Re: Is Canon Better? (S9000)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Scott, I agree with you about the quality of the review; I glanced at it and
concluded that it was irrelevant to the way I work.  It's for people who
want to do Seattle Filmworks@home.

That said, the problem is that I am using Epson printers in ways never
foreseen nor currently supported by their manufacturer.  These methodologies
have been built up over more than 5 years of experimentation by thousands of
enthusiasts and 3rd party suppliers.  I would be crazy to jump ship to a
unknown printer just because it prints screen-size jpeg's better than an
Epson does.  On the other hand, before the Epson 3000 my HP Designjet sure
looked good! 

I will be waiting for actual users to wow me with their prints.

Bill Morse
PhotoProspect
Cambridge, MA 02139

on 2/27/02 10:55 AM, Scott Lightner wrote:

> Thanks John,
> With regard to their comparison, I found this criteria:
> 
> "We placed both printers side by side using the same 1.4-MHz Pentium
> 4 with 128MB of RAM running a clean install of Windows 98 SE. We used
> several test JPEG images averaging around 1.5MB and a single TIFF
> 13MB image taken with a Nikon D1x digital camera. Each image was
> printed out on the respective manufacturer's best glossy 8.5x11 photo
> paper in both Highest quality and Photo quality. Each run was timed,
> and the photos were compared for color accuracy and saturation,
> sharpness, artifacts and dithering, and overall reproduction of the
> original image. Secondary tests included black-and-white text quality
> and speed, software, price per print, and special features such as
> borderless printing".
> 
> 
> I use Mac, and my files are of significantly higher quality and size
> than either of these mentioned (Cross field Drum Scans with file
> sizes ranging from 35 - 150 mgb).
> Reading further, and the settings they used are explained:
> 
> "We printed several colorful images (flower garden, cityscapes) in
> each printer's highest quality setting and photo setting (Canon's
> Photo Optimizer Pro with Image Optimizer, and Epson's PhotoEnhance
> with Digital Image Correction and its patented Print Image Matching)".
> 
> These are not the settings many of us would use.
> 
> If any others have thoughts, comparisons, or personal experience with
> the S9000 vs  1280,
> please bring them on.
> 
> Best,
> ~S~
> 
> 
>> At 10:36 PM 2/26/2002 -0800, you wrote:
>>> Does anyone have first hand experience with the new Canon S9000
>>> (13" wide) printers?
>>> Their website does not yet list it.
>>> 
>>> A comparison and contrast between this and the 1280 would be great.
>>> 
>>> TIA,
>>> ~S~
>> 
>> A comparison can be found at:
>> http://www.techtv.com/products/hardware/story/0,23008,3373126,00.html.
>> 
>> John
>> 
>> -
>> Turn off HTML mail features. Keep quoted material short. Use accurate
>> subject lines. http://www.leben.com/lists for list instructions.
> 
> http://www.ecologyfund.com
> http://www.workingforchange.com/shop/resp_shop_search.cfm

-
Turn off HTML mail features. Keep quoted material short. Use accurate
subject lines. http://www.leben.com/lists for list instructions.

[Index of Archives]     [Yosemite News]     [Yosemite Photos]     [Scanner Discussion Archive]     [Gimp Users]     [Gimp]     [Deep Creek Hot Springs]     [Photo Sharing]
  Powered by Linux