Printer questions

[MJCarnegie]

Hello Gang,

I'm really having a tough time deciding on a printer to buy. I was ready to go out and purchase a i960 yesterday when I came upon a discussion about the problem of premature or excessive fading associated with dye based ink systems. I'm smart enough to realize that anything exposed to the effects of sunlight over a sustained period of time will most definitely fade, but the rate at which Canons inks reportedly fade has me really concerned. If this is such a well documented problem why would Canon continue to stick with this type of ink system? Has anyone here experienced these problems, or is it much a do about nothing?

Thanks,
Mike

[John_T]

If you ask me, the longevity thing is mainly neurosis over recording "history", grand children knowing their heritage and soforth.

If you want the best prints NOW and for the reasonable future, then go Canon. The question of longevity is as much a question of the paper you lay the ink on as the ink itself. Of course Canon are working on it. Don't forget that the competition in this field is very stiff, and you won't be able to sue anyone over "longevity" in twenty years, so some people will claim anything that will get them sales now.

Check out the Canon i990.

I have the i9100 and wouldn't trade it for anything.

[john_houghton]

Preliminary reports from users of the new Epson R800 suggest that this will deliver prints as good as or better than the i950, and the prints will certainly last considerably longer. However, there are many factors to consider when buying a printer, and one that is "best" for one person will not necessarily be "best" for another.

John

[scottbergerphoto]

The Epson 2200 is superb. It's slower then the Canon's but produces stunning pictures. Check ou the review at: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/printers/Epson2200.shtml
Scott

[Ellie]

What about dye sub printers. like the Kodak 8500? Anyone know anything about them?
Ellie

[Boosting1Bar]

I've printed quite a few prints with it so far and am really happy with the results. I needed something that could print regular black and white documents relatively quickly so I couldn't really splurge for a photo only printer and then have to buy another to do regular stuff. I'm very very pleased with the quality of the prints. As far as longevity of them goes, I personally keep my pictures inside as opposed to laying out on the porch in the sun. Seriously though, I keep copies of all my shots on CD. Everytime my picture directory gets big enough, I just burn another CD so if need be I have access to the files and can print them again should I need to.

[scottbergerphoto]

I've printed quite a few prints with it so far and am really happy with the results. I needed something that could print regular black and white documents relatively quickly so I couldn't really splurge for a photo only printer and then have to buy another to do regular stuff. I'm very very pleased with the quality of the prints. As far as longevity of them goes, I personally keep my pictures inside as opposed to laying out on the porch in the sun. Seriously though, I keep copies of all my shots on CD. Everytime my picture directory gets big enough, I just burn another CD so if need be I have access to the files and can print them again should I need to.
It becomes more of an issue if you frame one and give it to someone as a gift, or a really big issue if you sell them.

[Ellie]

I'll be selling prints. I do a lot of school dances ball teams, and more and more portrait work. I need something that looks as good as lab quality. I read on another message board about the 8500 Kodak and how good it was. Of course it was an engineer from Kodak singing the praises so... But I was wondering what anyone has heard about them if anything. Most of what I do is 8x10 format.

Ellie