New Alps MD-5000 owner: Need help

[Teera]

I am a new Alps MD-5000 owner. I love it so much but would like to upgrade it to a dye sub printer. Need to know addresses of mail order stores that stock dye sub ugrade kit and dye sub paper and ink for Alps that will ship internationally.

Can't wait for the dye sub printing.
Thanks,
Teera

 

[Leon Wittwer]

Another consideration. Your 5000 prints dry micro prints at about 190 lines per inch which will provide a very nice print. This print will be very color fast, far more than any other consumer printer that I know of. I've been testing a variety of media for color permanence and the Alps MD 5000 dry micro prints are by far the best. They are comparable to "lab" prints on good Kodak paper. The bad news: the dye sub is less color fast than most ink jet printers. I performed very poorly in my tests. While the dye sub prints are a tiny bit better than the dry micro prints, in my oppinion, the nod goes to the dry micro prints for overall use. This also saves you $100 or so.

 

[Eric13613]

Another consideration. Your 5000 prints dry micro prints at about 190
lines per inch which will provide a very nice print. This print will be
very color fast, far more than any other consumer printer that I know of.
I've been testing a variety of media for color permanence and the Alps MD
5000 dry micro prints are by far the best. They are comparable to "lab"
prints on good Kodak paper. The bad news: the dye sub is less color
fast than most ink jet printers. I performed very poorly in my tests.
While the dye sub prints are a tiny bit better than the dry micro prints,
in my oppinion, the nod goes to the dry micro prints for overall use.
This also saves you $100 or so.

No offense Leon, but you have been persistantly posting that the Alps dye sub prints fade quickly. My dye sub prints have yet to fade. I've had the printer for over a year. You have also posted that you don't even have the 5000p, but the 1300. You have been the only one who claims that the 5000p isn't color-fast. How can you comment on the color-fastness(is that a word?) if you don't even have the printer you are commenting on. Seems that no one in the onelist alps section has posted about similar results. What gives?

I owned the original photosmart. The alps in dye sub was considerably better. Really not even close. My sister owns the Epson 750. While it produces an excellant quality print, in my opinion, it's not as good as my alps print. Although, it prints faster, obviously so, I have a 1520 that I use for everyday use. The cost per print is maybe 80 cents more per 8x10 print. But for 80 cents more, I have a print that from the start is better, water proof, and in my experience lasts longer. I have yet to have to reprint any pic.

So I guess I just don't have the same results that you do with my 5000p as you do with your 1300.

Eric Miller

 

[Leon Wittwer]

Another consideration. Your 5000 prints dry micro prints at about 190
lines per inch which will provide a very nice print. This print will be
very color fast, far more than any other consumer printer that I know of.
I've been testing a variety of media for color permanence and the Alps MD
5000 dry micro prints are by far the best. They are comparable to "lab"
prints on good Kodak paper. The bad news: the dye sub is less color
fast than most ink jet printers. I performed very poorly in my tests.
While the dye sub prints are a tiny bit better than the dry micro prints,
in my oppinion, the nod goes to the dry micro prints for overall use.
This also saves you $100 or so.

No offense Leon, but you have been persistantly posting that the Alps dye
sub prints fade quickly. My dye sub prints have yet to fade. I've had
the printer for over a year. You have also posted that you don't even
have the 5000p, but the 1300. You have been the only one who claims that
the 5000p isn't color-fast. How can you comment on the color-fastness(is
that a word?) if you don't even have the printer you are commenting on.
Seems that no one in the onelist alps section has posted about similar
results. What gives?

I owned the original photosmart. The alps in dye sub was considerably
better. Really not even close. My sister owns the Epson 750. While it
produces an excellant quality print, in my opinion, it's not as good as
my alps print. Although, it prints faster, obviously so, I have a 1520
that I use for everyday use. The cost per print is maybe 80 cents more
per 8x10 print. But for 80 cents more, I have a print that from the
start is better, water proof, and in my experience lasts longer. I have
yet to have to reprint any pic.

So I guess I just don't have the same results that you do with my 5000p
as you do with your 1300.

Eric Miller

Eric, As near as I could tell, the dye sub print process is identical in the MD 1300 and the MD 5000. Both printers use the same ribbon set and the same paper and have the same resolution of 600 dpi. I did two testing runs comparing Epson, HP,and Alps prints in a daylight window that was bright but with little sun. I printed two of everything. The first copy was the reference and the second was the test copy. Comparisions were done with my scanner and photoshop which allowed me to quantitatively measure the fading of the test

images. The images were a collection of thirty color swatches along with some portions of images for the subjective part of the test. I did two separate tests of the Alps print processes and the results were the same. The dye sub faded significantly quicker than the Epson OEM inks in an Epson 700. Since I can only approximately quantify the lux exposure in my tests, I use Epson 700 prints for a standard. I generally state results as better or poorer than the 700 prints. I'm not surprised that your prints have lasted a year. Under normal indoor conditions, a year is not unreasonable. If prints are kept in an album, the life can get much larger. As far as why I am the only one stating results on color fading, so far, I'm the only one that has gone to the trouble to do actual tests on some of the mainstream printers and reported them. I bought the MD 1300 because of the things that I read on the net that dye sub printing was very color fast and by implication the Alps process would be too. Unfortunately for my pocketbook, that turned out not to be true. I have an Alps MD 1300 for sale real cheap. Interested? If you are interested in doing your own prints, I will be willing to send you my test image and some Epson OEM prints so you can see for yourself.

 

[Eric13613]

Leon, I am not questioning the results that you came up with. However, in all your posts, you write that the Alps dye sub is not as colorfast as fact. When in actuality this is only your results from tests you did. Did you use several different lots of inks? It could be you had a bad ink cartridge. It could be that you had a bad printer for that matter. It just seems funny, that you and only you, post that the Alps is not colorfast. You seem to think, at least if I read your posts correctly, that the micro-dry inks are a better bet. Let me tell you, and anyone else who might be interested in this printer, the micro-dry ink prints are not even in the same ballpark in comparison to the dye sub.

I have no problem with you posting your opinion or your results about the Alps dye-sub. I just think that you should qualify your opinions and write "in my opinion", or "under my test results". I think you should also check into the comparisons between the 5000p and the 1300, because I don't beleive they have the same print head.

Eric Miller

Another consideration. Your 5000 prints dry micro prints at about 190
lines per inch which will provide a very nice print. This print will be
very color fast, far more than any other consumer printer that I know of.
I've been testing a variety of media for color permanence and the Alps MD
5000 dry micro prints are by far the best. They are comparable to "lab"
prints on good Kodak paper. The bad news: the dye sub is less color
fast than most ink jet printers. I performed very poorly in my tests.
While the dye sub prints are a tiny bit better than the dry micro prints,
in my oppinion, the nod goes to the dry micro prints for overall use.
This also saves you $100 or so.

No offense Leon, but you have been persistantly posting that the Alps dye
sub prints fade quickly. My dye sub prints have yet to fade. I've had
the printer for over a year. You have also posted that you don't even
have the 5000p, but the 1300. You have been the only one who claims that
the 5000p isn't color-fast. How can you comment on the color-fastness(is
that a word?) if you don't even have the printer you are commenting on.
Seems that no one in the onelist alps section has posted about similar
results. What gives?

I owned the original photosmart. The alps in dye sub was considerably
better. Really not even close. My sister owns the Epson 750. While it
produces an excellant quality print, in my opinion, it's not as good as
my alps print. Although, it prints faster, obviously so, I have a 1520
that I use for everyday use. The cost per print is maybe 80 cents more
per 8x10 print. But for 80 cents more, I have a print that from the
start is better, water proof, and in my experience lasts longer. I have
yet to have to reprint any pic.

So I guess I just don't have the same results that you do with my 5000p
as you do with your 1300.

Eric Miller

Eric, As near as I could tell, the dye sub print process is identical in
the MD 1300 and the MD 5000. Both printers use the same ribbon set and
the same paper and have the same resolution of 600 dpi. I did two
testing runs comparing Epson, HP,and Alps prints in a daylight window
that was bright but with little sun. I printed two of everything. The
first copy was the reference and the second was the test copy.
Comparisions were done with my scanner and photoshop which allowed me to
quantitatively measure the fading of the test
images. The images were a collection of thirty color swatches along with
some portions of images for the subjective part of the test. I did two
separate tests of the Alps print processes and the results were the same.
The dye sub faded significantly quicker than the Epson OEM inks in an
Epson 700. Since I can only approximately quantify the lux exposure in
my tests, I use Epson 700 prints for a standard. I generally state
results as better or poorer than the 700 prints. I'm not surprised that
your prints have lasted a year. Under normal indoor conditions, a year
is not unreasonable. If prints are kept in an album, the life can get
much larger. As far as why I am the only one stating results on color
fading, so far, I'm the only one that has gone to the trouble to do
actual tests on some of the mainstream printers and reported them. I
bought the MD 1300 because of the things that I read on the net that dye
sub printing was very color fast and by implication the Alps process
would be too. Unfortunately for my pocketbook, that turned out not to be
true. I have an Alps MD 1300 for sale real cheap. Interested? If you
are interested in doing your own prints, I will be willing to send you my
test image and some Epson OEM prints so you can see for yourself.

 

[Leon Wittwer]

Eric, I have done multiple tests so I believe that my results are representative of the fading properties of Alps dye sub prints. Fading is a function of the inks and the paper used. Even if the heads were different on the 5000 verses the 1300, that would not affect the fading results as long as both printers use the same ribbons and paper for dye sub prints. Nor would a "bad printer." The printer does very nice dye sub prints so it is unlikely that the printer is having a problem. The most likely reason that I am the only one reporting fading results on Alps and other printers is that I am the only person who is doing any testing. I have published my results and my testing procedures in detail some months ago and received no adverse comments. If you wish, I will send my test procedures to you and you can critique then yourself. In the absense of finding any problems with my test procedures, my results are not just an oppinion but are supported by data. By the way, where comparisons are possible, my results are not out of line with the Wilhelm Institute which does color fast testing professionally. I also am in contact with archival ink producers and my results as to fading and which ink is the weak link agree with their results. When I stated that dry micro prints were best, I was only referring to their color fast properties not print quality. I agree that the dye sub prints look better. I recommend that you do your own testing. Put a dye sub print up in a window. You will see fading in a few days if the window is in sun and in a couple of weeks if there is no sun. Then you will have a firm basis on which to discuss fading of Alps dye sub prints.

 

[Mike14243]

Need to know addresses of mail order
stores that stock dye sub ugrade kit
and dye sub paper and ink for Alps
that will ship internationally.

Try http://www.outpost.com

Upgrade kit in stock...$99

"Shipping Methods Outpost.com ships product internationally via Airborne Express International or DHL for delivery in approximately 48-72 hours plus additional time for local customs clearance. We're sorry, but we cannot ship international orders via U.S. Mail. Delivery time depends on product availability and shipping address. Orders shipped to an address different from the billing address will be delayed for verification (usually one extra day). Please see When to Expect Your Order under Shipping Information in the Help section for more specific information on product availability status and delivery time estimates."

 

[Sue13643]

I am a new Alps MD-5000 owner. I love it so much but would like to
upgrade it to a dye sub printer. Need to know addresses of mail order
stores that stock dye sub ugrade kit and dye sub paper and ink for Alps
that will ship internationally.

Can't wait for the dye sub printing.
Thanks,
Teera

Did you try the Alps site?

http://www.alpsusa.com/new/

Also links to several languages besides English.

 

[Brad Bates]

Eric,

I hear you loud and clear! I too am an Alps 1300 owner of over a year. I have prints hanging in my house basement (low light) as well as in my office (reasonable mixed light fluourescent and outdoor) and as yet, I have not noticed a fading problem. Perhaps my eye is being fooled or I am being gradually conditioned to the "new" colors being shown, but my senses tell me they still look essentially the same as the originals. I have not done the extensive testing that Leon obviously has, and I respect his findings, but I am sure glad that at least in the case of my Alps, the 'fading issue' is a non existent one for me.

I thoroghly enjoy my prints up to 8x10 and am eagerly looking forward to the tabloid sized printer rumoured to be in the works.

The words of both you and Leon ring true, try it for yourself. Find a friend who has the Alps and get a print from them to hold onto it for a while, or just go out and get the printer --- Trust me, you won't look back in regret as you pass around your truly photographic (ie NO DOTS WHATSOEVER) prints. I like that!

Keep up all the good postings,

Brad

I have no problem with you posting your opinion or your results about the
Alps dye-sub. I just think that you should qualify your opinions and
write "in my opinion", or "under my test results". I think you should
also check into the comparisons between the 5000p and the 1300, because I
don't beleive they have the same print head.

Eric Miller

Another consideration. Your 5000 prints dry micro prints at about 190
lines per inch which will provide a very nice print. This print will be
very color fast, far more than any other consumer printer that I know of.
I've been testing a variety of media for color permanence and the Alps MD
5000 dry micro prints are by far the best. They are comparable to "lab"
prints on good Kodak paper. The bad news: the dye sub is less color
fast than most ink jet printers. I performed very poorly in my tests.
While the dye sub prints are a tiny bit better than the dry micro prints,
in my oppinion, the nod goes to the dry micro prints for overall use.
This also saves you $100 or so.

No offense Leon, but you have been persistantly posting that the Alps dye
sub prints fade quickly. My dye sub prints have yet to fade. I've had
the printer for over a year. You have also posted that you don't even
have the 5000p, but the 1300. You have been the only one who claims that
the 5000p isn't color-fast. How can you comment on the color-fastness(is
that a word?) if you don't even have the printer you are commenting on.
Seems that no one in the onelist alps section has posted about similar
results. What gives?

I owned the original photosmart. The alps in dye sub was considerably
better. Really not even close. My sister owns the Epson 750. While it
produces an excellant quality print, in my opinion, it's not as good as
my alps print. Although, it prints faster, obviously so, I have a 1520
that I use for everyday use. The cost per print is maybe 80 cents more
per 8x10 print. But for 80 cents more, I have a print that from the
start is better, water proof, and in my experience lasts longer. I have
yet to have to reprint any pic.

So I guess I just don't have the same results that you do with my 5000p
as you do with your 1300.

Eric Miller

Eric, As near as I could tell, the dye sub print process is identical in
the MD 1300 and the MD 5000. Both printers use the same ribbon set and
the same paper and have the same resolution of 600 dpi. I did two
testing runs comparing Epson, HP,and Alps prints in a daylight window
that was bright but with little sun. I printed two of everything. The
first copy was the reference and the second was the test copy.
Comparisions were done with my scanner and photoshop which allowed me to
quantitatively measure the fading of the test
images. The images were a collection of thirty color swatches along with
some portions of images for the subjective part of the test. I did two
separate tests of the Alps print processes and the results were the same.
The dye sub faded significantly quicker than the Epson OEM inks in an
Epson 700. Since I can only approximately quantify the lux exposure in
my tests, I use Epson 700 prints for a standard. I generally state
results as better or poorer than the 700 prints. I'm not surprised that
your prints have lasted a year. Under normal indoor conditions, a year
is not unreasonable. If prints are kept in an album, the life can get
much larger. As far as why I am the only one stating results on color
fading, so far, I'm the only one that has gone to the trouble to do
actual tests on some of the mainstream printers and reported them. I
bought the MD 1300 because of the things that I read on the net that dye
sub printing was very color fast and by implication the Alps process
would be too. Unfortunately for my pocketbook, that turned out not to be
true. I have an Alps MD 1300 for sale real cheap. Interested? If you
are interested in doing your own prints, I will be willing to send you my
test image and some Epson OEM prints so you can see for yourself.

 

[Leon Wittwer]

Brad, Fading is in the eye of the beholder and your eyes unconsciously corrects a lot of defects in pictures. I told my boss that a picture that he had in his office had faded. He said that it had not faded and looked the same as when he mounded it. I took it off the wall and out of the frame. Fading was obvious between the parts subjected to light and those hidden by the frame. Fortunately, my boss accepts defeat graciously. When I do my testing, I always do two prints. One is protected in the dark and one is tested. I judge everything relative to the reference print. As an experiment, you might reprint the picture that you have in your office and compare the new with the old and see if there is any fading.

 

[Eric13613]

Okay. So you say you did multiple tests. Under what conditions? What was the temperature of the window while the tests where being conducted? What was the humidity level? How much sunlite? How long under direct sun per day? Did you use overcoat on the dye sub prints? You claim to be a published tester? Where? Who scrutinized your results?

You claim that the reason why no one else is reporting this excellerated fading is because you are the only one doing testing. Did you ever think that no one is reporting fading because there is no fading to report? The Alps 1300 has been here at least 3 years. Why is it that no else is complaining about this supposed problem? I could not find 1 complaint about fading using Deja.com. Tell me why this is Leon.

I cruised by http://www.wilhelm-research.com/ to see if in fact Wilhelm also reported this fading problem. No results were posted. Leon, do you have an in at Wilhelm where he would release his results to you alone? As I said in my earlier comments, your comments are opinion. Because you taped some pictures to a window and took some notes, in my opinion, does not make for a thorough test. When I owned my Photosmart people were posting like crazy the fading properties of the Epsons compared to the PS. Other than Leon Wittwer, have any of you read a post by another, that claimed such poor color fast photos by an Alps dye sub? If you have had the same problems, let us know.

Oh, and Leon. Earlier in this thread you wrote that the Epson 1200/750/700 looked better than the Alps in dye sub mode. Now you write that "I agree that the dye sub prints look better." Well, which is it? You also might want to read the December 27th edition of Phil's news. Nai-Chi Li concluded that the 5000p out performed the Epson's in quality. I guess in your estimation, he should write a follow-up in a week that the Alps prints disappeared off the page.

And like I said earlier, Leon, I have no problems with you posting about your experience with the Alps 1300 dye sub. But your crude experiments, don't prove that the 5000p prints are not colorfast. Especially, when no else seems to be complaining about it.

Eric Miller

Eric, I have done multiple tests so I believe that my results are
representative of the fading properties of Alps dye sub prints. Fading
is a function of the inks and the paper used. Even if the heads were
different on the 5000 verses the 1300, that would not affect the fading
results as long as both printers use the same ribbons and paper for dye
sub prints. Nor would a "bad printer." The printer does very nice dye
sub prints so it is unlikely that the printer is having a problem. The
most likely reason that I am the only one reporting fading results on
Alps and other printers is that I am the only person who is doing any
testing. I have published my results and my testing procedures in detail
some months ago and received no adverse comments. If you wish, I will
send my test procedures to you and you can critique then yourself. In
the absense of finding any problems with my test procedures, my results
are not just an oppinion but are supported by data. By the way, where
comparisons are possible, my results are not out of line with the Wilhelm
Institute which does color fast testing professionally. I also am in
contact with archival ink producers and my results as to fading and which
ink is the weak link agree with their results. When I stated that dry
micro prints were best, I was only referring to their color fast
properties not print quality. I agree that the dye sub prints look
better. I recommend that you do your own testing. Put a dye sub print
up in a window. You will see fading in a few days if the window is in
sun and in a couple of weeks if there is no sun. Then you will have a
firm basis on which to discuss fading of Alps dye sub prints.