Larry Roohr (roohrphoto@orci.com)
Wed, 21 Apr 1999 18:33:49 -0600
Daryl,
For the printer I'd recomend waiting a few weeks (if your in the US) and
getting the Epson 1200. It will do 17 x whatever and it has half the droplet
size of it's current counterpart, the Epson EX. Then again the EX'es are
dropping in price anticipating the 1200's introduction so you could get a
bargain there.
For scanners I'd look again at Epson. They've just introduced an 800x1600
dpi flatbed that comes with the transparancy adapter thats excellent, in the
800$ range. Again, the previous model included the transparancy adapter and
can be had in the 300$ range. For scanning 4x5's you'd have plenty of
resolution, med format it would depend on what you wanted to do, for 35mm
they won't do too well.
If you want model numbers on the scanners let me know and I'll get them for
you.
good luck,
Larry
-----Original Message-----
From: D.A. Saunders <dasaunders@freewwweb.com>
To: alt-photo-process-l@skyway.usask.ca
<alt-photo-process-l@skyway.usask.ca>
Date: Wednesday, April 21, 1999 1:51 PM
Subject: Scanner / Printer Combo for Alt. process [Was Re: costs of Digital
isnot *easier* [Was: Too much equipment]
>I'm sure this has been asked a bazillion times but the question
>popped into my head by what Judy mentioned so here goes . . .
>
>What scanner / printer combinations are some of you using to create
>good-quality enlarged negs successfully? Any inkjets out there?
>(Enlarged meaning not smaller than 8x10 and perhaps up to say
>11x14 or maybe even 16x20).
>
>Also, Judy, what is the 18x22 inkjet you refer to?
>
>Thanks for your input . . . er . . . (output) . . .
>
>Daryl
>
>At 01:21 AM 04/20/1999 -0400, you wrote:
>>[snip] PS. Since you can now get an 18 by 22 inch inkjet for about $500
(put
>>it on the Visa), you don't probably really need a service bureau either..
>>and that's less than 3 boxes of 14 x 17 film... How many to a box?
>>Judy
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu Oct 28 1999 - 21:39:32