Greetings,
I understand solid ink printers give better rendition to photos and a
longer life span, but they are not so widely advertised, are they any better
than ink jets?
I'm not sure they really are, in terms of photo quality -- at least
not when compared to the very best photo-quality printers from
Epson or Canon.
Dye sub prints have a very different feel to them -- much more
like conventional RC paper photo prints. They have no visible
dots, but they do have jaggies, and may exhibit banding.
(The old ALPS printers were notorious in this regard.)
Generally you will be limited to papers specifically designed
for the printer in question.
One of the photo magazines recently ran a review by Ctein of the
Kodak 8500. It didn't sound like the reviewer was overwhelmed
or overjoyed by the output, though he didn't diss it too badly
either. (Most of his complaints were about very subtle issues
of color rendition.)
The print samples in the article from the 8500 weren't terribly
impressive.
For my money, I'd go with a pro-quality inkjet. If you're
concerned about print life, get a printer that can use
pigment inks. (Which points to Epson or high-end HP,
and rules out Canon.)
rafe b.
http://www.terrapinphoto.com