Re: Printing Digital Camera pictures

["Tesla list" <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>]

Original poster: "Michael Rhodes by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>" <rhodes-at-fnrf.science.cmu.ac.th>

At 11:14 24/10/01, you wrote:
>Original poster: "Terry Fritz" <twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>

I also have an Epson stylus color 900. I have used Canon, HP and
Epson and Epson has by far been the best in terms of print quality.
I often have to produce graphics for scientific publications and in
many instances the color accuracy is critical.  What I have found
is that the accuracy varies from manufacturer to manufacturer and
even from batch to batch.  I had found the 'perfect' paper (glossy)
some time ago, it was "Hi-Jet glossy - Water Resistant".  I used to
spray a thin coat of clear lacquer to protect the pictures but the
paper identified as 'water resistant' works very well.  I have pictures
I printed in my wallet and they are still in excellent shape after
carrying them around for over two years.

>I use an Epson stylus color 900 printer.  It can print like four normal
>size pictures on a big sheet of Kodak photo inkjet paper and they are
>"really really good".  You will spend real money on ink and fancy paper but
>it is probably still cheaper than photo store pictures.  Less when you can
>print "perfect" pictures that have been fixed with photo software and the
>bad ones removed. ;-))  I have not tried the true photo printers but I hear
>they are darn good.  Maybe not "perfect", but close enough.  Of course, no
>showing the pictures in the rain :-)) but the pictures will not mess up
>with normal handling.  Spend like $200 on the printer and save the rest for
>them darn inkjet cartridges ;-))

 >>>>>>>>>>>snipped<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<


   -------------------------------
   Michael Rhodes
   Senior Researcher
   Fast Neutron Research Facility
   Chiang Mai University
   Thailand
   -------------------------------