Re: Printing 3-D

[P3D John W Roberts <roberts@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

>Date: Sun, 16 Mar 1997 18:48:40 -0600
>From: P3D John Ohrt  <johrt@xxxxxxx>
>Subject: Re: Printing 3-D

>The Epson Pro gives a pleasing, almost watercolor like print on matte,
>but the reccommended paper for top quality is gloss as it is for the
>Fargo.  I prefer gloss, but then I have no taste.  

For printing scanned photographs, I think the choice of gloss is very
important. I've seen pairs of prints put out by the same printer, identical
image, one on gloss and one on plain paper, and the gloss print actually
looks like a photographic print, while the other one looks "unconvincing".
I just bought some gloss paper for work - the advertising on the label claims
that the difference is that plain paper absorbs the ink while the ink dries
on the surface of the gloss paper, and it produces a sharper image with
more saturated colors and higher contrast.

>The price is meant to
>be an apples to apples comparison since both printers are only purchased
>for color output (as opposed to text).  

On the other hand, I've never even put the color cartridge in my inkjet printer
at home. I bought it for text and black and white graphics (with emphasis on
line graphics), and I consider it close to the quality of a laser printer
for those applications (I can tell the difference if I look closely, but it's
not obvious or obtrusive). For 3D line art, I expect plain paper would be fine.

Trivia item: HP's black ink holds up pretty well when tap water is spilled
on it, but it runs when exposed to rainwater. I'm thinking about marketing
oil-and-rainwater salad dressing, rainwaterade,... :-X

John R


------------------------------