| Author | Thread |
|
|
04/05/2008 12:18:43 PM · #1 |
| Didn't see any previous threads on this. I personally don't like and don't use ink jet printers, but I never realized this. |
|
|
|
04/05/2008 12:23:26 PM · #2 |
Originally posted by strangeghost:
Didn't see any previous threads on this. I personally don't like and don't use ink jet printers, |
what do you use then?
|
|
|
|
04/05/2008 12:25:30 PM · #3 |
I get all my printing done by a local pro shop. I submit my images on the web and pick them up the same business day or the following day. I spent a few years hassling with ink cartridges and clogged nozzles. I recycled the whole mess and never even considered buying another one. I'm holding out for genuine laser print technology that cuts the mustard.
Still waiting, btw. |
|
|
|
04/05/2008 12:34:18 PM · #4 |
Originally posted by strangeghost:
Still waiting, btw. |
Being in that business, I can tell you you will be waiting a while. It can be close, with good paper and a high end printer, but the technology just does not give that photographic quality you want. The main reason, IMO, is that ink is absorbed into the paper, so it behaves and looks more like photo paper, while toner sits layered on top of the page.
|
|
|
|
04/05/2008 12:34:24 PM · #5 |
Pretty much all inkjet printers *have* to have a waste ink space. They all need to clean their heads, and most have user-accessible maintenance routines that involve head cleaning. They also need to purge out the heads upon cartridge change to get rid of trapped gas.
I had a cheapie Epson printer that had a built-in peristaltic pump to remove ink from the small waste reservoir to a larger reservoir, and that system was a nightmare. The printer would fail, and the only reason was clogging of the pump suction line. The manufacturer replaced it once (the whole printer) and I cleaned the replacement printer twice more, then I just threw it away.
Most printers have pretty much maintenance-free wast ink reservoirs, and you rarely have to worry about it for the life of the printer. Is there wasted ink? Yes, there is. I still prefer inkjet technology over the alternatives for occasional to moderate general use, and were I choosing a higher quality photo printer, I would definitely be buying an inkjet. The only time I would choose a non-inkjet printer would be for high-volume text printing (no color) where I would choose laser, or for multi-part forms, where dot-matrix is a necessity.
ETA: Our current "family" printer is an extremely cheap Lexmark ($30 at Wally World) that actually costs more to re-load with ink than the printer cost. It replaced the above-referenced Epson, and has been going for two-plus years with no problems. I bought it late on a Sunday when the Epson bit the dust and one of the kids had a homework assignment that needed to be printed. If I get another year out of it, I'll be extremely happy. Never clogs, just prints when you need it, no warm-up time, extremely low power consumption.
Message edited by author 2008-04-05 12:41:21. |
|
|
|
04/05/2008 12:36:09 PM · #6 |
Originally posted by yospiff:
Originally posted by strangeghost:
Still waiting, btw. |
Being in that business, I can tell you you will be waiting a while. It can be close, with good paper and a high end printer, but the technology just does not give that photographic quality you want. The main reason, IMO, is that ink is absorbed into the paper, so it behaves and looks more like photo paper, while toner sits layered on top of the page. |
Yup. Side-by-side, the inkjet will blow the laser away in quality every time, and for far less money. Color lasers are a maintenance nightmare too. |
|
|
|
04/05/2008 12:50:01 PM · #7 |
Originally posted by kirbic:
Yup. Side-by-side, the inkjet will blow the laser away in quality every time, and for far less money. Color lasers are a maintenance nightmare too. |
Not all the time. I had a service call one time where the customer was complaining that their $100 inkjet was printing a photo better than our expensive color copier/printer with a Fiery controller. The reason was that the ink bled slightly into the page, creating a natural smoothing effect on the image. The image on the laser page showed the dot pattern. The text on the inkjet page looked like garbage, however, while the laser output was nice and crisp. Many end users who do not understand the technology assume that the xerographic device should always be "better". The customer understood, but was not happy about it. Not much I could do about it, however.
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 12/29/2025 06:50:43 AM EST.
