Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/07/06
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Today I was out looking at inkjet printers for b/w work scanned on a Sprintscan 120. Guess after reading a score of posts on this, I'll wait until inkjet printing is more straightforward. "Piezography" sounds more complicated than actually printing pictures in a bathroom - at least there, I just plug in Ilford MG IV, set the lens at f/5.6 and the density at +45 (well, this is a Durst DA900, so it's kind of like cheating), and expose. Four minutes later, I have prints that last for 50 years, no surface flatness, no fading, no color cast. If I don't like the contrast, it takes all of ten seconds to change the contrast filter. It's my surmise that when you can get the Ilford paper for $30/100 in 8x10 glossy delivered, that it's actually cheaper too. The enlarger cost a bit less than a 2200. Dante On Sunday, July 6, 2003, at 07:12 PM, kip@mac.com wrote: > All: > > Ben marks wrote: > >> Note that Epson's inks are (as I beleive Tina mentioned) dye-based >> rather than pigment based. > > It should be clarified that one of the pros and cons of the Epson 2200 > (which I own) is that its inks ARE pigment-based, not dyes. Epson > manufactures both types depending on which model of printer, but > everyone should be aware that the 2200 uses pigment-based inks. The > pro is the archival nature of the 2200's output; the con is a > "bronzing" effect, especially on glossy papers. > > Kip Peterson > San Diego > > -- > To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html > > ____________ Dante Stella http://www.dantestella.com - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html