|[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]|
On Wed, 22 Dec 1999, Andrew D. Dierlam wrote: > Rafe: > > I know you agonized for months on the 1160 vs 1200, etc > but I haven't seen a final pronouncement from you as to > your satisfaction with the 1160. What's the verdict? > > What ink/paper combination are you going to use? I didn't agonize about the 1160 itself... it was an easy decision. Along the way, I had agonized about other models, like the 1200 and 3000, each of which has its good and bad points. In the end, what with the 11/29 Wilhelm report, the 1160 seemed like the best all-round compromise. Plus, it has a 13x44" print area, a $50 rebate, and uses the same carts as the 1520... I think it's about 80-90% of the print quality of my 700. The 700 does better printing highlights. I only have about 5 days experience with the 1160, as compared to about 10 months with the 700. As to paper/ink no decisions yet. Still too many choices: 1. Archiva: limited availabiltiy, and there's the problem of diluting w/alcohol, adding surfactants, etc. But nice gaumt, I hear, and great longevity. 2. MIS Supply, Generations: Easy solution, compatible w/Epson inks. But where is the longevity data? 3. Fotonic/Lysonic (and then, which one?) Expensive. Not compatible w/Epson ink, need careful flushing of carts. Paper: way too many choices. I haven't a clue. And this is all worrisome, because the *main* point of the Wilhelm report was that paper+ink is what determines archival properties -- so the paper is as important as the ink, and must be considered at the same time. rafe b. - Turn off HTML mail features. Keep quoted material short. Use accurate subject lines. http://www.leben.com/lists for list instructions.
[Photo] [Yosemite News] [Yosemite Photos] [Scanner] [Gimp] [Gimp] Users