RE: 2000P Non Archival?

["Jon and Amy Harris" <jonandamy@foxinternet.com>]

<x-charset iso-8859-1>My recommendations would be if you really need/want the 75-100-year life
span of the 2000P, get one of the cheap Epson 4-color models for your
day-to-day chores.  Print quality will be fine for reports, letters, and
even the photos will look pretty darn good with one of the new 2880 dpi
models on glossy paper.  I'm not up on the specific model numbers, but I
know I've seen reports of these going for less than $100.  When you consider
the $800-900 price tag on the 2000P, the added cost of a cheap second
printer is quite small percentage-wise.

If you don't have the space or you don't like the idea of 2 printers, then
consider the 1270 or 1280.  It is cheap, has the very best photo quality, is
great for day-to-day non-archival usage, and on the right paper is fairly
archival.  The 15-20 year rating on Epson HWM paper is pretty good, and I'd
imagine that if it was stored in the dark, it would even longer.

For me personally, I'm not that concerned about longevity beyond 10 years or
so.  I figure by then there will be something out that blows away this
current generation in terms of quality and longevity and I can re-print
things if they fade.  Of course, not everyone shares this viewpoint and
obviously those who sell prints cannot take this approach.  But for my
personal prints it's nice to have this luxury.  I've even started displaying
my HWM prints without glass since it completely eliminates the reflection
problem (and saves money on the glass) figuring if it fades in a few years
it's only a buck or two to reprint!

Best wishes on your decision!

-Jon (1270 owner)

P.S. IMO is a common internet abbreviation for In My Opinion.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-epson-inkjet@leben.com
> [mailto:owner-epson-inkjet@leben.com]On Behalf Of Larry Hunt
> Sent: Saturday, September 01, 2001 11:14 AM
> To: epson-inkjet@leben.com
> Subject: Re: 2000P Non Archival?
>
>
>
> Thanks Jim, I appreciate your input. What does IMO mean?
> It sounds more and more like two printers are going to be necessary for
> doing what I want done.
>
> By the way would anybody know about the archival life, or where to find
> out about same, of ALPS MD-5000 Prints, or where that information might
> be found. I've had this printer for over two years and have done some
> impressive prints with it but don't have a clue about the longevity. In
> its VPhoto mode it prints 2400X2400.
>
> Larry
>
> On Saturday, September 1, 2001, at 08:04  AM, Jim Wingo wrote:
>
> > The 2000P stands apart from all other Epson printers sold at retail: it
> > is
> > intended as strictly an archival photographic printer. Its inks perform
> > horribly on plain paper and it is miserably slow. Thus, IMO, it is a
> > poor
> > choice as a general use printer. If your need for a non-archival printer
> > includes 13" wide media, then the 1270/80 are good choices. If not,
> > then an
> > 880, 980 (and the new C80, I suspect), or 890 will perform very well
> > at a
> > modest cost, depending on if you need 6 colors or 4 for your general
> > use.
> > One advantage of having a second printer you may be forgetting, is the
> > ability to do two jobs at once.
> >
> > Jim Wingo
> >
> > *********** REPLY SEPARATOR  ***********
> >
> > On 8/31/2001 at 3:04 PM Larry Hunt wrote:
> >
> >> No Bob, you have not missed the point. But since this printer cost a
> >> great deal, I was wondering if I could use it for general purpose
> >> printing and pictures that did not need to have a long life. I want to
> >> have the ability to have archival prints that last but I did not want
> >> to
> >> have to get another printer for day to day printing activities. I
> >> currently have an Epson Photo 700 that does a great job but it is
> >> getting tired.
> >> Larry
> >> On Friday, August 31, 2001, at 06:48  AM, Bob Meyer wrote:

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

</x-charset>