RE: filmscanners: real value?

["Laurie Solomon" <laurie@advancenet.net>]

Ok, I take you word on that; I was talking in general terms rather than in
terms of any specific make or model.  It is also possible that my
information and understanding is dated regarding this aspect given the fast
paced changing technologies and equipment designs.

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-filmscanners@halftone.co.uk
[mailto:owner-filmscanners@halftone.co.uk]On Behalf Of Ian Jackson
Sent: Sunday, February 04, 2001 9:18 AM
To: filmscanners@halftone.co.uk
Subject: Re: filmscanners: real value?


Laurie,

Re point (2) The Olympus P400 also laminates

> (3)  Inkjets have reached the level where there quality and other features
> come very close to those, if not in some instances surpass those, of
> inkjets.

Eh!

Ian

----- Original Message -----
From: "Laurie Solomon" <laurie@advancenet.net>
To: <filmscanners@halftone.co.uk>
Sent: Friday, February 02, 2001 4:53 PM
Subject: RE: filmscanners: real value?


> Ian,
>
> Partial possible answers to your question are:
>
> >I wonder why there are so few people film scanning then printing with dye
> >sublimation printers?
>
> (1)  Dye sublimation printers may be too costly as compared to inkjet
> printers both to purchase and to operate given the cost of expendables.
> (2)  Dye sublimation prints are even more fragile than inkjet prints in
> terms of longevity in the case of resistance to heat and water among other
> factors so I am told.
> (3)  Inkjets have reached the level where there quality and other features
> come very close to those, if not in some instances surpass those, of
> inkjets.
> (4)  There is more development going on in regard to inkjet and laser
> technologies than in dye sublimation technologies, which it appears -
> relatively speaking - has been orphaned, which makes people uncomfortable
in
> investing in a product that might be abandoned in the near future so as to
> make getting expendables difficult and expensive.
>
> >B&W - I see no mention of this is any Dye sub printer literature
>
> (1) Expense of printers and expendables as noted above.
> (2) Difficulty getting good black and white tonal range using just the
black
> on the dye sub black dye ribbon and getting rich blacks when trying to
> obtain black from a mixture of the other color dyes.
> (3) Not archival enough to be used for anything more than mere proofing.
>
> >Where do I find an A3 Dye sub printer under 2000 UK Pounds?
>
> I have no response to this. :-)
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-filmscanners@halftone.co.uk
> [mailto:owner-filmscanners@halftone.co.uk]On Behalf Of Ian Jackson
> Sent: Friday, February 02, 2001 6:01 AM
> To: filmscanners@halftone.co.uk
> Subject: Re: filmscanners: real value?
>
>
> Michael,
>
> I've got to be careful here as this is a scanners BBS not a printer BBS
but
> I wonder why there are so few people film scanning then printing with dye
> sublimation printers?
>
> Surely these would fully complement say a 4000 dpi scanner?
>
> My only questions are:
>
> (1) B&W - I see no mention of this is any Dye sub printer literature
> (2) Where do I find an A3 Dye sub printer under 2000 UK Pounds?
>
> Ian
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Michael Moore" <miguelmas@uswest.net>
> To: <filmscanners@halftone.co.uk>
> Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2001 8:26 PM
> Subject: Re: filmscanners: real value?
>
>
> > Ian,
> > I totally agree. HP has fallen victim to the same short term marketing
> mentality
> > that infects too many of today's manufacturers and service providers.
That
> said,
> > I do think that their printers at least are much better made than
> Epson's...
> > What I would really like to see is the old HP mentality applied to their
> > printers, etc., so that we would have truly professional equipment, both
> in
> > manufacture and design... I will also reply to Art's comment about the
> price
> > comparison between HP and Epson... wheteher it's the 740, the 870, or
the
> 2000,
> > they all have the print head as part of the printer, so if the darned
> thing
> > clogs beyond repair, you're scr.... (my spell-checker just kicked in).
> > As for HP, ain't nobody that I know making third party archival
> pigment/inks for
> > the darn thing.... Just give me a Fuji Frontier...
> >
> > Mike Moore
> >
> > Ian Jackson wrote:
> >
> > > Michael Moore wrote.....
> > >
> > > Michael,
> > >
> > > I respect your comment about HP assuming you meant the same
> oscilloscopes,
> > > power supplies etc,   that I also used.  However HP's Computers,
> printers,
> > > software and service FOR THOSE PRODUCTS,  are just not in the same
> league.
> > >
> > > Somehow I feel you would not disagree?
> > >
> > > Ian
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Arthur Entlich" <artistic@ampsc.com>
> > > To: <filmscanners@halftone.co.uk>
> > > Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 11:39 PM
> > > Subject: Re: filmscanners: real value?
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Michael Moore wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I cut my electronics teeth on HP when I trained as an electronics
> tech
> > > in Th
> > > > > US Navy... Their stuff was always built to last... Last summer I
> bought
> > > an HP
> > > > > 932C... it's built much better than my Epson 740... plus the
> cartridges
> > > come
> > > > > with the nozzles built in so if a print head clogs, you just
replace
> the
> > > > > cartridge... I bought it to replace an Epson that had a clogged
> print
> > > > > head...(third party inks!)... I thinks it's a load of bull that
> things
> > > can't
> > > > > be made to last...
> > > > >
> > > > > Mike M
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Didn't the 932C cost a good deal more than the 740 (I'm not on top
of
> > > > the prices on these)?  And yes, most anything can be made to last,
it
> > > > costs more R&D and usually more in material and manufacturing
expense
> to
> > > > do so.  That's not my point.  Making a car last (say a Ford Model T)
> > > > that can't go above 30 miles an hour, other than as a collectable,
> > > > doesn't make good sense in a world that demands cars that can go 80
> mph
> > > > for practical considerations. The same is true (and more so) of high
> > > > tech.  If you owned a 10 megabyte harddrive and it was built to last
> for
> > > > 50 years, would you still be using it today? Not likely.  The darn
> thing
> > > > has more value in aluminum and gold than in either practical use or
> > > > resale value.
> > > >
> > > > BTW, I have a perfectly good 10 meg hard drive I'll sell you (weighs
> > > > about 15 pounds -- you pay postage, too)  And if you'd like that
one,
> > > > you'll really appreciate my dual drive Bernoulli with disks (which
are
> > > > 12" wide and hold 5 or 10 megs each... it weights about 50 pounds.)
> and
> > > > is bigger than a tower computer ;-)
> > > >
> > > > Art
> > > >
> > > >
> >
>