Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Printers > Photo Inkjet

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jun 24, 2003, 6:21 PM   #11
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 14
Default

Thats it then. Canon it is. Thanks Wayne!
Skripo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 26, 2003, 3:40 AM   #12
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 506
Default

Actually check into this review first.

It lists most if not all the papers availible and thier archival abilitlies on each printer. I don't think the i950 is fully up yet but the s900 should be near the same.

http://www.livick.com/method/inkjet/pg2d.htm
Gregersonsalvage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 26, 2003, 3:08 PM   #13
Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 54
Default

you shouldn't base your opinion on one source
let's better wait for results from Wilhelm Imaging Research...
wayne123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 26, 2003, 4:29 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 506
Default

check out thier results and what they use.

Livid uses real daylight on thier research hence thier claim "FLUORESCENT LIGHTING IS VERY SLOW, IN FACT FEEBLE AND ARTHRITIC WHEN IT COMES TO FADING PIGMENTED INKS.


CONSEQUENTLY ANY ORGANIZATION WHICH IS FADE TESTING USING FLUORESCENT LIGHTING AS THEIR MAIN SOURCE


OF ILLUMINATION IS NOT ACTUALLY ACCOUNTING FOR THE MAJORITY OF PRINT DISPLAY CONDITIONS. EXTRAPOLATIONS


WORKED OUT UNDER FLUORESCENT LIGHTING WILL YIELD RATINGS FOR EPSON'S LATEST ULTRACHROME INKS THAT ARE


APPROXIMATELY 2/3 HIGHER THAN NORMAL DAYLIGHT RATINGS. IF YOU MULTIPLY THE FLUORESCENT RATINGS BY .33% IT


WILL REFLECT A MORE ACCURATE RATING FOR DAYLIGHT DISPLAY CONDITIONS WHEN YOU ARE USING ULTRACHROME INKS.

"

Does'nt the latter company use flourescent lighting for thier tests.
Gregersonsalvage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 3, 2003, 3:32 PM   #15
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 14
Default

Well I finally went and bought the i950. I found several continous ink systems and the fact that the tanks are seperate and unchipped makes them easy to change or refill them individually.

The only negative is the 25 year print durability. Heck, I'll just reprint.
Skripo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 4, 2003, 10:04 AM   #16
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 3,193
Default

I'm printing since some weeks with i950 - it is an excellent printer. Fast, silent, ...

using good quality (fast drying) second source glossy paper (1/3 price of Canon paper) and refill ink (for 5% of original Canon ink price - 6x 100ml = Euro 69) makes it an universal photo printer with no difference to photo labor prints.
DonalDuc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 4, 2003, 11:10 AM   #17
Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 54
Default

refills shorten the life of the printhead and cause that your printouts will last NOT 25 but 5 years.
wayne123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 6, 2003, 8:57 AM   #18
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 5
Default longevity of ink

I have never understood why anyone would care hold long the ink lasts when it comes to printing a digital cam pic. First off the picture file will last as long as you save it and back it up. The software to manipulate that pic will only get better. The printers wil get less expensive and print quality and speed will continue to improve. It is my personal opinion the most people that hang here <steves webpage> will upgrade their printers at least 1 time if not more in the next 5 years.
1. The only reasons I can think of it's to much work to remove a pic from the frame and put the new on in.
2. You are not big on cleaning and when you remove your digital picasso it will show the wall hasn't been cleaned for 5 years.

Just kidding of course , but I still don't understand why something that cost less then a beer in a bar to produce needs to last 25. years.
DylanMN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 6, 2003, 9:19 AM   #19
Senior Member
 
cope's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 718
Default Re: longevity of ink

Quote:
Originally Posted by DylanMN
I have never understood why anyone would care hold long the ink lasts when it comes to printing a digital cam pic. First off the picture file will last as long as you save it and back it up. The software to manipulate that pic will only get better. The printers wil get less expensive and print quality and speed will continue to improve. It is my personal opinion the most people that hang here <steves webpage> will upgrade their printers at least 1 time if not more in the next 5 years.
1. The only reasons I can think of it's to much work to remove a pic from the frame and put the new on in.
2. You are not big on cleaning and when you remove your digital picasso it will show the wall hasn't been cleaned for 5 years.

Just kidding of course , but I still don't understand why something that cost less then a beer in a bar to produce needs to last 25. years.

AMEN!
cope is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 6, 2003, 2:55 PM   #20
Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 54
Default

1. People are not only printing from digicams

2. I don't want my prints to fade after couple of years - I store them in albums.

3. I don't store pics from my camera on hard driver, CDs, etc. I print them only once and many people do so, or, I go to the photolab (very rarely however).

Do you think that if I print 300 4x6" images and after 5 years I will want to print them again, you must be kidding. First, it will cost me too much, second: I will probably have other things in mind and won't have time to print them again (or I may forget about them)

Thats why people care about fading and that's why I bought Epson 2200.

Wayne
wayne123 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 4:41 AM.