Re: Nikon D200 (for alt)

From: Judy Seigel ^lt;jseigel@panix.com>
Date: 02/10/06-10:18:06 PM Z
Message-id: <Pine.NEB.4.63.0602102312020.13703@panix3.panix.com>

On Thu, 9 Feb 2006, Jack Fulton wrote:

> The same is true for work prints. The very term 'work' print means you've not
> had the intent for it to last but only to see if it warrants
> the time to make it quality and that quality then includes fine ink, fine
> paper and that combo generally provides great archivability.
> And, when one is involved with a work pattern and making lovely larger photo
> prints employing ink-jet procedures, why not just use good, proven, inks,
> work with an inexpensive paper, which will match your final paper choice and
> just get into it and make art . . not proofs.

Actually Jack, they're "work prints" for mock up for book (aka "dummy").
But, if it matters, I tested my 3rd-party cartridges EXTENSIVELY against
the Epson originals -- in every category that I could devise (eg hours of
exposure to full UV, etc.) they were the same. I'd guess in fact that
they're made by the same Chinese factory -- tho as I recall the 1160 inks
are NOT claimed as archival.

In any event, I don't at this point make digital prints as final "art,"
but make no predictions for future..

J.
Received on Fri Feb 10 22:18:20 2006

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 03/13/06-10:42:57 AM Z CST