RE: The 1270-Bad news / QA-engineering/responsibility toemployees

[meander@post4.tele.dk]

<x-flowed>Laurie wrote:

>Excuse me but I think you have gotten your threads mixed up.


Not really, Marie do not state what type of printing she referred to. 
So, I took the opportunity to widen the discussion to see if anyone 
has experience on printers other than Epson. As it happened, John and 
Rafe picked it up and supplied further info on Laser printers. And, 
others on Lightjet.

>  This is NOT a condemnation of inkjets for not producing a 100
>% equivalent to traditional photographic prints as you seem to want to
>suggest it does. as indicated in your statement below.


Incorrect assumption, due to lack of words on my part.

Then Bill wrote:
>
>
>Here are two exact quotes fron Epson's website:
>http://www.epson.co.uk/product/printers/inkjet/styphoto1270/
>
>The Stylus Photo 1270 is..... true Photo-Quality performance comes
>as standard without the need for additional upgrades,...
>
>What part of the above are we not supposed to accept???  Do photographers
>complain?  Never!!!  I've been an active participant in this particular
>thread, but I want to make it clear, I think that Epson make a great printer
>and I'm happy with the "photographic" quality of the prints.
>
>But in the spirit of this discussion, and as a complaining photographer :),
I wish the paper had a little more weight to it.

A year ago , based on Epsons claims, I bought a Photo Ex. Only to 
discover it cannot produce a true B&W photographic image, using their 
ink,  and did need additional upgrades, in the form of software to 
produce photographic quality colour prints. Around six months ago I 
discovered this list and because of the info supplied here can now 
produce acceptable B&W prints. Because all my images are of found 
objects and scenes I have a lot of freedom when it comes to producing 
the print. Therefore, I am very pleased with Epson printers, up to a 
point. I dont think its necessary for me to go over the minus points 
of inkjets which are covered by postings to this list. But, it does 
seem that Epson are making it more difficult to use 3rd party 
supplies with their printers and so I am keeping an eye open for an 
alternative. Hopefully, the rumored updated 3000 will suit me, 
providing Epson does not make it too difficult to use Quad/small 
gamut inks.

As for complaining photographers...you should have heard the 
discussions I have had with myself in my now defunct darkroom!


jerry.

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

</x-flowed>