greg.Chappell@bankofamerica.com
> Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 1999 6:50 PM
> To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> Subject: RE: [Leica] Epson paper/ink question
>
>
> "Whatever I buy today will be obsolete tomorrow!"
>
> Sometimes before tomorrow. What a true statement, and the one
> reason I will
> not be investing in computer/printer equipment anytime in the
> near future.
> Even if you like & keep what you've got, no manufacturer will
> support it
> after 5 or 6 years. How many other industries can get away
> with that! Come
> to think of it, that's what most camera makers do now.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tina Manley [mailto:images@InfoAve.Net]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 1999 1:16 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