«

wrote:

> First, I'd like to thank all who have helped me in the past in this
> newsgroup. I went from an old 35mm SLR to the Nikon D70 DSLR/ SB-800
> speedlight which many of you suggested. So far, I am very satisfied with
> it.
> I'm now looking for a Dye-Sub Printer for 4"x6" prints. Could you
> suggest a good model? (with regard to quality, durability, and economy).
> I'm shooting in the Nikon RAW format and am editing with Nikon Capture and
> Photoshop CS2. Thanks in advance for suggestions. I'd also like to hear
> any negative comments you have about your suggestions. I'm concerned that
> all the printer review sites are biased towards the manufacturers.
>
>
>
I forgot to mention in my previous epistle that I initially bought the
Sony dye sub printer. It really SUCKED!!!!! I could never get a decent
picture, the colors were always off, sometimes the computer wouldn't
recognize it. It is gathering dust in my garage; it was a real piece of
junk.

On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 11:04:39 -0700, Oscar The Grouch wrote:

> Geez, you ask for comments on a dye sub printer and you get a bunch of
> garbage replies...none of them related to your quest.

This is almost hilarious, as your points wandered farther off from
what the OP asked for than anyone else. Would you like an extensive
listing of them, or are you capable of figuring them out for
yourself?

On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 14:50:04 GMT, Scott in Florida <> wrote:

>>>
Yes it is nice here and up to 47 degrees on one February day. But our damned
winter still takes us down to 15 centigrades during the day and 2-3 at night.
Wish I had not given all my jumpers away as we left UK behind. Still I would
like to visit Florida again and see if I could get one of the armadillos in the
camera - however I want a live one. Judgin from the roads, there must be
millions of them - here we kill kangaroos - makes a bit more of an impact on the
car and passengers so we try to avoid them.

However there are so many things one wants to do when age threatens lifestyles.
Kenya and Tanzania was our hunting (camera) grounds from the UK. Lots of pics
could be had there with the new equipment.

Some 38 years ago I was standing within 6 foot of an Alligator in the
Everglades. They seem to be as tame as our fresh water crocs. I still have the
slide somewhere but unfortunately the colours are not what they used to be.

Borge, Perth
Pentium P4 3.0 Ghz, 1 Gb memory, 600 GB disk space
Olympus E300, Pentax Optio S, Canon S1 IS.

ASAAR wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 11:04:39 -0700, Oscar The Grouch wrote:
>
>
>>Geez, you ask for comments on a dye sub printer and you get a bunch of
>>garbage replies...none of them related to your quest.
>
>
> This is almost hilarious, as your points wandered farther off from
> what the OP asked for than anyone else. Would you like an extensive
> listing of them, or are you capable of figuring them out for
> yourself?
>
And what have you contributed to his topic besides trolling? How
convenient that in your reply you omitted my comments on the Canon and
Olympus printers. Cheers!

What are HiTi printers? Never heard of them.

SteveJ wrote:
> Sure the HiTi printers are one of the best and cost runs about 0.40 per
> print, cheaper than Kodacks, Hp, or Sony Dy subs. Epson prints suck.
>
>
> "ASAAR" <> wrote in message
> news:...
>
>>On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 16:54:06 -0400, <> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> I'm now looking for a Dye-Sub Printer for 4"x6" prints. Could you
>>>suggest a good model? (with regard to quality, durability, and economy).
>>>I'm shooting in the Nikon RAW format and am editing with Nikon Capture
>>>and Photoshop CS2.
>>
>> Is there any reason why it has to be a dye-sub printer? Epson's
>>4"x6" printer produces high quality, durable prints (water resistant
>>and tested to have much greater longevity than other personal
>>printers, much longer than commerically printed photos too). It
>>also seems to be the cheapest per print (26 cents/per vs. 40 to more
>>than 50 cents/per using other printers).
>>
>
>
>

Did a Google search and found their site. I'll have to read up on them.

SteveJ wrote:
> Sure the HiTi printers are one of the best and cost runs about 0.40 per
> print, cheaper than Kodacks, Hp, or Sony Dy subs. Epson prints suck.
>
>
> "ASAAR" <> wrote in message
> news:...
>
>>On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 16:54:06 -0400, <> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> I'm now looking for a Dye-Sub Printer for 4"x6" prints. Could you
>>>suggest a good model? (with regard to quality, durability, and economy).
>>>I'm shooting in the Nikon RAW format and am editing with Nikon Capture
>>>and Photoshop CS2.
>>
>> Is there any reason why it has to be a dye-sub printer? Epson's
>>4"x6" printer produces high quality, durable prints (water resistant
>>and tested to have much greater longevity than other personal
>>printers, much longer than commerically printed photos too). It
>>also seems to be the cheapest per print (26 cents/per vs. 40 to more
>>than 50 cents/per using other printers).
>>
>
>
>

On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 16:54:06 -0400, <> wrote:

Try this question over in comp.periphs.printers


************************************************** ***

"It is a good thing to read books, and need not be a
bad thing to write them, but in any case, it is a
pious thing to collect them."

Fredrick Locker-Lampson
(1821-1895)

Armadillos in Florida? Sure you weren't in Texas? Well the alligator was
in Florida.


nesredep egrob wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 14:50:04 GMT, Scott in Florida <> wrote:
>
>
> Yes it is nice here and up to 47 degrees on one February day. But our damned
> winter still takes us down to 15 centigrades during the day and 2-3 at night.
> Wish I had not given all my jumpers away as we left UK behind. Still I would
> like to visit Florida again and see if I could get one of the armadillos in the
> camera - however I want a live one. Judgin from the roads, there must be
> millions of them - here we kill kangaroos - makes a bit more of an impact on the
> car and passengers so we try to avoid them.
>
> However there are so many things one wants to do when age threatens lifestyles.
> Kenya and Tanzania was our hunting (camera) grounds from the UK. Lots of pics
> could be had there with the new equipment.
>
> Some 38 years ago I was standing within 6 foot of an Alligator in the
> Everglades. They seem to be as tame as our fresh water crocs. I still have the
> slide somewhere but unfortunately the colours are not what they used to be.
>
> Borge, Perth
> Pentium P4 3.0 Ghz, 1 Gb memory, 600 GB disk space
> Olympus E300, Pentax Optio S, Canon S1 IS.

On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 08:44:53 -0700, Oscar the Grouch again griped:


>> This is almost hilarious, as your points wandered farther off from
>> what the OP asked for than anyone else. Would you like an extensive
>> listing of them, or are you capable of figuring them out for
>> yourself?
>
> And what have you contributed to his topic besides trolling?

Ah yes, the best defense is a good offense. But if you knew what
a troll was you'd have called another play.


> How convenient that in your reply you omitted my comments on the
> Canon and Olympus printers. Cheers!

I guess my assumption that you'd be capable of figuring out how
your points wandered off from what the OP was looking for was wrong.
So I'll list a few. First, starting your initial reply with:

> Geez, you ask for comments on a dye sub printer and you get a bunch of
> garbage replies...none of them related to your quest.

which sure looks like the hallmark of a troll. The OP asked for
a dye-sub printer, and I didn't say that he shouldn't get one, but
wanted him to be aware that some of the 4"x6" ink-jet printers don't
have the limitations that some of their larger counterparts are
known for - smudging when wet, short lifespan, etc. So this may NOT
conflict with what he/she is looking for. You, on the other hand
have no qualms about discussing printers that don't fit the OP's
needs. He asked for (among other things) a 4"x6" printer that was
economical and produced high quality prints. So you talk about the
Canon Selph, which you admit to not being sure if it's dye-sub or
inkjet, but it really doesn't matter, since you say the quality
(vivid colors) doesn't match that of your Canon inkjet printer.
It's cost per print is far higher than those printed by the Epson
PictureMate, and they don't last nearly as long.

What else? You mention the Olympus 400 and it's replacement, the
440. Quality is good you say, but it's a larger 5"x7" printer that
(as you note) is a "monster" and quite heavy. You may be able to
get it for less than the price listed in B&H's catalog ($449), but
there goes more of the "economy" the OP was looking for. And you
say again, that its colors aren't as vivid as those produced by your
Canon inkjet. So far you're making my suggestion to consider a
non-dye-sub printer a good one.

Then you talk about Epson's slow 825 inkjet printer. Is this a
4"x6" printer that the OP inquired about? Well, you also mention
the Epson 2400, which is far larger, heavier and more expensive than
what? What again? Oh yes, the little, economical 4"x6" printer
that the OP was asking about. Funny how easy that was to forget.

Then you complain about Epson's perforated 4"x6" paper which you
didn't like because it was a PIA to feed properly into the printer
and you still had to remove the perforated tabs. What you are
evidently ignorant of is that the 4"x6" paper Epson provides in a
kit (with ink cartridge) for their PictureMate printer has no
perforations at all. You can even buy 4"x6" sheets of Epson paper
in packs of 100 (without cartridges) that also has no perforations.
You may have had an Epson 825 printer, but it is nothing like the
Epson 4"x6" PictureMate printer, which was not designed to take
8"x10" paper. Whether it can accept the special 4"x6" paper that
has perforated tabs, I have no idea so I won't speculate on that.

You then add that all of your printers could print sizes up to
8"x10" and an inkjet printer would be needed if larger prints were
desired. Woo hoo. Still lusting after the large 13"x44" Epson
printers? They're all far cries from the little, economical,
convenient 4"x6" printers the OP wanted to hear about.

Happy trolling . . .