Re: [photo-3d] stereocard printer possibilities?

["Dan Shelley" <dshelley@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

>I'm at my wit's end (which didn't take too long; I apparently have
short
>wits). I decided to get a photo printer to play around with making
>stereo cards.  3D Stereo Image Factory Plus has a great little
template
>built-in that allows you to print out monolithic Q-Vu formated
prints.
>It's great: you work out all the stereo window/rotational problems
with
>the software then just print, cut on the dotted lines, and slip into
a
>Q-Vu mount.  All one would need is a printer that gives an acceptable
>image in a viewer.

The monolithic print creation capability in 3D SIF is really a nice
boon... I was never much of a fan of the Q-Vu format becuase aligning
images correctly for the premade windows was very difficult. NOW, with
my Epson 750 photo printer, using Epson's special photo FILM, I can
create images that look superior to local "mini-lab" prints for about
the same price. AND, they are made here at home, when I want, and I do
not have to spend extra time trimming and mounting...

>I thought the Epson Stylus Photo 870 was that printer.  What clinched
it
>for me was the fact that the fading problem with inkjets had
supposedly
>been solved by Epson, who were making claims that 870 prints would
last
>as long as photographic prints.  While they had done tests with
>lightfastness, they hadn't counted on the environment.  Big mistake.
It
>seems that, in some areas of the country, the 870 photos were fading
in
>as little as a day or two because of ozone levels.  PR nightmare.
Epson
>is trying to avoid a class action lawsuit by offering to buy back the
>printers.  Anyway, to make a long story short, the Epson is not gonna
>work for making cards.

Had not heard of this, and especailly not about the 750. All the APEC
stereocard exchange members either already have, or will receive a
streocard I made using this printer and film this week. Any one of you
out there want to attest to the fact that there is NO PIXELIZATION at
all, even under greater than normal viewing magnification? These look
just like, or better than photographic prints.

>Everything else is in place.  I'm ready to become a stereocard
>convert/practitioner/tycoon.  All I need is the right printer.  Other
>people on this list must be doing this.  I've heard some people
mention
>dye-sub printers.  I need to keep costs down but I'm ready to
consider
>anything.  There are low priced dye-subs from Olympus (P300) and
Canon
>(CD-300) but they only print on 4 x 6.  What printers are you all
using?

If you buy the 8x10 sheets of Epson film on the Internet, it's about
$30 for 15 sheets of 8.5" x 11". Ink is under $20, and prints many (I
have not counted, but have always been surprised how long they
last...) full sheet images between replacement. You can fit an awful
lot of pairs on one sheet. For the last APEC exchange, I used a
slightly smaller than normal chip size, and got 6 pairs per sheet.

Dan Shelley