Perhaps not. I just hope in the end that the added $'s
translate to something that will "wow" me and more
importantly, "wow" potential clients and anyone else. 

-Brendan

--- Jack Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Only problem is, I tend to examine even prints with
> a loupe, at least
> intelectually speaking. In a way, it's like having
> 500 hp under the
> hood but not needing it or using it. Still a rush
> knowing it's there.
> Does one "need" camera RAW, etc, etc..?
> 
> Jack
> 
> --- Brendan MacRae <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> 
> > 
> > 
> > --- Jack Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > 
> > > Wouldn't detail be further compromised by larger
> > > droplets?
> > 
> > Absolutely. Bigger droplets mean less detail. But,
> > once you get to a certain size, I think the issue
> > becomes a matter of complete subjectivity.
> > 
> > Here's what I read recently over at PopPhoto (are
> > those groans I hear? :-P):
> > 
> > "The smaller the droplet, the greater the
> resolution
> > of the print. Small droplets also let you produce
> > finer tonal gradations and highlight details with
> > fewer inks.
> > 
> > But, unless you inspect printswith a loupe, you
> > probably don’t need to worry much about droplet
> size
> > once you go below about 4 picoliters. Factors such
> as
> > paper type and image processing are more likely to
> > determine how smooth and detailed your prints
> look."
> > 
> > > These are just rhetorical reactions to a series
> of
> > > curiosities.
> > > There has to be a definitive answer lurking
> > > somewhere.
> > 
> > I think the answer is just dialing in a good
> printer
> > to your taste in the end. But, I have to say that
> I
> > agree that I don't want to start out with a
> printer
> > with a relatively "large" droplet size.
> Fortunately
> > both the Canon and the Epson are within the very
> tiny
> > range (4 for the Canon, 3.5 for the Epson). And
> yet,
> > printers with larger droplet sizes than these two
> > supposedly also produce amazing results. 
> > 
> > -Brendan
> > 
> > > 
> > > Jack
> > > 
> > > --- Brendan MacRae <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > wrote:
> > > 
> > > > I read something one time about the way
> different
> > > > papers react to droplet size. The finish
> either
> > > repels
> > > > or absorbs the inks differently. So, smaller
> > > droplets
> > > > would spread reducing detail in some papers. 
> > > > 
> > > > -Brendan
> > > > 
> > > > --- Jack Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > I've always been curious as to whether there
> > > were a
> > > > > direct connection
> > > > > between droplet size and printer resolution.
> > > AEBE,
> > > > > it seems smaller ink
> > > > > droplets would equal finer printed
> detail.(?)
> > > > > What are the paper considerations?
> > > > > 
> > > > > Jack
> > > > > 
> > > > > --- Brendan MacRae
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > > Hum, not sure that smaller droplets always
> > > > > translate
> > > > > > to print detail. The paper is a big
> variable
> > > here.
> > > > > > However, that's interesting, too. The 2400
> has
> > > a
> > > > > huge
> > > > > > following, I know, but it's too small for
> what
> > > I
> > > > > want
> > > > > > to do.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > -Brendan
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > --- Jack Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > > In keeping with my severe resolution
> > > hang-up,
> > > > > I've
> > > > > > > noted that the R1800
> > > > > > > advertises having the smallest ink
> droplets
> > > in
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > industry, 1.5
> > > > > > > picoliters. The R2400, 3.5 picoliters,
> but
> > > > > produces
> > > > > > > "superior" B&W
> > > > > > > prints.
> > > > > > > This is my total offering on the
> subject.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Jack
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > --- Brendan MacRae
> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > I'm going to be putting my digital
> > > darkroom
> > > > > > > together
> > > > > > > > soon and I've decided on everything
> but
> > > the
> > > > > > > printer at
> > > > > > > > this point.
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > I want a large format ink jet and have
> > > been
> > > > > > > looking at
> > > > > > > > Canon and Epson. Both of the 17" wide
> > > $1800
> > > > > > > printers
> > > > > > > > have gotten good reviews. I'm leaning
> > > toward
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > Epson
> > > > > > > > since I know a designer who owns an
> older
> > > > > model
> > > > > > > that
> > > > > > > > produces amazing prints. I've never
> seen
> > > > > anything
> > > > > > > from
> > > > > > > > a Canon.
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > Also, does anyone else use the
> ColorVision
> > > > > Print
> > > > > > > Fix
> > > > > > > > Pro suite? +'s? -'s?
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > Thanks.
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > -Brendan
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> __________________________________________________
> > > > > > > > Do You Yahoo!?
> > > > > > > > Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the
> best
> > > spam
> > > > > > > protection around 
> > > > > > > > http://mail.yahoo.com 
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > -- 
> > > > > > > > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> > > > > > > > PDML@pdml.net
> > > > > > > >
> > > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> __________________________________________________
> > > > > > > Do You Yahoo!?
> > > > > > > Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best
> > > spam
> > > > > > > protection around 
> > > > > > > http://mail.yahoo.com 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > -- 
> > > > > > > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> > > > > > > PDML@pdml.net
> > > > > > >
> > > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > >
> > >
> __________________________________________________
> > > > > > Do You Yahoo!?
> > > > > > Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best
> spam
> > > > > protection around 
> > > > > > http://mail.yahoo.com 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > -- 
> > > > > > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> > > > > > PDML@pdml.net
> > > > > >
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> > > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > >
> > >
> __________________________________________________
> > > > > Do You Yahoo!?
> > > > > Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best
> spam
> > > > > protection around 
> > > > > http://mail.yahoo.com 
> > > > > 
> > 
> === message truncated ===
> 
> 
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
> protection around 
> http://mail.yahoo.com 
> 
> -- 
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Reply via email to