Re: Epson PictureMate Photo Printer
Re: Epson PictureMate Photo Printer
- Subject: Re: Epson PictureMate Photo Printer
- From: email@hidden
- Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2005 15:07:01 EDT
In a message dated 10/7/05 2:49:07 PM, email@hidden writes:
In a message dated Fri, 7 Oct 2005 14:06:57, CDTobie wrote:
> Yes, thats just the case, a known state, but not a raw one...
I don't think that one would be able to linearize a PrinterMate, if that is
what you mean by a state that is not "raw."
You can't linearize other Epson's either, but you can get an extended gamut and better color from "no color adjustment' profiling with the most appropriate media setting, with the PicMate neither one can be varied.
>> Still, a good-looking snapshot is a more pleasing artifact to hold in one's
>> hands than the kind of gaudy, excessively-saturated print that one may get
>> otherwise.
>
> Given that the snapshot market has been raised otherwise, the question is
> rather like asking "but given the choice, people would surely prefer healthy
> whole grain cereals to sugar coated, artifically flavored junk, wouldn't
> they?" I'm not sure the answer will please you. But for your own images, go
> for it.
Well, I am the sort of guy who used to think that Beta was better than VHS,
or still believes that eating healthy is a good idea, etc... Hopelessly out
of the mainstream of sensible choicemaking, as you can see...
>> Perhaps one would have to print a chart in sections, then tape it together?
>
> Precisely, though sessions is an interesting term...
Sorry, "sessions"? I don't understand...
Ahh, Sections...
> No gloss optimizer, so there is still "that inkjet look" to the images.
You mean the "bronzing" effect?
Bronzing has to due with effects at the dark end with high ink loads, we're looking at the effect at the light end, called gloss differential, where inked and uninked sections have a different reflectivity at an angle...
> [...] of the dozens of inkjet models I have at hand, there are never a set of
> images where I think "hey, I should print these on the PictureMate". But there
> are people who make me think "hey, thats a PictureMate person, I should
> recommend they get one".
Clearly no print will look *better* on a PictureMate.
Fair enough...
If I may say so, that
is beside the point. The only valid reason would be pure and simple
convenience (ease of operation, and a device that is easy for anyone to
operate, including the uninitiated to the intricacies of fine printing).
Yup... though most 4x6 printer users are printing from the memory card, not from Photoshop, so its a point, shoot, and print workflow, with no color management at all.
I currently have an Epson 2200, so I could possibly use it to print
snapshots too, which I have only tried unsystematically so far. Has anyone
studied the cost of printing snapshots on a larger printer (like mine) vs.
the 29-cent-per-print cost on a PictureMate? If the price is lower on a
larger printer, then perhaps it would truly make *no* sense to get the
PictureMate, other than simply because of the low price and/or as a toy,
perhaps.
Depends on the paper you buy and (dare I say it?) the ink system you use. Assuming Epson carts, it would be a wash, with a good price on 4x6 paper. With third party inks or a bulk system (a pain, but cheaper for large quantity printing) the 2200 solution would be cheaper. The other virtue of the PicMate is the little "lunch box" format, complete with carrying handle... cute, convenient, simple, and reasonably priced; if you need a dedicated glossy snapshot printer.
C. David Tobie
Product Technology Manager
ColorVision Inc.
email@hidden
www.colorvision.com
_______________________________________________
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