Re: digital printers

[Ernst Dinkla <ernst@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

In <URL:news:lokaal.panorama> on Thu 16 Nov, Dee Breger wrote:

> I create both b/w and colorized digital enhancements of electron
> photomicrographs and am looking for info on the most archival/sophisticated
> but also cost-effective method to print them as equivalent to art
> photography.  I'm confused about the relative pros and cons among the
> digital printing technologies such as dye sub, ink jet, Iris, etc., not to
> mention the various kinds of papers.  The new Epson 2000P seems like a good
> idea for personal purchase, since the price of having files printed
> commercially can quickly add up to the price of a good printer; also the
> print shops vary in technique and papers.  Can anyone enlighten me on how
> the 2000P (six colors, oil-based  ink jet) compares with other techniques
> (or other printers)? There are three grades of archival papers promoted for
> it, luster (RC), matte and glossy.  If the matte and glossy aren't RC, what
> are they? (I can't get a definitive answer from the sales or technical
> folks at Epson!) Would they be comparable to fiber/rag papers used for
> traditional photographic prints?

As Glenn Barry wrote, the Leben/Epson list is the best source of
information. Add to that a FAQ of that list http://welcome.to/epson-inkjet

BTW, the 2000p has encapsulated (wax, resin) pigment particles in the
ink but isn't an oil based ink like some wide format inkjet printers
are, Xerox models for example.

If you need more fade proof prints it could be a good choice, if that
aspect comes second you may look for another Epson as it has some quirks
on colour control. But that subject will be covered at the list etc.

Ernst
-- 
Ernst Dinkla  Serigrafie,Zeefdruk            The point will never be metric
Soon, early next year 1-1-1, the address will change to  e.dinkla@xxxxxxxxx