ðòïåëôù 


  áòèé÷ 


Apache-Talk @lexa.ru 

Inet-Admins @info.east.ru 

Filmscanners @halftone.co.uk 

Security-alerts @yandex-team.ru 

nginx-ru @sysoev.ru 

  óôáôøé 


  ðåòóïîáìøîïå 


  ðòïçòáííù 



ðéûéôå
ðéóøíá












     áòèé÷ :: Filmscanners
Filmscanners mailing list archive (filmscanners@halftone.co.uk)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[filmscanners] Re: Printers




"Ted Bayer" <tedbayer@harbornet.com> asks:

> The two I am considering are:
> HP Deskjet 920c
> Epson Stylus C80

FWIW, I just replaced an aging HP 970 with an Epson 950C. The bottom line
is: the HP is better.

Very strange, since I've _never_ heard anything nice said about HP and never
heard anything bad said about Epson.

The HP suffers from water-soluble inks and bad paper handling for
heavy-weight stock (it sometimes scratches the surface of the paper as it
drags it through its somewhat convoluted paper path), but it's faster, the
colors are much brighter, and it seems a tad sharper. The portraits in the
Kodak PDI Target test file look chalky and corpse-like on Epson 950C prints.

I expect/hope I'll be able to brighten up the Epson colors somewhat by
twiddling some settings somewhere.

I was looking forward to full-bleed prints from the Epson, but it has this
cute trick that the narrower the margins the slower it prints. My first
print took over 30 minutes, and wasn't even a full-bleed.

David J. Littleboy
Not amused, in
Tokyo, Japan




----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe 
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or 
body



 




Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.