WTD: Photo printer recomendations

  • Thread starter Thread starter Stevie Boy
  • Start date Start date
Bob Headrick said:
Yes, there are sites that you can compare, but in today's world of small drops
and/or light dye loads a 17x magnification does not really give any indication
of what the user will perceive when actually looking at a print, hence my offer
to send Steve an actual print. Perhaps you could do the same and he could
compare?

- Bob Headrick
Click to expand...

If he likes, I will send him a glossy 4x6 6 color print of this
picture
http://www.steves-digicams.com/2004_reviews/fz20/samples/p1010078.jpg
and you can do the same. Or I can send it to you and you can forward
both to him in the same envelope. Either way is fine with me.
 
Yes, there are sites that you can compare, but in today's world of small drops
and/or light dye loads a 17x magnification does not really give any indication
of what the user will perceive when actually looking at a print, hence my offer
to send Steve an actual print. Perhaps you could do the same and he could
compare?
Click to expand...
As Bob already knows I'm not an HP fan because every time there's a
new version of Windows, HP can't be bothered to update their inkjet
printer drivers, however,

(This is a consumer magazine, but still...):

Practical Photography (UK) Jan 2005:

Direct Printer Test: Best Buy - HP Photosmart 375 Pros: Fast, good
quality prints,great value. Cons: cheap feel to the printer.

Epson Picturemate also tested: Pros: very simple to use. Cons: Image
quality isn't great.

They concluded that the HP was worth the extra money over the Epson
and made it the Best Buy.
 
<< From: "Stevie Boy" (e-mail address removed)
Date: Mon, Jan 3, 2005 4:50 AM
Message-id: <[email protected]>


"...the HP is an
exceptional printer, combining terrific ease of use with drop-dead photo
quality." Referring to the Picturemate: "It's colors are bright and rich
but
still accurate to the source. It's just not quite at the same level as the
HP."
Click to expand...

From the little snippet above it would seem that the reviewer has given
golden stars to both printers just put the words in different ways.
Well, I will make an offer to the original poster I have made to others in
the
past: email me a jpg to (e-mail address removed) and your postal address and I
will
make a print and mail it to you.
Click to expand...


IS there a site where jpg photo images from a range of printers can be
viewed?
I'd love some samples but being on the other side of the Atlantic it aint
gonna happen.

SteveTry getting the HP pictures wet and then do the same to the Epson. The Epson
prints will absolutely not smear and if your quote is to the HP 375 with 3
color inks and no separate black as contrasted with the 6 color Epson, I
can’t see how the HP pictures could be better. (Happy with my PictureMate.)
 
Laptop Magazine and Mobile PC Magazine for printer reviews!
Hahahahahaha.......as one person suggested, try using the HP Premium
Plus Photo Paper and touch the picture, and watch as the photo comes
right off. On top of that, the value packs that bring the cost per page
for HP to $.29, cost a staggering $79.99......that's a joke, you have
to buy all that to get the cost down. On top of that, the HP with a
tri-color cartridge can't print true black, having to mix all colors,
wasting ink to make composite black. Read review on sites that are
dedicated to photo printing, and you'll see the Epson Picturemate is
the hands down winner. And Bob, tell HP why is it that they call their
Photosmart AIO's, photosmart, when they don't even ship with a photo
cartridge. HP is a joke these days, with their miniscule ink carts,
such as the number 28 ink cartridge, a tri-color cartridge with 8 ml.
worth of ink. For photo printing stick with Epson and Canon.
 
Back
Top