Re: filmscanners: RE: Photo quality printers: Hewlett-Packard vs. Epson
Software City wrote: Being in the repair biz, I can only say we see lots more HP inkjets, then all the other brands combined (granted there are more HP's in circulation, but the numbers still seem disproportionate). HP does great lasers, but I'd never recommend an HP inkjet to a Customer. There's a lot of cheap plastic in them, at least on the lower end. Plus, there aren't any Continuous Inking Systems available for HP. One distinction between HP Epson others is the fact that the print head is built into the cartridge.I'd guess the theory is that you get a fresh head with each new cartridge, but I have to wonder about the head quality ongoing cost. (I believe there's a class action suit going on over this issue.) If you do some surfing of folks who are seriously into the digital darkroom, you never see a mention of HP: mostly Epson. Regards, Ken Jaskot - Original Message - From: "patton paul" [EMAIL PROTECTED] I was wondering if anybody could comment on the relative quality of Hewlett-Packard vs. Epson photo quality printers. I have heard that HP inkjet heads actually last longer if you refill them and continue to print... I have two HP printers so far I have no complaint. I got a Canon before. It was simply not comparable in print quality. Quoton
Re: filmscanners: RE: Photo quality printers: Hewlett-Packard vs. Epson
Being in the repair biz, I can only say we see lots more HP inkjets, then all the other brands combined (granted there are more HP's in circulation, but the numbers still seem disproportionate). HP does great lasers, but I'd never recommend an HP inkjet to a Customer. There's a lot of cheap plastic in them, at least on the lower end. Plus, there aren't any Continuous Inking Systems available for HP. One distinction between HP Epson others is the fact that the print head is built into the cartridge.I'd guess the theory is that you get a fresh head with each new cartridge, but I have to wonder about the head quality ongoing cost. (I believe there's a class action suit going on over this issue.) If you do some surfing of folks who are seriously into the digital darkroom, you never see a mention of HP: mostly Epson. Regards, Ken Jaskot - Original Message - From: "patton paul" [EMAIL PROTECTED] I was wondering if anybody could comment on the relative quality of Hewlett-Packard vs. Epson photo quality printers.
RE: filmscanners: RE: Photo quality printers: Hewlett-Packard vs. Epson
Well- Let me offer my tidbit of experience. A few years ago, I had an Epson Stylus Color IIs- not a great printer by any stretch, but at the time it was all I could afford. I upgraded my computer to Windows 98, and the printer would not work right any longer- printed the pages funny, weird characters, etc, and no amount of reinstalling software would help. Finally I called Epson (a long distance toll call). My tech couldn't figure out what was wrong and put me on hold to do research. I waited on hold for 45 minutes (long distance), and when he finally came back, I was told "We can't figure out why it's not working. We'd recommend buying a new printer." I was furious. Their drivers didn't work (I had downloaded the Windows 98 updates from their site), so I should go buy a new printer? Ok fine. I bought an HP. I currently own an HP 952 C, and it has given me great photo quality prints. I know the prints won't last 200 years, but, well, neither will I... so I don't care. The prints I do get look great. Rick -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Software City Sent: Monday, March 12, 2001 12:29 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: filmscanners: RE: Photo quality printers: Hewlett-Packard vs. Epson Being in the repair biz, I can only say we see lots more HP inkjets, then all the other brands combined (granted there are more HP's in circulation, but the numbers still seem disproportionate). HP does great lasers, but I'd never recommend an HP inkjet to a Customer. There's a lot of cheap plastic in them, at least on the lower end. Plus, there aren't any Continuous Inking Systems available for HP. One distinction between HP Epson others is the fact that the print head is built into the cartridge.I'd guess the theory is that you get a fresh head with each new cartridge, but I have to wonder about the head quality ongoing cost. (I believe there's a class action suit going on over this issue.) If you do some surfing of folks who are seriously into the digital darkroom, you never see a mention of HP: mostly Epson. Regards, Ken Jaskot - Original Message - From: "patton paul" [EMAIL PROTECTED] I was wondering if anybody could comment on the relative quality of Hewlett-Packard vs. Epson photo quality printers.
RE: filmscanners: RE: Photo quality printers: Hewlett-Packard vs. Epson
I have an HP 2000C (recently replaced in their product line with the 2200) and it does have separate print heads as well as 4 separate ink cartridges. This printer seems extremely robust and the ink cartridges seem to last forever! I do tons of printing on it and have never had to replace a print head. Frank Paris [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://albums.photopoint.com/j/AlbumList?u=62684 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Software City Sent: Monday, March 12, 2001 9:29 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: filmscanners: RE: Photo quality printers: Hewlett-Packard vs. Epson Being in the repair biz, I can only say we see lots more HP inkjets, then all the other brands combined (granted there are more HP's in circulation, but the numbers still seem disproportionate). HP does great lasers, but I'd never recommend an HP inkjet to a Customer. There's a lot of cheap plastic in them, at least on the lower end. Plus, there aren't any Continuous Inking Systems available for HP. One distinction between HP Epson others is the fact that the print head is built into the cartridge.I'd guess the theory is that you get a fresh head with each new cartridge, but I have to wonder about the head quality ongoing cost. (I believe there's a class action suit going on over this issue.) If you do some surfing of folks who are seriously into the digital darkroom, you never see a mention of HP: mostly Epson. Regards, Ken Jaskot - Original Message - From: "patton paul" [EMAIL PROTECTED] I was wondering if anybody could comment on the relative quality of Hewlett-Packard vs. Epson photo quality printers.
Re: filmscanners: RE: Photo quality printers: Hewlett-Packard vs. Epson
P.S. You might want to review the comp.periphs.printers FAQ: http://www.interface-ag.com/~jsf/printers/cpp70105.txt Maris - Original Message - From: "patton paul" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, March 10, 2001 8:56 PM Subject: filmscanners: RE: Photo quality printers: Hewlett-Packard vs. Epson | I was wondering if anybody could comment on the relative quality of | Hewlett-Packard vs. Epson photo quality printers. I just heard from a | salesperson at a store that deals in both HP and Epson products that HP | printers are more trouble-free than Epson. Does this correspond to the | experience of people on the list? The Epson website stresses the | lightfastness of Epson inks for long lasting prints. The HP site says | nothing about this issue. How do Epson and HP printers compare for the | longevity of photo prints made with their inks? HP printers are 4 color, | Epson printers are 6 color. Is this difference important? I just had a | sample photo print made with an HP printer, and the color quality seems | excellent. Are their any other photo quality printer brands that I should | give serious consideration to besides HP and Epson? | __ | Dr. Paul Patton | Beckman Institute Rm 3027 405 N. Mathews St. | University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Urbana, Illinois 61801 | work phone: (217)-265-0795 fax: (217)-244-5180 | | "The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the | source of all true art and science." | -Albert Einstein | __ | |
Re: filmscanners: RE: Photo quality printers: Hewlett-Packard vs. Epson
I have the HP Photosmart P1000. I have never had an Epson so I cannot give you a personal opinion comparing the two. I did monitor the Epsons and HPs on mailing lists and newsgroups for a while before purchasing, and there were some expressions of concern as to the Epsons printheads clogging though no actual complaints that I recall. The responses were generally that no clogging would occur unless the printer sat unused for several *months*, and even then several methods for unclogging were provided. As to quality of print, I am very well satisfied with the HP. I cannot compare it to the Epson's results, though. Maris - Original Message - From: "patton paul" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, March 10, 2001 8:56 PM Subject: filmscanners: RE: Photo quality printers: Hewlett-Packard vs. Epson | I was wondering if anybody could comment on the relative quality of | Hewlett-Packard vs. Epson photo quality printers. I just heard from a | salesperson at a store that deals in both HP and Epson products that HP | printers are more trouble-free than Epson. Does this correspond to the | experience of people on the list? The Epson website stresses the | lightfastness of Epson inks for long lasting prints. The HP site says | nothing about this issue. How do Epson and HP printers compare for the | longevity of photo prints made with their inks? HP printers are 4 color, | Epson printers are 6 color. Is this difference important? I just had a | sample photo print made with an HP printer, and the color quality seems | excellent. Are their any other photo quality printer brands that I should | give serious consideration to besides HP and Epson? | __ | Dr. Paul Patton | Beckman Institute Rm 3027 405 N. Mathews St. | University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Urbana, Illinois 61801 | work phone: (217)-265-0795 fax: (217)-244-5180 | | "The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the | source of all true art and science." | -Albert Einstein | __ | |
RE: filmscanners: RE: Photo quality printers: Hewlett-Packard vs. Epson
I have made hundreds of prints up to 13"x19" with my Epson 2000p and it has worked flawlessly. I can just tell from the way it sounds that it is a well-made, precision instrument. I also have an HP 2000C and its photo quality prints can't begin to compare with the Epson's. Granted, the HP printer is from a previous generation. The HP has also worked flawlessly and is a great general purpose printer. The Epson is a dedicated photo printer. Frank Paris [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://albums.photopoint.com/j/AlbumList?u=62684 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of patton paul Sent: Saturday, March 10, 2001 6:56 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: filmscanners: RE: Photo quality printers: Hewlett-Packard vs. Epson I was wondering if anybody could comment on the relative quality of Hewlett-Packard vs. Epson photo quality printers. I just heard from a salesperson at a store that deals in both HP and Epson products that HP printers are more trouble-free than Epson. Does this correspond to the experience of people on the list? The Epson website stresses the lightfastness of Epson inks for long lasting prints. The HP site says nothing about this issue. How do Epson and HP printers compare for the longevity of photo prints made with their inks? HP printers are 4 color, Epson printers are 6 color. Is this difference important? I just had a sample photo print made with an HP printer, and the color quality seems excellent. Are their any other photo quality printer brands that I should give serious consideration to besides HP and Epson? __ Dr. Paul Patton Beckman Institute Rm 3027 405 N. Mathews St. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Urbana, Illinois 61801 work phone: (217)-265-0795 fax: (217)-244-5180 "The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the source of all true art and science." -Albert Einstein __
