Newest Canons vs. Epsons - Best Photo Printer?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Zippy Zoo
  • Start date Start date
There's a limit somewhere, otherwise printers would use so many millions of
color as picture have in order to get perfect print.
Oops...but there's a catch...digital camera catches only 3...damn...
Click to expand...


Again, you don't even recognize the distinction
between additive and subtractive color.

Cameras and eyes capture additive primaries.

Prints work by laying down subtractive primaries.

These are not trivial, academic distinctions.

And nobody's forcing you to buy a 6-color or
8-color or 10-color printer. If the advantage
isn't meaningful to you, don't buy it.


rafe b
www.terrapinphoto.com
 
Were you an artist trying to produce prints of your work, rather than a bullshit artist trying to mislead people with your ignorance, you'd be aware of the problem.

I quoted Ferrari scarlet as being problematical because I know someone who gave up trying to reproduce the colour himself on his CMYK printer and went to a print shop using Roland eight-colour inkjets to get the job done, because they *could* reproduce it.

The person running the print shop, as part of his picture mounting and framing business, bought the Roland printers in the first place because he is a marine artist and got fed up with the offset litho printer he usually did business with not being able to reproduce some of the blues in his paintings.

Many of his customers come to him precisely because they, too, find his printers can reproduce colours in their paintings that others have failed to reproduce.

If you took some time off from being infantile in this newsgroup and looked at some of the gamut charts displayed on a plethora of web sites, you'd see that there are many colours that are problematic in printing. Just because you aren't discerning enough to care whether or not you can produce them on your cheapo printer doesn't mean that it's not an important requirement for others.

Jon.
 
SleeperMan said:
ok let's stop here. I see you're going into pro mode, while general thread
was regarding printers for general public. If going into pro, it's also a
question of which color is right?
Click to expand...

Pro mode? Wanting good quality photos makes me a pro? That is just so
silly. I do want properly exposed, well lit, natural looking photos, but
that does not make me a pro. Consider me a part of the general public.

But you go on with your 10 or even 20 color printers and have a good luck
working only for ink, while us mortals are quite happy with what i said.
Click to expand...

Mine has a mere 6 colors. What I spend on ink in a year I can earn in a few
hours so it is not a big deal. I happen to like rib eye steaks, but if
you are happy with round steaks, enjoy them.
 
Edwin said:
Pro mode? Wanting good quality photos makes me a pro? That is just so
silly. I do want properly exposed, well lit, natural looking photos, but
that does not make me a pro. Consider me a part of the general public.





Mine has a mere 6 colors. What I spend on ink in a year I can earn in a few
hours so it is not a big deal. I happen to like rib eye steaks, but if
you are happy with round steaks, enjoy them.
Click to expand...
ASK DA BEEFER ABOUT STEAKS
 
Bob said:
Well, the advances made in home printing in the last half dozen or so
years *have* been pretty amazing. There are printers available from
several manufacturers for well under $250 that can noticeably exceed
the print quality from the typical one hour photo developing place.
Click to expand...

ESPECIALLY CANON -- RIGHT BOOB?
 
WHO CARES

rafe said:
Again, you don't even recognize the distinction
between additive and subtractive color.

Cameras and eyes capture additive primaries.

Prints work by laying down subtractive primaries.

These are not trivial, academic distinctions.

And nobody's forcing you to buy a 6-color or
8-color or 10-color printer. If the advantage
isn't meaningful to you, don't buy it.


rafe b
www.terrapinphoto.com
Click to expand...
 
The current Canon dye inks "may" provide that kind of permanence, the
R800 definately will.

Art
 
I hate to say it, but you fell down on that last one. Television, first
of all uses RGB primary light to product its image, and it still lacks a
lot of hues.

Printers use reflective CMY, which is just not the same in terms of how
colors are made. In particular the reds, greens and blues, all suffer
in accuracy. As I stated before, the smaller the dot and more dot
patterns that can be created, the more shades can be represented to the
human eye.

Even RGB filters in digital cameras (using the Bayer matrix pattern) are
not able to reproduce all greens properly. Sony has added a darker
green filter for instance for their CCD chips.

Art
 
No, their engineers aren't idiots, working for "the man" and selling
their souls to the highest devil.

Obviously, someone is willing to pay for more ink colors, so there is
indeed likely to be some qualitative differences (again, mainly in
pigments which do not have the same qualities to mix and reflect color
that dye inks do).

If they were really serious about producing a CMYK printer, they could
use that engineering expertise to produce heads with smaller dots and
more complex dot patterning. Using more colors, especially the low
color load ones, allows them to use larger drops, and speed up the
printing process without using more dots or faster mechanics and
drivers. It also allows them to sell a lot of cheap fluids like water,
glycol and alcohol and very little colorant, which is more costly. They
also design the drivers to use about twice the amount of load color
loaded inks to the high color loaded, which does indeed burn through
more cartridges.

As least some HP printers used twice size cartridges for LM, LC, K, LK
and Y, so they tended to run out more evenly.

With Epson's current system, each time a cartridge runs out there is a
purging of all heads, so a heck of a lot of ink is lost down the drain.
That was also an engineering decision, yes?

Art
 
Again, be careful confusing RGB light separations and the reflective
inks using CMY/K, they do not work the same way.

In light, add red and green and get yellow. Change the mix and the type
of yellow alters. With the CMYK situation, the base yellow ink color is
the "purest" yellow you are going to get from that printer. If it is
too saturated, there isn't a lot you can do other than space the dots
further apart.

And lastly, digital cameras or LCD screens or CRTs are mostly RGB and
cannot reproduce some colors very well. Try to get a good variation of
greens and cyans on a TV...

I do take your point that everyone has different expectations of color.
We even al have differing abilities to see colors, and our ability
worsens considerably as we age, and our eye lenses yellow.

If you are pleased with the output you get, then its good enough if you
are not providing your work to a demanding 3rd party. However, I still
wouldn't want to be reprinting my stuff every few years due to fading
issues ;-)

Art
 
A good inkjet printer will still beat a laser, and the other
technologies are just not really appropriate for most image
reproduction. (and not necessarily better either). The next step up in
terms of quality might be a laser controlled digitally burned color
"silver" print using a wet lab.

Art
 
That's exactly the point, however. The images only need to please the
person who is "paying for them". So, for some, more color accuracy is a
must either because they want it, can see it, or it is mission critical
and a must have, and for some people it's an unnecessary or costly or
time consuming endeavor that's just not worth it. Happily, there are
printers made for both of you! Whoopee!

Art
 
I work for me, but I spend much of my time these days working for
improving the state of society, the planet, and values I hold dear. Its
what gives me the ability to speak with frankness and honesty about
products, issues or corporate actions. I honor no sacred cows.

Sorry if that goes against what you choose to believe about me, but you
are certainly entitled to whatever it is you chose to believe. At the
end of the day, I have a pretty good idea where the truth sits.

If engineers (sacred cow, eh?) were just ethical enough as a group to
say "no" to the bean counters and military industrial complex once in a
while, we'd have a lot less garbage on the planet, a lot fewer unsafe
products, a lot less recalls and lawsuits, and many less bombs,
armaments, and weapons of mass destruction. Sure engineers help make
great and neat stuff too, like heart lung machines, or jaws of life, or
computers, but that's the easy thing to work doing. I worry about the
ones that will do whatever they are asked or told because its a job,
regardless of the consequences of their "great innovation and intellect".

We are each responsible for what we help to spawn. Not only that, but in
spite of what many of the profession seem to believe about themselves,
engineers are fallible. They aren't the gods of science and technology
many assume themselves to be.

If you don't think Epson's engineers were involved in the design of many
of the anti-consumer and anti-environmental technologies built into
their more recent printers, I have a nicely engineered bridge to sell you.

Art
 
I work for me
Click to expand...


Isn't that nice. What pays the rent or the mortgage?
An inheritance? Lottery win? Drug dealing?

Or what did you for a living, before you "retired?"

I really don't give a flip what you think about
engineers, Art. Though I can safely assume that
you were *not* an engineeer, I think.


rafe b
www.terrapinphoto.com
 
Gee, Rafe, I didn't think you cared...

Are you offering me some work and need a copy of my c.v.?

I've pretty much revealed all, at one time or another, but I'm not
making it easy for you... you'll have to do a google easter egg hunt, if
you really care enough.
Isn't that nice. What pays the rent or the mortgage?
An inheritance? Lottery win?
Click to expand...

Drug dealing?
Why? Do you remember buying something from me at a Dead concert? ;-)

;-)

Art
 
Arthur said:
Gee, Rafe, I didn't think you cared...

Are you offering me some work and need a copy of my c.v.?
Click to expand...

YOU SHOUKD BE LUCKY TO HAVE A RESUME. I AM SURE YOU DO NOT HAVE A CV
 
Back
Top