Re: Canon S800 vs. Epson Line

[Nick Makris <nick@mcn.org>]

Patty, I will defer to what Guillermo has said below with regard to answers
to your specific questions about the Epson line of printers - nicely said.

Moreso, this list has had this discussion many times, once or twice very
recently.  I will forward to you all the posts about printers that I have
saved (perhaps 100 or more) if you like.

I hope to provide some detailed information about using the Epson 1160 &
1520 printers in the near future.  As Guillermo pointed out, there are
several manufactures of grey/black inks that can be used to replace the
traditional CYMK inks - most only for the Epson line.  I have purchased the
Piezography system for the 1160 & 1520 and I am currently making a
transition from the MIS ink system - not without some difficulty, mostly
with the implementation of hardware.

I now have 4 printers connected to my PC - an HP laser jet, an Epson 1520
(both of these on traditional printer ports), and 2 Epson 1160's on USB
ports.  I use the laser for traditional correspondence, the 1520 will soon
have the MIS ink black/gray set in it once again and it's main purpose will
be for testing the output of a particular image on the much more economical
MIS inks.  One of the 1160's will be for traditional color prints and the
other will be for the much heralded (and more expensive) Piezography
black/grey inks/software.

The Piezography software is a Photoshop plugin that is capable of writing
directly to the printer (especially the 1160) that provides a much more
detailed print and has the effect of reducing/eliminating posterization that
occurs at most levels of resolution when using the standard Epson printer
driver.  Or so the story goes - I'm getting ahead of myself, this is what I
hope to report on in the near future.

Many thanks,

Nick

----- Original Message -----
From: "Guillermo" <penate@home.com>
To: <alt-photo-process-l@skyway.usask.ca>
Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2001 7:13 AM
Subject: Re: Canon S800 vs. Epson Line


>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Patricia Figliola Lewis" <pflewis@hotmail.com>
>
>
> Allow me, pls, to input my 0.02 worth of comments.
>
> > I've looked at Epsons and what I do NOT like about them is that many
seem
> > very tied to traditional photographic sizes, such as 4x6.  While many
> people
> > will LIKE that feature, I cannot foresee a time when i will print
> something
> > 4x6 (or 8x10, etc) from a nearly square sx-70 print.  Even when I start
> > learning transfer techniques, although they are LESS square, they still,
I
> > don't think, print in traditional ratio sizes.
>
> I doubt there is a printer, this days, that do not allow you to set CUSTOM
> paper sizes.  Even my old Lexmark 3200 allows me to do that.
>
> > When you say, "If you just want to print color images, go for the Canon;
> If
> > you want flexibility and choices, go for an Epson," what do you mean?
>
> Arguable, Epson is 1 (perhaps 2) steps ahead of the competition in print
> technology/quality, therefore many 3rd party suppliers of archival inks
and
> related technology direct their efforts exclusively to Epson printers.
You
> then have stuff like CIS systems (www.nomorecarts.com), QuadTone,
> Piezography (www.piezography.com), etc that come to increase the features
of
> an Epson printer (at a price I must say).
>
> > I also want to make some pretty small prints -- for notecards and such.
> > Already I am having to "trick" my current printer into accepting these
> paper
> > sizes.  I am less interested in using traditional photographic paper and
> > will contimue with using more "art" papers more than anything else.  Do
my
> > size and paper type requirements change your opinion at all?
>
> See above.
>
> Guillermo
>
>
>
>