Re: ImagePrint for Epson 1800?
Re: ImagePrint for Epson 1800?
- Subject: Re: ImagePrint for Epson 1800?
- From: Robert L Krawitz <email@hidden>
- Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2005 19:07:36 -0400
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2005 15:36:45 -0400
From: Armand Rosenberg <email@hidden>
I've heard this statement too, but it's not supported by any
reviews I've seen. Just trying to understand... Is this Epson's way
to keep selling 2200's? Can anyone comment on a real-life
comparison between 2200 and 1800 on matte and semi-gloss surfaces?
(Yes, there is a big difference on glossy papers.) I think some
specialty papers (like canvas, maybe?) won't work in the 1800, but
other than that...?
What do people really mean by the statement that the 1800 won't
replace the 2200...?
My own experience tuning the R800 (the R1800 will be the same) for
Gutenprint (the new name for Gimp-Print) suggests to me that the
results on matte paper won't be much, if any, better than on the 2200.
Yes, the red and "blue" inks expand the gamut, but the 2200 has
enormous gamut to begin with and the CMY inks (particularly C and M)
on the R800 are much less saturated than the equivalents on the 2200.
It may be easier to get a bit more accurate grayscale on the R800, but
it won't be too different. Grain won't really be any better on the
R800 than on the 2200 because the 2200's light inks compensate for the
smaller drop size on the R800.
The 2200 will probably be considerably faster than the R800 in
practice, also. The R800 has more nozzles than the 2200 -- 180 per
color vs. 96 per color -- but the 2200 produces excellent prints (with
the 4 pl drop size being used) at 720 DPI, whereas the R800 needs
1440x1440 DPI to use its smallest drop size. The actual printing time
should be about the same -- the R800 can do 720 DPI horizontal
resolution in one pass, while the 2200 needs two passes -- but the
computational load will be much less.
Also, even the 1.5 pl blue drops from the R800 are visible to the
unaided eye (even more so than the black drops, for some reason),
while the 4 pl light cyan drops are not individually perceptible.
And yes, this does mean that the next release of Gutenprint
(5.0.0-beta4) will support the R800 and R1800.
>In a short conversation with John Pannozzo he indicated that the R1800
>would be supported. No timeframe was mentioned. John also mentioned that
>the 2200 remains a better option for non glossy "art" papers.
>
>> Message: 4
>> Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 19:46:52 -0400
>> From: Armand Rosenberg <email@hidden>
>> Subject: ImagePrint for Epson 1800?
>
>>
>> Anyone care to speculate if ImagePrint will ever be made available
>> for the Epson 1800 (and when)? (Didn't think I'd get far if I called
>> ColorByte...)
--
Robert Krawitz <email@hidden>
Tall Clubs International -- http://www.tall.org/ or 1-888-IM-TALL-2
Member of the League for Programming Freedom -- mail email@hidden
Project lead for Gimp Print -- http://gimp-print.sourceforge.net
"Linux doesn't dictate how I work, I dictate how Linux works."
--Eric Crampton
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Colorsync-users mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden