dan_ling Posted December 4, 2003 Share Posted December 4, 2003 I'm making the move to digital. I have bought a new PC and a monitor and a scanner Minolta Scan Dual III and I'm ready to make the next move and buy a digital printer. I was considering the Epson 1280 until I saw that the 960 was of a newer technology and I would only sacrafice speed and size of printing. Having read the reviews extensively it seems both printers are of good quality though the 1280 seems to have a longer track record. Any suggestions as to which way I should lean? And is the quality of the prints different between the two? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark_kinter Posted December 4, 2003 Share Posted December 4, 2003 Both of those printers will yield excellent quality prints. However, neither uses ink that is classified as archival. This gets into a fuzzy subject that I'm sure the participants here can verbalize on. IF you do a lot of things properly, the prints will last quite a while. If you treat them as a store processed photo, they will fade in 6 months or so. This whole subject gets frustrating when attempting to get to the bottom of the truth. DONT'T EVEN BEGIN TO TRUST THE TECH HELP AT EPSON! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emre Posted December 4, 2003 Share Posted December 4, 2003 I would get the 960 because it is better, and your scanner can not produce enough information to print bigger than Letter/A4 anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dan_ling Posted December 5, 2003 Author Share Posted December 5, 2003 Tust no one seems to be the mantra these days.... I was hoping i could print to frame and store long term. Its disappointing to hear the maximum size off a minolta scan is 8x 10 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bob_rannells Posted December 5, 2003 Share Posted December 5, 2003 I've produced excellent 11X14" prints from scanners with similar resolution. With interpolation, I've gone up to 16X24 with good results. The Epson 1280 will give you very good photo quality. Once you go up to a certain level of quality with a printer I think it is very difficult to see any difference between models. My choice would be to go for the larger of the two printers, the 1280. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chip Posted December 5, 2003 Share Posted December 5, 2003 Dan, Your scanner is capable of producing good scans that can be resized with resonable care to huge sizes. Whoever said that you can't go bigger than 8x10 is an idiot. According to him I can't print larger than 6x8 from my EOS 1D and yet I've made plenty of 13x19 prints with my 1280 and many people have incredible 16x20's hanging on their walls from this same EOS 1D camera. New technology is not better technology. Every time you see a hot young girl go by do you toss out the wife and kids? Okay, okay, some of you do but the point is that if you learn how to maximize image quality with good tools you won't need the latest printer. The 1280 makes incredibly good prints if you take the time to learn how to edit and prep your scans or image files. No printer, no matter how new can print what's not in your image file. If it ain't in the file it ain't gonna print. The Epson 1280 is a well known photo printer and is in many people's opinion the printer to beat in the small paper output size market. Many pros use this printer to produce prints for sale. Don't limit yourself, think big and put them on the wall! HTH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emre Posted December 5, 2003 Share Posted December 5, 2003 Where on earth did the Canon 1D enter the debate? He's talking about a film scanner for heaven's sake. I dare you to make a good 13x19 print off a Minolta DSIII. Oh, and the 960 IS a better printer than the 1280. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dan_ling Posted December 5, 2003 Author Share Posted December 5, 2003 thank you every one for your responses emre can you really tell the difference between a print made from a 1280 and a 960 Really what I am asking is 2 picolitres really that different from 4 picolitres. I'm a biochemist by trade and i understand the size of a picolitre and its really stinkin small Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emre Posted December 5, 2003 Share Posted December 5, 2003 All modern inkjet printers are in the sub-10 pl category, and one can see a difference between their output. This is due not only to the size of the droplets, but also the precision with which they are layed down. My recommendation was based not only on the droplet size: the 960 has true 1440 dpi resolution (versus 720 dpi for the 1280); the 960 has individual ink cartridges. Most importantly, you simply will not be able to make satisfactory 13x19 prints from your scanner, so I believe it makes more sense to have better Letter-size prints now, and buy a better, new printer when you either buy a good digital camera or a more capable scanner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emre Posted December 6, 2003 Share Posted December 6, 2003 <i>...is 2 picolitres really that different from 4 picolitres?</i> <p> Here is a review that answers your question, albeit for Canon printers: http://www.tomshardware.com/consumer/20030509/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
casey mcallister Posted December 6, 2003 Share Posted December 6, 2003 If you plan on printing a lot of photos...don't cheat yourself! Get the Epson 2200. The print quality is FANTASTIC, and archival is better than most. I'm a DSLR type, but have taken an image from a 4 megapixel Sony 'point and shoot' and got a great 13 x 19. Bye they bye, art is opinion...my preference is matte paper, cause for me the glossy stuff looks like doodoo when viewing it off center. William Casey McAllister Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chip Posted December 7, 2003 Share Posted December 7, 2003 Dan, Before all the hoop-la of 4,000ppi and 5,600ppi scanners the 2,400-2,800ppi scanners were making perfectly nice large prints, BIGGER than the the Epson 960 can make. A decent 2,800ppi scanner like the DSIII while modest in specs by today's standards is fully capable of producing files that (as I posted previously), can be resized with care to produce larger prints than the 960 can produce. Don't sell youself short and buy a small format printer unless you only print small prints. If you have good chromes or negs scan them at max. resolution and bit depth and suck the resulting file in to PhotoShop and have at it. My EOS 1D is a mere 4MP DSLR and has only 2,496 pixels on the LONG side and it makes incredible 13"x19" prints on the Epson 1280S and 2200 printers that I'm using. These same files have been output on larger Epson inkjets and LightJet (30"x50"@305dpi), printers with excellent results. I used to get large drum scans made of my best chromes. I stopped getting as many drum scans once I bought a decent film scanner. The reason is that you can produce pretty good scans with moderately priced equipment. I picked up a nice new Polaroid SS4000 when they first came out and my people have been pretty happy with the images it manages pull off out of my chromes. Some of these images have been output as very large images and look very good. My point is that you shouldn't be afraid to buy a bigger printer, the image quality of your scanner is good enough and can be resized to produce images that can go well beyond what the scanner can produce at it's native resolution. If you have good images, print them BIG you will love them! Cheers P.S. If you have problems with your SDIII image files email me and I'll help you. Don't bother to ask Emre, he doesn't have a clue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emre Posted December 8, 2003 Share Posted December 8, 2003 30x50 prints from a 4MP file ... I rest my case. P.S. I like your pictures. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dario_spadoni Posted December 8, 2003 Share Posted December 8, 2003 My 2 cents. I have the Scan Dual III,and just recived the Epson 1280 last week. The Epson plus scanned slides [asa 100] plus a little Photoshop, has produced GREAT 11"x17". Color, sharpness, and detail. All there.I have tried Epson's Panoramic paper 8.3"x23.4" for some of the pan's I have made. WOW, far better the I hoped for. Very, very happy with the 1280. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chip Posted December 9, 2003 Share Posted December 9, 2003 Emre, What 4MP files? You rest your case? It seems to me that it needs excercise. Thanks for the message Dario. If Dario can get good results and I and about half a zillion other people can get good results, why can't you? Cheers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now