dye sub (i.e Kodak 1400 and Olympus 440) vs. Photosmart 8450

I work for a mid-size organization that holds many events and keeps MANY photo records of said events. As photo manager, I'm looking for a printer that is fast for printing 20-100 contact sheets at a time but also has the quality for great (and borderless would be nice) 8X10s and 4X6s. We use the Epson 1280 right now but it's very slow for high quality prints (about 8 min for an 8X10) and I can't get it to do borderless. I feel like the dye subs will be fast and I would sacrifice borderless for speed, but I know the 8450 would at least do 4X6 borderless. Any tips from anywhere would be GREATLY appreciated! Anyone had problems with the lag time for data transmission for the 440? I wonder if the 1400 would be the same?
THANKS!

• sarah

Sarah,

The Kodak 1400 would probably fit your needs well. It can print up to 8.27x12 inches (on 8.5x14 inch paper). The image size is sufficient to print four 4x6 image per page. Of course, you would have to cut the prints out of the single sheet.

On my relatively slow work system (P3-733), it takes approximately 2 minutes from the time I issue the print command until the print is finished.

Let me know if you have any questions regarding the Kodak 1400.

Bob Collette
Eastman Kodak Co.

Bob,

Are all the manuf. issues finalized now, and is the printer shipping in quantity?

Are there other issues open that youcan speak of that may be addressed still in firmware or hardware upates (ie, any reason to keep waiting before buying the 1400).

Can you give a final overview of the intial issues that occured and how they were addressed, with the results. For example banding was one thing, some people said cosmetically the trays seemed loose perhaps?

Anyway, I don;t want to start rumors, I am hoping you can memorialize what exactly was modified (or link to a post where you explain already if I missed it)

thanks

Most of the manufacturing issues with the Kodak 1400 printer have been resolved. While I'm not at liberty to discuss the details, I can say that most of the changes involved either tightening up the specifications on certain critical parts, or ensuring that the parts coming into the factory met specification. In several instances, there were also some process improvements implemented.

While banding has received the most attention, there were also improvements made in paper picking and ribbon patch sensing. A few other assorted "nuisance" type problems have also been addressed, primarily via firmware. While we haven't released new firmware yet, we expect to do so in the next few weeks (it's still evolving).

While the production line still isn't producing the volume of printers that we would like to see, it is producing a more-or-less steady stream of printers. Nearly 300 printers have been sent to dealers within the past couple of weeks, with more shipping daily.

At this point, most of the future improvements will come via firmware, which is easily upgradeable, so if you can get your hands on one (they're still in tight supply because of the large backlog of orders), you shouldn't have a problem.

Bob Collette

It sounds good. Well, when we move on this hopefully we'll be able to get our hands on one of them!

Just curious, Bob...

What needed to be tweaked in the paper picking?(and did it end up helping registration?) Was this a firmware issue?

• Mike

Bob Collette said:

Most of the manufacturing issues with the Kodak 1400 printer have
been resolved. While I'm not at liberty to discuss the details, I
can say that most of the changes involved either tightening up the
specifications on certain critical parts, or ensuring that the
parts coming into the factory met specification. In several
instances, there were also some process improvements implemented.

While banding has received the most attention, there were also
improvements made in paper picking and ribbon patch sensing. A few
other assorted "nuisance" type problems have also been addressed,
primarily via firmware. While we haven't released new firmware
yet, we expect to do so in the next few weeks (it's still evolving).

While the production line still isn't producing the volume of
printers that we would like to see, it is producing a more-or-less
steady stream of printers. Nearly 300 printers have been sent to
dealers within the past couple of weeks, with more shipping daily.

At this point, most of the future improvements will come via
firmware, which is easily upgradeable, so if you can get your hands
on one (they're still in tight supply because of the large backlog
of orders), you shouldn't have a problem.

Bob Collette

Click to expand...

Mike,

A problem was identified where an occasional paper jam would occur. Not all printers had the problem. It was solved via a change in the firmware timing sequence of the picker motor and capstan motor.

Bob

Thanks, Bob.

My 1400's been chugging along quite nicely. I haven't even noticed any of those firmware nuisances yet!

• Mike

Bob Collette said:

Mike,
A problem was identified where an occasional paper jam would occur.
Not all printers had the problem. It was solved via a change in
the firmware timing sequence of the picker motor and capstan motor.

Bob

Click to expand...

photo99 said:

Thanks, Bob.

My 1400's been chugging along quite nicely. I haven't even noticed
any of those firmware nuisances yet!

• Mike

Click to expand...

Mike,

Can you give us an idea of the quality of prints from the 1400? I currently use an Epson R800 inket but I would like a dye sub again. I had an Olympus P440 and I sold it but wish I hadn't. Can you tell us how the print quality compares to a high quality inkjet? Even better would be if you have experience with the Olympus P400/440 and how it compares to the Kodak?

Thanks much!
Todd
--
Todd Walker
http://www.toddwalker.net
http://www.twphotography.net
http://www.pbase.com/twalker294

Hi, Todd,

I own an Epson R800 as a companion to the Kodak 1400. The R800 is an outstanding printer, but I find myself using the 1400 most of the time now for fast event printing. It's really nice not having to deal with wondering if any R800 heads are clogged since I tend to print in batches once a week. I particularly like the Epson lustre paper look on the R800, so the R800 is sticking around.

I don't know what particular issues you had with the Olympus that led you to sell it, but I suspect that the general dye sub image qualities are very similar between the Olympus 400/440 and Kodak 1400 units. Color gamut and dynamic range of the two printers (Olympus and Kodak) should be fairly similar. I've never done a side-by-side comparison, though.

If you had banding or registration issues with the Olympus, I can tell you that the Kodak 1400 seems to have both under control in the unit that I have.

The Kodak 1400 unit definately feels much more robust than the Olympus 400/440, but it also takes up a lot more space!

• Mike

Todd Walker said:

photo99 said:

Thanks, Bob.

My 1400's been chugging along quite nicely. I haven't even noticed
any of those firmware nuisances yet!

• Mike

Click to expand...

Mike,

Can you give us an idea of the quality of prints from the 1400? I
currently use an Epson R800 inket but I would like a dye sub again.
I had an Olympus P440 and I sold it but wish I hadn't. Can you tell
us how the print quality compares to a high quality inkjet? Even
better would be if you have experience with the Olympus P400/440
and how it compares to the Kodak?

Thanks much!
Todd
--
Todd Walker
http://www.toddwalker.net
http://www.twphotography.net
http://www.pbase.com/twalker294

Click to expand...

photo99 said:

Hi, Todd,

I own an Epson R800 as a companion to the Kodak 1400. The R800 is
an outstanding printer, but I find myself using the 1400 most of
the time now for fast event printing. It's really nice not having
to deal with wondering if any R800 heads are clogged since I tend
to print in batches once a week. I particularly like the Epson
lustre paper look on the R800, so the R800 is sticking around.

I don't know what particular issues you had with the Olympus that
led you to sell it, but I suspect that the general dye sub image
qualities are very similar between the Olympus 400/440 and Kodak
1400 units. Color gamut and dynamic range of the two printers
(Olympus and Kodak) should be fairly similar. I've never done a
side-by-side comparison, though.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the reply Mike. I didn't have any issues with the P440 per se. I originally got it to do printing for things such as team pictures and such where I charge less than portrait sittings and therefore don't feel bad about giving a slightly inferior quality print. I usually use Mpix for my "serious" printing. When somebody is paying me $25 per 8x10 sheet, I want to give them the best so I use Mpix. For lower profit jobs however I would like to print my own. I sold the 440 because I wasn't doing much of the lower priced stuff and I simply wasn't using the printer much. I did a soccer team about a month ago and used my R800. The results were excellent with the Premium Luster paper but it took FOREVER to get all the prints made and I was longing for my 440 again. I should have just used Mpix but I really prefer the convenience and control that making my own prints gives me.I would love to have a dye sub that I could use for ALL my prints but I can't see using any currently available dye sub in the under $1000 range for portrait prints. Maybe it's just my own hangup, but for the money that I charge I want to give people the highest quality prints that I can.

photo99 said:

If you had banding or registration issues with the Olympus, I can
tell you that the Kodak 1400 seems to have both under control in
the unit that I have.

Click to expand...

Not at all. The prints from the 440 were perfect. I think my main hangup was the feel of the paper. It just didn't have the quality feel that prints from Mpix do.

Thanks so much for your thoughts!

--
Todd Walker
http://www.toddwalker.net
http://www.twphotography.net
http://www.pbase.com/twalker294