What the Pros Use

John said:

I always here people jumping up and down about the
low cost printers (sub 1000). Are these actually the
printers that professional digital photographers are using?
I want to know if professionals are printing their own
are using a service? My wife won't let my buy a
Iris or Lightjet 5000....

-John

Click to expand...

Stan Disbrow said:

John,

I'm still using an outside service to produce saleable prints. The
problem with the
produced are in question. I do use a small inkjet for printing
samples and for my own use, as I can easily reprint any prints that
fade or get messed up. I can't bring myself to actually charge
money for something I'm not sure will last, so I use an outside
printer for those.

The small inkjet I'm currently using is a Canon BJC-8200 six-color
inkjet. This has the best output for the money that I've found. I
don't care for the 8200's output as a plain paper printer (it's
slow and the thin ink bleeds a bit on plain paper), but I use a
laser printer for that and the 8200 is strictly a photo printer.

I am going to be adding two more printers right after New Years'.
One will most likely be the Kodak 8650R Dye Sub for 8x10 and
smaller prints. The other will be the Kodak 3043 large-format
inkjet (43" wide and as long as you'd like), as I have need to
produce shots up to 36x48. Both these printers are equivalent to
those used by many outside service providers.

Stan

Click to expand...

John said:

Stan,

Thanks so much for the reply. Have you ever tested the Kodak?
Is the 3043 better than the Epson 7500 or 9500? I wonder if
they are sharing the same jet technology.

I know the IRIS is an inkjet as well, but it has been sub 5 picolitre
for a while. The others seem to be just now catching up. I

I like the look of the Kodak Dye Sub smaller guy. Is the image
quality able to surpass something like a Epson 5000 with EFI
Fiery RIP?

Thanks a lot for the feedback gentlemen.

-John

Click to expand...

Warren Cook said:

I use a Fugix printer as my primary printer, and use an Epson 3000
for larger prints, or for those mis-directed customers, looking for
over-saturated, primary color - rich prints.

Click to expand...

Protographer said:

for that reason. In the meantime, since no one know how long Kodak
will be bring this to market, does anyone know where to get a non
glossy laminating machine that will add a non glossy finish to
prints without making the print look laminated, as in, in a sealed
package....I just want to add a top layer to the print with the
different finish. Some time in the past, I've read a post from
someone who was doing this with the Kodak dye sub printers. More
info please, if you are reading this.

Click to expand...

Stan Disbrow said:

I'm trying to find a way to test the 3043 at this point. No one
around this area is a dealer for it. I've been chatting with the
guys at Imaging Spectrum about printers, and I might have to send
them a file and have them ship me a print from one.

I doubt that the Epson and the Kodak share much technology, as I
have found that the Kodak is a rebranded Mutoh for this model
series. For my needs, I want a six-color with the capability to
switch between dye and pigment inks. The main reason I was looking
at Kodak is that the media used on such a printer needs to be
matched up to the inks used, and I feel that Kodak has a real good
handle on this issue.

I could also be talked into the Epson or Ilford models, as I think
they have the printing part figured out, as well. Kodak appears to
be more into the customer service aspects of their business than
anyone else. That is what is really making me lean towards Kodak,
both for input and output devices. I have the Nikon D1 and the
Kodak DCS460, and guess which company has the better support? Can
you guess why I'm also looking at replacing the D1 with a DCS620x?

As for the 8650R, 8660 and 8670 dye sub printers from Kodak, I have
seen a couple of test prints from the 8670. They are very nice,
indeed. I wouldn't care to sell prints off of the small inkjets,
but these Kodak printers have output as clean and durable (as far
as I can tell) as prints out of the darkroom. I'd have no
reservations in selling prints made on one.

Bob Reis has a thread over on the Printer Forum about the 8650R he
recently got. He also sent me a recent e-mail that goes into a bit
more detail than his post. The important parts are that Kodak has a
SW driver that allows you to print photos from SW other than
photoshop (like Qimage, etc) on the raste printers withou the need
of the postscript module. The 8650R is raster, unless you add a
postscript card, and the 8670 is already postscript. The 8650R is
$2500, and the 8670 is more like $6000. Bob can't tell a difference
between photo output on the 8650R over the 8670, so the 8650R looks
like a really good deal.

I've also looked into the Fuji Pictrography printers, but there
have been some questions about the print longevity in other threads
around this board lately. That's one concern I have about those
printers. The other concern is that I might not have enough usage
to justify the higher cost of these printers. Heck, I had the same
concern about the 8670, but with the 8650R being so much less
costly, I can justify picking one of them up.

My big requirement is in larger size output, which is why I was
looking into the large format equipment. Still, I'd like to have
something on hand that isn't inkjet for the smaller prints as well.
Right now, I'm sending it all out and I'm not all that happy with
what I get back at times. I'd rather keep it all in-house just to
keep control over the quality.

Stan

John said:

Stan,

Thanks so much for the reply. Have you ever tested the Kodak?
Is the 3043 better than the Epson 7500 or 9500? I wonder if
they are sharing the same jet technology.

I know the IRIS is an inkjet as well, but it has been sub 5 picolitre
for a while. The others seem to be just now catching up. I

I like the look of the Kodak Dye Sub smaller guy. Is the image
quality able to surpass something like a Epson 5000 with EFI
Fiery RIP?

Thanks a lot for the feedback gentlemen.

-John

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Stan Disbrow said:

I'm trying to find a way to test the 3043 at this point. No one
around this area is a dealer for it. I've been chatting with the
guys at Imaging Spectrum about printers, and I might have to send
them a file and have them ship me a print from one.

I doubt that the Epson and the Kodak share much technology, as I
have found that the Kodak is a rebranded Mutoh for this model
series. For my needs, I want a six-color with the capability to
switch between dye and pigment inks. The main reason I was looking
at Kodak is that the media used on such a printer needs to be
matched up to the inks used, and I feel that Kodak has a real good
handle on this issue.

I could also be talked into the Epson or Ilford models, as I think
they have the printing part figured out, as well. Kodak appears to
be more into the customer service aspects of their business than
anyone else. That is what is really making me lean towards Kodak,
both for input and output devices. I have the Nikon D1 and the
Kodak DCS460, and guess which company has the better support? Can
you guess why I'm also looking at replacing the D1 with a DCS620x?

As for the 8650R, 8660 and 8670 dye sub printers from Kodak, I have
seen a couple of test prints from the 8670. They are very nice,
indeed. I wouldn't care to sell prints off of the small inkjets,
but these Kodak printers have output as clean and durable (as far
as I can tell) as prints out of the darkroom. I'd have no
reservations in selling prints made on one.

Bob Reis has a thread over on the Printer Forum about the 8650R he
recently got. He also sent me a recent e-mail that goes into a bit
more detail than his post. The important parts are that Kodak has a
SW driver that allows you to print photos from SW other than
photoshop (like Qimage, etc) on the raste printers withou the need
of the postscript module. The 8650R is raster, unless you add a
postscript card, and the 8670 is already postscript. The 8650R is
$2500, and the 8670 is more like $6000. Bob can't tell a difference
between photo output on the 8650R over the 8670, so the 8650R looks
like a really good deal.

I've also looked into the Fuji Pictrography printers, but there
have been some questions about the print longevity in other threads
around this board lately. That's one concern I have about those
printers. The other concern is that I might not have enough usage
to justify the higher cost of these printers. Heck, I had the same
concern about the 8670, but with the 8650R being so much less
costly, I can justify picking one of them up.

My big requirement is in larger size output, which is why I was
looking into the large format equipment. Still, I'd like to have
something on hand that isn't inkjet for the smaller prints as well.
Right now, I'm sending it all out and I'm not all that happy with
what I get back at times. I'd rather keep it all in-house just to
keep control over the quality.

Stan

John said:

Stan,

Thanks so much for the reply. Have you ever tested the Kodak?
Is the 3043 better than the Epson 7500 or 9500? I wonder if
they are sharing the same jet technology.

I know the IRIS is an inkjet as well, but it has been sub 5 picolitre
for a while. The others seem to be just now catching up. I

I like the look of the Kodak Dye Sub smaller guy. Is the image
quality able to surpass something like a Epson 5000 with EFI
Fiery RIP?

Thanks a lot for the feedback gentlemen.

-John

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Pepe said:

Protographer said:

for that reason. In the meantime, since no one know how long Kodak
will be bring this to market, does anyone know where to get a non
glossy laminating machine that will add a non glossy finish to
prints without making the print look laminated, as in, in a sealed
package....I just want to add a top layer to the print with the
different finish. Some time in the past, I've read a post from
someone who was doing this with the Kodak dye sub printers. More
info please, if you are reading this.

Click to expand...

I am not sure if it will work with dye-sub prints but inkjet prints
can be applied with a special coating to make it last longer - the
sprays come in different texture - glossy, matte and another one.

Click to expand...

protographer said:

Such sprays just melt the UV extralife media laminate on the Kodak
dye sub prints. I know, I've tried it.

me

Pepe said:

Protographer said:

for that reason. In the meantime, since no one know how long Kodak
will be bring this to market, does anyone know where to get a non
glossy laminating machine that will add a non glossy finish to
prints without making the print look laminated, as in, in a sealed
package....I just want to add a top layer to the print with the
different finish. Some time in the past, I've read a post from
someone who was doing this with the Kodak dye sub printers. More
info please, if you are reading this.

Click to expand...

I am not sure if it will work with dye-sub prints but inkjet prints
can be applied with a special coating to make it last longer - the
sprays come in different texture - glossy, matte and another one.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

john Tibbitts said:

Gentlemen,

Thanks for the incredible insight and advice. Well....I bought
a 8660. The only problem...it does not support Win2K. The
bummer is that I called Kodak first to verify it would as it was
on their website. Then, once I had problems installing it, they
told me emphatically it would not work with my OS. That sucks.
It looks like a good printer. They said if I wait there will be
a driver.

Any ideas? (Get a MAC? )

Click to expand...

John Kruper said:

Its not a great solution, since its not a "real" printer driver,
but it works ok if you don't mind its limits. The big one is you
have to use Photoshop to print. Instead of File Print, you do File
Export.

http://www.kodak.com/global/en/service/software/8660/exportModule.shtml

john Tibbitts said:

Gentlemen,

Thanks for the incredible insight and advice. Well....I bought
a 8660. The only problem...it does not support Win2K. The
bummer is that I called Kodak first to verify it would as it was
on their website. Then, once I had problems installing it, they
told me emphatically it would not work with my OS. That sucks.
It looks like a good printer. They said if I wait there will be
a driver.

Any ideas? (Get a MAC? )

Click to expand...

Click to expand...