Re: filmscanners: [OT] Olympus P-400 printer ???

[Arthur Entlich <artistic@ampsc.com>]

Raymond Carles wrote:

> You're comparing two VERY different beasts here!
> 
> While the Epson is an inkjet printer, the Olympus is a fast dye
> sublimation (not inkjet) printer, one can use to print directly from a
> digital camera, no computer needed...

This is a good point, although the differences are getting "blurred" 
these days, as inkjets get faster, and the ink costs go up, and the dot 
size decreases.  Also the 6 color inkjets make the image so close to 
continuous tone, that again the lines are blurred.

With more archival inks for inkjets and better UV protective layers on 
Dyesub, the permanence is about the same.

Further still, there are a number of stand alone inkjet printers 
(Epson/Lexmark(under Kodak label)/HP (Photosmart series) now
on the market, that use an interface built in to them that you can slip 
the flash memory of a digital camera without a computer in between.

The main differences, practically speaking are:

Usually, cost of materials on Dye sub are higher, and they also are 
consistent.  Most use the same amount of materials if you are printing a 
dot in the center of a 8 x 10 sheet or a full image edge to edge. 
Inkjet printers use ink only where needed, not a dye sheet for each of 3 
or 4 colors (CMY or CMYK)

Usually, dye subs are limited to a maximum size in each dimension, which 
inkjets often allow for very long or unlimited length, but a limited width.

Dye sub require very specialized media, while inkjets can provide a 
great variety of papers.

Dye sub usually do a poor job with text, while inkjets provide very good 
text.  Most dye sub are 300-400 dpi, but provide true 24 bit (16 million 
color) per addressable dot, while inkjets are higher resolution, but 
require a number of dots to emulate full color.  That's why the text 
looks better on inkjet.

Speed is similar for similar sized images at this point.

Making test prints is very costly on a Dyesub, unless it uses special 
"ring around" software or some other type of test pattern (and usually 
still require a full page printout), because you can not make a "small" 
or partial print without using the full dye sheets.

Some dye sub printers have tried using ribbons of dye sheets rather than 
full continuous sheets, but they had problems with banding.

The benefit of inkjet (for me at least) is I can do tests using minimal 
consumables, over and over, if I need to in order to get very accurate 
color rendition.  I don't know if dye subs and ICC profiles have 
improved tremendously, but when Kodak was pushing them a few years box, 
they were having some problems with color management.  There is also 
less throw away waste with an inkjet, especially if you can recycle or 
refill your ink carts.


Art