What do you use for prints - inkjet or dye-sublimation?
D.M. Procida
producing photo prints at home, does inkjet still have the dge over the
dye-sublimation printers on the market?
Daniele
John Doe
quality to what I get from the photo lab.
Best,
Ross
Paul Furman
Yes I think dye sub has been overcome, though it's not bad, some labs
might still use it & there are some 4x6 type printers still sold with
that technology. I think the HP is a dye based inkjet, I use a pigment
based Epson inkjet. They are all good. For really large prints (13x19
max at home) I get lightjet prints on basically traditional photo paper,
that's what many photo labs use now, inkjet is called [crap I forget the
fancy artist term for sprayed ink in French or whatever it is] and it's
really not more affordable, just allows you to do it at home as lightjet
isn't a home or even office solution. And inkjet lets you experiment
with different papers & such, like 'fine art watercolor paper' or canvas.
Steve Wolfe
> producing photo prints at home, does inkjet still have the dge over the
> dye-sublimation printers on the market?
Dye-sub and inkjets have different advantages. I have a 4x6 Sony dye-sub
from years ago which prints at 403 DPI. While that is lower than the huge
figures quoted by inkjet manufacturers, because of the difference in
technology, it gives a print that is very sharp - STUNNINGLY sharp. And
with the clear overcoat, the prints are incredibly resiliant.
Now... inkjets. The high-end inkjets have a wider gamut than dye-sub, are
cheaper to print with, and can print much larger. I haven't compared the
gamut of low-end inkjets to that of high-end models, but just in shadow
detail, you can see a VERY large difference between low- and high-end
models.
If I had to make a judgement call, I'd say that the dye-sub is, overall,
better than a cheap inkjet, but not as good as a quality inkjet. That's a
personal call, though, if others see things differently, please chime in.
Steve
CJS
printers? Phenominal DPI
http://memjet.com/popup_7.html
More info at:
Pretty damned impressive if you ask me!
"D.M. Procida" <real-not-anti...@apple-juice.co.uk> wrote in
message
news:1hvgdhm.12mxdc6koogmwN%real-not-anti...@apple-juice.co.uk...
Joseph Meehan
I use a color laser. If I have something that I really like and want
real quality I have it commerically printed.
--
Joseph Meehan
Dia 's Muire duit
Tony Polson
i would agree with that analysis.
I use Mitsubshi dye sub printers and Epson inkjet printers. The dye
subs are used for event photography. They are very fast and the
prints are extremely durable straight out of the printer - ideal for
people taking prints home with them soon after.
The Epson inkjets (2400 and 4800) are used for everything else. They
offer extremely high image quality.
If you want the best quality, a quality inkjet will beat any dye sub.
The dye sub scores if you want speed and a very durable product.
Horses for courses.
J. Clarke
> Came accross this yesterday - perhaps the way things are headed with
> printers? Phenominal DPI
>
> http://memjet.com/popup_7.html
>
> More info at:
>
> http://memjet.com
>
> Pretty damned impressive if you ask me!
5 color and I can't see where it's actually going to be cheaper to run,
no matter what they claim.
Further, with a full-page-width print head it's going to have a lot of
chances to destroy itself by clogging one nozzle.
> "D.M. Procida" <real-not-anti...@apple-juice.co.uk> wrote in
> message
> news:1hvgdhm.12mxdc6koogmwN%real-not-anti...@apple-juice.co.uk...
>> I used to be up-to-date with this sort of thing, but no longer - for
>> producing photo prints at home, does inkjet still have the dge over
>> the dye-sublimation printers on the market?
>>
>> Daniele
--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
Guy
Ditto - Epson R260
ROY BRAGG
but since the i560 has separate rather than combined color ink tanks it has
more ink capacity.
Roy
"Guy" <guy.j...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:CvSdnaVWz4lEfZjb...@comcast.com...
CJS
"J. Clarke" <jclarke...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:eu48p...@news2.newsguy.com...
> 5 color and I can't see where it's actually going to be cheaper to run,
> no matter what they claim.
I imagine that it would depend on how it was used. No advantage to the
person who takes a 5 hour photography trip - spends another 5 hours
perfecting it in PS - and then 20 minutes waiting for it to print (but
enough about my weekend!), BUT ...
... I also use my 7800 for printing A2 / A1 prints for a local copy centre.
I enjoy doing them, but I wouldn't want to "leave my day job" and try to
live off the profits - biggest reason is that they just take too long for
the money. If however I could print them in under a minute (each) instead of
10 to 20 minutes each, I'd make a truckload more money. So probably no
cheaper to run, but a truckload more profitable to run if you've got the
volume.
> Further, with a full-page-width print head it's going to have a lot of
> chances to destroy itself by clogging one nozzle.
I don't know - at that many DPI I don't know if it could even be detected -
and perhaps they have ways to compensate?
At the end of the day I don't know what they'll be like - I was just so
damned impressed by the speed (and apparant quality) - was quite surprised
that others here didn't even rate it worth a mention though.
Cheers,
Gray_Wolf
>>
>At the end of the day I don't know what they'll be like - I was just so
>damned impressed by the speed (and apparant quality) - was quite surprised
>that others here didn't even rate it worth a mention though.
>
>Cheers,
>
Any idea on price?
CJS
"Gray_Wolf" <G_W...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:br0d0311vg438plre...@4ax.com...
> Any idea on price?
All I know about them is what I read on their website. From what I
understand they won't be making the printers, but will no-doubt be licencing
the technology to whoever they can get to buy it. I guess that all we can do
is sit back and wait for the good times :)