Re: Epson 1400

To: alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca
Subject: Re: Epson 1400
From: Sandy King <sanking@clemson.edu>
Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2007 21:13:31 -0500
Comments: "alt-photo-process mailing list"
In-reply-to: <BAY133-W395C9E24E0DE4394BF453BBB580@phx.gbl>
List-id: alt-photo-process mailing list <alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca>
References: <003801c841c1$eb7954b0$8801a8c0@athlon64><05301D52-CD6A-41FB-B136-56EE0CFC1803@bellsouth.net><63AD09A4-18AA-4D8F-A75F-46F364C3216E@bellsouth.net><BAY133-W395C9E24E0DE4394BF453BBB580@phx.gbl>
Reply-to: alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca

Title: Re: Epson 1400

I don't recommend the Epson 1400. Some months ago I bought one and tested it for digital negative printing. UV blocking is very low.

A better choice in the economy range is the Epson R1800. Another good choice is the HP B9180, especially if you are using Mark Nelson's PDN.

I am still using the Epson 2200, with QTR and a special profile posted to the hybrid forum by Clay.

Sandy King

At 9:12 PM +0000 12/23/07, Marek Matusz wrote:

Thanks to all for responding to my printer question. I got a lot of thumbs up for Epson 3800. It seems to be a printer of chice for many and it definitely has all the pluses of the old 2200. It is a bit precey for me now. Is anybody using Epson 1400? Now I am talking diginegatives only. The printer is much less expensive and it is apparently a replacement of the old workhorse, Epson 1280.
Marek

Don't get caught with egg on your face. Play Chicktionary! Check it out!

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Epson 1400
  - From: Projekti Vedos <vedos@samk.fi>

References:
- RE: Pinters might be OT
  - From: Don Bryant <dsbryant@bellsouth.net>
- Re: Pinters might be OT
  - From: Diana Bloomfield <dhbloomfield@bellsouth.net>
- Re: Pinters might be OT
  - From: sam wang <stwang@bellsouth.net>
- Epson 1400
  - From: Marek Matusz <marekmatusz@hotmail.com>