Re: Epson 3800 vs 4800 - any advice?
Thanks Mark, I don't suppose you have any data on using black ink only for Neanderthals like me, do you... 8-) Best regards, Jon On 2/28/2007, "Ender100@aol.com" <Ender100@aol.com> wrote: >Jon, > >The Epson 3800 using all inks to print black measures about log 1.9 UV >density. The Epson 2200 is about 7 stops more dense at log 4.0 > >Best Wishes, >Mark Nelson > >Precision Digital Negatives - The System >PDNPrint Forum at Yahoo Groups >www.MarkINelsonPhoto.com > >In a message dated 2/28/07 11:46:47 AM, jon@terabear.com writes: > > >> Ouch. I'd hate to go backwards. >> >> The 2 main advantages to 4800 over the 3800 I've found is: >> >> 1) Higher capacity carts >> 2) The 4800 accepts roll media where the 3800 does not >> >> Neither of these things matter if I can't get reasonably comparable >> density out of either of them using black ink only though. Is the 3800 >> thought to be better using black ink only than the 4800? I'd look into >> a used 4000 as you recommend Camden, but I like having that Manufacturer >> Warranty in case there are problems. >> >> Jon >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >************************************** > AOL now offers free email to everyone. > Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com. > >
|