[filmscanners] Re: Scanner & printer

["Arthur Entlich" <artistic-1@shaw.ca>]

David J. Littleboy wrote:


>
> It seems to be between the Canon 9000 (dye-based inks) and the pigment ink
> Epson 2100, 2200, or 4000 (same printer: the only difference is where you
> buy it). The Canon (as I understand it) doesn't do full-bleed A3. However,
> I'm finding the Epson 950C _very_ slow for full-bleed A4 (20 to 25 minutes),
> and probably should have bought the Canon 900. Sigh. (I whimped out on A3
> this time around since I really don't have space for it (my wife said shut
> up and buy it<g>.)). They're enourmous. Also, since I haven't bitten the
> bullet and purchased the 8000, I don't have A3 quality images yet.)
>
> David J. Littleboy
> davidjl@gol.com
> Tokyo, Japan
>


David,

Have you discussed this slowness with Epson yet, to determine if that is
the "norm" or just either a defective unit or some weirdness in your
system.  I find this very odd, as I haven't yet heard another discussion
of this problem.

Secondly, I was wondering two things about the new Canon printers:

1) how permanent are the dye based inks considered

2) The Canon 9000 reportedly has several thousands nozzles versus the
Epson's' well under 1000.  Has anyone heard of any clogging or related
ink flow problems with the Canon 9000.  Several thousand nozzles seems
like a lot to keep track of ;-)

Art

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