Two printer questions

[Fat Tone]

1. What large format (e.g. A3) printer to buy when cost isn't too important?

2. What 6"x4" printer to buy? I probably need a new camera anyway (depending on what Fuji say about my current psychedelic photos), and already have an Epson 895, so a camera with a dedicated photo printer could be an option. Are they all dye-sub? Are they expensive to run? Are they any good?

TIA

[az]

You seem to have really bad luck with cameras

All PictBridge compatible cameras can print directly on all PictBridge compatible printers. From what I've heard, dye-sub are the only printers being able to match real lab prints, although the prints cost more.

As for an A3 printer, what will it be for?

AZ

[J1NG]

Yeah. Dye Sub will cost you an arm and a leg to run. But damn, are the results worth it. Got one right here. Only use it occasionally though. Usually I just print using normal ink catridges instead. (Much more economical)

J1NG

[az]

Why don't you just get your pics printed in a lab? Very very nice results and cheaper than printing yourself.

AZ

[Fat Tone]

The A3 printer would be a general purpose publicity/photo printer. I need something (at work) to complement the Dimage A2...the colour laser obviously doesn't cut it with photographs. I'm specifying A3 for versatility.

BTW Az, it's just the one camera that died...I haven't had the time/money to get the F401Z fixed yet. I shall send it off for a free estimate later this week, but I really doubt it will be economically worth the repair.

My 890 (895 was incorrect) is great for odd photos and general purpose work, but I do find Epsons hard work to keep print quality high. I was thinking that if I go for a new camera, I've seen a number of camera/printer bundles and it might be worth it. I won't be spending several hundreds for something like the A2! I'll just borrow that when I need it

[Kurt]

@ Fat Tone: A3 laser means it will cost you like a small car, EPSON's are quite good though. You can also get a Xerox Phaser A3 (dye sublimation). For decent inkjet A3, you can have a look at the Epson Stylus Photo 2100 with autocutter.

[az]

The phasers aren't dye sub, they're dry ink.

And no laser would really cut it for photo printing.

AZ

[J1NG]

Oki used to have a DP7000 printer. A3. Dye Sub able. Tech taken from Alps. Big brother to DP5000 (A4 Dye Sub able). Dunno if it's still around. Should be good.

J1NG

[VJ]

Also check out the HiTi dye sub printers. I have the Photoshuttle, and it gives great results. On their website, you can send them a photo, and they'll send you a printout using one of their printers (for free).

http://www.hi-ti.com/uk/

Running costs are amongst the cheapest in dye-sub...

Reviews (of Hiti and others) can be found here:

http://www.steves-digicams.com/printers.html

Jörg

[Fat Tone]

Thanks guys. Sorry I haven't had time for reply for the last few days.

[J1NG]

Hmmm, why are those Dye Sub printers doing only 300x300dpi?

J1NG

[az]

Because that's enough. They can produce full color dots (so one dot = one pixel) of a fixed size. Inkjets can produce colored dots of a fixed size, but they can only mix colors a little by printing colored dots one over another, and the minimum number of ink per dot is limited (I think epson claim 4 picoliters), so you need more dots than one to create the exact color of a pixel, for which you need a very high dpi so no one can see the raster. Offset, on the other hand, can produce dots of exactly one out of their four colors (CMYK), but can vary their size and can position them very accurately, thus offset is great for sharp black text but less so for pictures (which you can see in the papers). This effect is tried to work against by using raster image processors that optimize the raster the dots are placed in (if they were all printed in horizontal lines, pictures would look horrible). You can see how offset works by closely looking at big billboard posters. Laser is not unlike offset, but I think the dot size isn't variable here (don't hurt me if that's wrong though). You can also buy RIPs for lasers, they're expensive though and don't magically turn them into photoprinters.

So printing resolution is always mmeasured in dots per inch (dpi), while scanners and monitors work with pixels, so they're measured in pixels per inch, ppi, but nobody says that

AZ

[VJ]

Actually, some HiTi models do 310 dpi, others even over 400 dpi...

But as az said: it is enough...


Jörg

[Wombat]

How can it be enough? I can easily see the difference between a 300dpi and 600dpi laser printer, printing black/white documents.

[VJ]

A laser prints much finer and crisper dots. Really, the printout of photos on dye-sub seems perfect. 300 dpi is more or less standard, 400 dpi is perfect.
Check out the reviews...

Jörg