Steve's Digicams Forums

Steve's Digicams Forums (https://forums.steves-digicams.com/)
-   Photo Inkjet (https://forums.steves-digicams.com/photo-inkjet-43/)
-   -   S9000 Waterproof prints? (a little long) (https://forums.steves-digicams.com/photo-inkjet-43/s9000-waterproof-prints-little-long-2222/)

tmoca Aug 26, 2002 11:03 AM

S9000 Waterproof prints? (a little long)
 
I am in the market for a quality photo printer. I am leaning either towards the Canon S9000 or the Oly P-400 Dye sub, which just went down in price to $499.

I have read both reviews for these printers and most of the discussions. I notice too that Steve owns an S9000.

I will be mainly using the prints for promotional business material and family photos. Mainly 8X10s to go into a promo folder. I know that the Oly prints just under 8X10 and I can deal with that. I like the option of printing in wide format and the other options with the S9000 will give me. I also know the Oly will put out a better print, but I doubt that it is really noticeable to an untrained eye, that is not looking for a difference. (just a side note I am aware that I will have to keep my existing inkjet if I go with the Oly)

With that said, what I am really concerned about is the durability of the print. Since these promo pics and family pics will be handled I would like to know what your experience is with the S9000 prints and smudging / light water exposure such has sweaty hands and moisture. Is there a photo paper that limits this? Any suggestions or other opinions and the two printers?

Thanks in advance. I am looking forward to your response,

Craig

Gary Senkus Aug 26, 2002 11:10 AM

tomca,
The olympus being a dye sub will be better. Canon pictures waterproof??? Think I also heard you can change the memory cards in their digicams underwater also.:D

steve Aug 26, 2002 11:17 AM

The S9000 prints on Photo Paper Pro paper are quite durable and handleable (is that a word?) but not "waterproof" in the purest sense.

The P400 is limited media wise (paper sizes) and of course the consumables are a tad expensive and can only be had from Olympus as it uses specific dye ribbon cartridge and paper.

-Steve

tmoca Aug 26, 2002 11:19 AM

I am aware the the dye-sub will put a better print. I am just looking to get the most out of the printer.

I had seen on a few other reviews that said the prints on the S9000 could be dunked in water and wiped off. (not repeatedly or contiuously of course). I just wanted to get some insight on this from people in this forum.

I would like to hear from owners of the s9000 and their experiences with prints being handled.

Craig

tmoca Aug 26, 2002 11:21 AM

"The P400 is limited media wise (paper sizes) and of course the consumables are a tad expensive and can only be had from Olympus as it uses specific dye ribbon cartridge and paper. "

That's what I've read Steve.

In your opinion Steve, would an s9000 print survive a few hundred passes around a group of people?

That is my main concern.

cyberflaw Aug 30, 2002 11:14 PM

Hey Craig,
I've tested the 9000 myself, and like you said, that the picture will be touched by about a hundred or so people, the 9000 won't be able to handle that. A few wet hands, only on photo paper pro, that's it. The inks used are not water (or sweat) resistant. If durability is your main concern and if you don't mind paying a little extra. Epson 2200 might be a good buy. The 2200 has water resistant inks. I even left one sample in water for three days (regular inkjet paper used), and the ink didn't dissolve in water.
Hope this helps.

- Cyberflaw:cool:

mrh57 Sep 14, 2002 1:38 PM

I'm not sure what type of photographic image can survive after being touched by over 100 people. If this is really the situation then I'd worry less about how waterproof the images are and I'd spend more time concerning myself with a way to package the prints for mass handling.

sjms Sep 14, 2002 2:51 PM

to answer your question on what photo will last the handling of 100 people or more is simple. one in a sealed or laminated in plastic of some form. a regular photo will star to deteriorate after a time also.

the 2200 isn't going to fair much better.

[Edited on 9-14-2002 by sjms]


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 1:01 AM.