Re: filmscanners: real value?

[Arthur Entlich <artistic@ampsc.com>]

Michael Moore wrote:

> Ian,

> 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).

My hopeful final comments on this OT topic.

1) I have never yet been made aware of, or encountered (I help a lot of 
people with clogged inkheads) a clog that was "beyond repair".  Inks are 
soluble in something, usually water or alcohol, and although a bad clog 
may involve a day or two of soaking, or a cleaning cartridge, unless you 
are pumping epoxy glue through the heads, they should be cleanable.

2) The Epson Piezo based heads were very superior to the "on the 
cartridge" bubblejet technology for years.  It is only a result of 
Epson's superior head design that the other companies had to improve 
theirs' to compete.

3) The reason bubblejet (heated ink) technology hasn't caught on in the 
art and photo marketplace is because the logistic of how it works makes 
special ink formulations more difficult to produce.  The piezo head 
Epson created has incredible flexibility in terms of ink formulation, 
dot size, etc.  However, it cannot me made cheaply enough to make it 
easily replaceable or expendable.

4) I would agree that Epson might want to consider producing a printer 
which has an easily removable head (to make cleaning easier, and 
possible replacement), but it requires some very careful tolerances 
built in, because, having does a full head calibration once, I can tell 
you, with the current manufactured tolerances, it is quite time 
consuming, as there are several physical adjustments that have to be 
done manually, and are pretty finicky.

Art