Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > Costco / Walmart Photo Machines

Reply
Thread Tools

Costco / Walmart Photo Machines

 
 
Paul D. Sullivan
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-09-2007
Tektronix Phasers... I remember using those. Very vidid color,
but messy as heck.

> Per Ron Baird:
>> Kodak has been working on its inks for several years
>> and has a great technology at this point.

>
> Is wax dead?
>
> Some years back, I did a high school reunion book on printers
> that used chunks of colored wax instead of ink and thought the
> results were pretty good - or at least good enough for me.
>
> What keeps me thinking of wax is the apparent simplicity -
> just those solid blocks of "stuff" - No ink capsule, no little
> plastic sheets to protect the ink jets, and so-forth.
>
> Seems like if it were made more cost-competitive it would be
> an attractive alternative.



 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Just D
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-09-2007
"Paul D. Sullivan" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:7GRyh.9408$xu4.4446@trndny04...
> Tektronix Phasers... I remember using those. Very vidid color,
> but messy as heck.


Maybe machines are not very bad, but I never was able to get a good quality
of my pictures, in most cases these brainless operators decided to reformat,
reframe the images so that sometimes I was getting the trees without the top
part, the portraits were without the part of the face, etc. They were
explaining that with the wrong format, wrong H/W ratio of my shots...
Yea-yea. I guess the hands are the most serious reason.

Just D.


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Paul D. Sullivan
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-09-2007
Yeah, I would prefer to print my own too, but I don't know what
printer to get. I was thinking the Canon 6700D but I'm not sure
how it compares, and I'm bummed that in the USA it can't print on
CD's or DVD's. I'm not sure what to do.

> Maybe machines are not very bad, but I never was able to get a
> good quality of my pictures, in most cases these brainless
> operators decided to reformat, reframe the images so that
> sometimes I was getting the trees without the top part, the
> portraits were without the part of the face, etc. They were
> explaining that with the wrong format, wrong H/W ratio of my
> shots... Yea-yea. I guess the hands are the most serious
> reason.



 
Reply With Quote
 
MarkČ
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-09-2007
Paul D. Sullivan wrote:
> Yeah, I would prefer to print my own too, but I don't know what
> printer to get. I was thinking the Canon 6700D but I'm not sure
> how it compares, and I'm bummed that in the USA it can't print on
> CD's or DVD's. I'm not sure what to do.
>
>> Maybe machines are not very bad, but I never was able to get a
>> good quality of my pictures, in most cases these brainless
>> operators decided to reformat, reframe the images so that
>> sometimes I was getting the trees without the top part, the
>> portraits were without the part of the face, etc. They were
>> explaining that with the wrong format, wrong H/W ratio of my
>> shots... Yea-yea. I guess the hands are the most serious
>> reason.


Many of the cheaper Epsons will print on CDs with very decent results. I
used to use (and still have) a cheap Epson JUST for printing onto
writable-surface CD/DVDs, but when you want 200 disks, it's a pain in the
neck, because it requires your attention throughout.

A year ago, I switched to a dedicated DVD duplicator that will burn and
print 100 disks without intervention from me...all unattended. It's called
the Rimage 2000i, and you can see it in my office here:
http://www.pbase.com/markuson/image/66057618/original

If you need large quantities of printed/burned CD/DVDs, then you might want
to consider this product. There are several similarly-priced units, but
they are total crap compared with the Rimage.

If all you want are a dozen or so disks on occasion, the little Epsons will
do just fine for most folks (cheap, meaning about $110 USD).

MarkČ


--
Images (Plus Snaps & Grabs) by MarkČ at:
www.pbase.com/markuson


 
Reply With Quote
 
Just D
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-09-2007
> Many of the cheaper Epsons will print on CDs with very decent results. I
> used to use (and still have) a cheap Epson JUST for printing onto
> writable-surface CD/DVDs, but when you want 200 disks, it's a pain in the
> neck, because it requires your attention throughout.
>
> A year ago, I switched to a dedicated DVD duplicator that will burn and
> print 100 disks without intervention from me...all unattended. It's
> called the Rimage 2000i, and you can see it in my office here:
> http://www.pbase.com/markuson/image/66057618/original
>
> If you need large quantities of printed/burned CD/DVDs, then you might
> want to consider this product. There are several similarly-priced units,
> but they are total crap compared with the Rimage.
>
> If all you want are a dozen or so disks on occasion, the little Epsons
> will do just fine for most folks (cheap, meaning about $110 USD).


I was using several Epsons for many years for one simple reason - I spent
the whole day many years ago on the computer show where I tested a lot of
different brands and model of printers including pretty cheap, medium and
very expensive laser printers, all color. I took my own CD with several
shots and the best results that I got there came from Epsons. Then I tried
several Photo printers in my office and at home with the same results - very
good quality of prints, but noisy, very sensitive to the paper, only Epson
inks, no fake or some replacements even if I saw the text on the box that
the ink is absolutely compatible - it wasn't, Epson heads were mostly
refusing to work with these inks skipping lines, requiring more cleaning,
very thirsty printers, if you don't print for a week or even less you need
to lose the inks to get it working again, etc. Finally I decided to take a
look at other models and compared the medium and cheap range Canons. The
first reaction was - the quality is lower, that's true, but! If I need to
print a lot of colored prints for my friends, to send to somewhere, some
color papers, presentations, make a lot of small or medium prints then my
Canon Pixma iP5000 is perfect. I guess I printed several hundreds of photos
plus many usual papers, and I changed the ink cartridges only once. That's
good. Also they are separate and it's possible to replace them in different
time upon needs. The printer is very cheap especially comparing to others.
It's fast and silent, I can't hear it even if I sit in one meter from it
working. It has a very convenient top lid and I can close it to avoid dust
when it's not required. So I started using this model and found that it
almost never cleans its heads because for some reason they don't need that.
To start printing it usually takes less than a minute. It doesn't require
any calibration like all Epsons that I was using before. Yes, it's cheap,
the quality is not perfect, but for everyday use it's good and pretty
enough. For a single large print with a better quality I use another photo
printer allowing me A3 formats for sure. I'm happy with this model as well
as with another one cheap B/W laser printer - Samsung ML-1740. Same price -
very cheap, 8 MBytes base memory, enough to print with 600 DPI, etc. So to
keep more expensive models alive it makes sense to buy couple cheaper models
like these. But this is my personal opinion only. I know one person who
bought a very expensive color laser printer for everything...)

Just D.


 
Reply With Quote
 
MarkČ
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-09-2007
Just D wrote:
>> Many of the cheaper Epsons will print on CDs with very decent
>> results. I used to use (and still have) a cheap Epson JUST for
>> printing onto writable-surface CD/DVDs, but when you want 200 disks,
>> it's a pain in the neck, because it requires your attention
>> throughout. A year ago, I switched to a dedicated DVD duplicator that
>> will burn
>> and print 100 disks without intervention from me...all unattended. It's
>> called the Rimage 2000i, and you can see it in my office here:
>> http://www.pbase.com/markuson/image/66057618/original
>>
>> If you need large quantities of printed/burned CD/DVDs, then you
>> might want to consider this product. There are several
>> similarly-priced units, but they are total crap compared with the
>> Rimage. If all you want are a dozen or so disks on occasion, the little
>> Epsons will do just fine for most folks (cheap, meaning about $110
>> USD).

>
> I was using several Epsons for many years for one simple reason - I
> spent the whole day many years ago on the computer show where I
> tested a lot of different brands and model of printers including
> pretty cheap, medium and very expensive laser printers, all color. I
> took my own CD with several shots and the best results that I got
> there came from Epsons. Then I tried several Photo printers in my
> office and at home with the same results - very good quality of
> prints, but noisy, very sensitive to the paper, only Epson inks, no
> fake or some replacements even if I saw the text on the box that the
> ink is absolutely compatible - it wasn't, Epson heads were mostly
> refusing to work with these inks skipping lines, requiring more
> cleaning, very thirsty printers, if you don't print for a week or
> even less you need to lose the inks to get it working again, etc.
> Finally I decided to take a look at other models and compared the
> medium and cheap range Canons. The first reaction was - the quality
> is lower, that's true, but! If I need to print a lot of colored
> prints for my friends, to send to somewhere, some color papers,
> presentations, make a lot of small or medium prints then my Canon
> Pixma iP5000 is perfect. I guess I printed several hundreds of photos
> plus many usual papers, and I changed the ink cartridges only once.
> That's good. Also they are separate and it's possible to replace them
> in different time upon needs. The printer is very cheap especially
> comparing to others. It's fast and silent, I can't hear it even if I
> sit in one meter from it working. It has a very convenient top lid
> and I can close it to avoid dust when it's not required. So I started
> using this model and found that it almost never cleans its heads
> because for some reason they don't need that. To start printing it
> usually takes less than a minute. It doesn't require any calibration
> like all Epsons that I was using before. Yes, it's cheap, the quality
> is not perfect, but for everyday use it's good and pretty enough. For
> a single large print with a better quality I use another photo
> printer allowing me A3 formats for sure. I'm happy with this model as
> well as with another one cheap B/W laser printer - Samsung ML-1740.
> Same price - very cheap, 8 MBytes base memory, enough to print with
> 600 DPI, etc. So to keep more expensive models alive it makes sense
> to buy couple cheaper models like these. But this is my personal
> opinion only. I know one person who bought a very expensive color
> laser printer for everything...)
> Just D.


I print a lot of LARGE prints on my Epson 4000 printer (also visible in my
office pic), but I agree that for tons of little 4x6 images, it's nice to
have a quick, cheap output device. That's why I woudn't mind taking a stab
at the new (shudder!) Kodak printers. If their pigment ink, lowcost, high
quality claims are true, then they could give me a decent way to shurn out
loads of the little prints family is always begging me for...but for which I
have little desire to spend time/money on with my big printers.


--
Images (Plus Snaps & Grabs) by MarkČ at:
www.pbase.com/markuson


 
Reply With Quote
 
GMAN
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-09-2007
In article <IzTyh.32$(E-Mail Removed)>, "MarkČ" <mjmorgan(lowest even number here)@cox..net> wrote:
>Paul D. Sullivan wrote:
>> Yeah, I would prefer to print my own too, but I don't know what
>> printer to get. I was thinking the Canon 6700D but I'm not sure
>> how it compares, and I'm bummed that in the USA it can't print on
>> CD's or DVD's. I'm not sure what to do.
>>
>>> Maybe machines are not very bad, but I never was able to get a
>>> good quality of my pictures, in most cases these brainless
>>> operators decided to reformat, reframe the images so that
>>> sometimes I was getting the trees without the top part, the
>>> portraits were without the part of the face, etc. They were
>>> explaining that with the wrong format, wrong H/W ratio of my
>>> shots... Yea-yea. I guess the hands are the most serious
>>> reason.

>
>Many of the cheaper Epsons will print on CDs with very decent results. I
>used to use (and still have) a cheap Epson JUST for printing onto
>writable-surface CD/DVDs, but when you want 200 disks, it's a pain in the
>neck, because it requires your attention throughout.
>
>A year ago, I switched to a dedicated DVD duplicator that will burn and
>print 100 disks without intervention from me...all unattended. It's called
>the Rimage 2000i, and you can see it in my office here:
>http://www.pbase.com/markuson/image/66057618/original
>
>If you nee


Sweet effing office!!!!!!!!!
 
Reply With Quote
 
Just D
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-09-2007
>>A year ago, I switched to a dedicated DVD duplicator that will burn and
>>print 100 disks without intervention from me...all unattended. It's
>>called
>>the Rimage 2000i, and you can see it in my office here:
>>http://www.pbase.com/markuson/image/66057618/original


What's on the right side made of white metal or plastic? Fridge with beer?

Just D.


 
Reply With Quote
 
MarkČ
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-10-2007
GMAN wrote:
> In article <IzTyh.32$(E-Mail Removed)>, "MarkČ" <mjmorgan(lowest
> even number here)@cox..net> wrote:
>> Paul D. Sullivan wrote:
>>> Yeah, I would prefer to print my own too, but I don't know what
>>> printer to get. I was thinking the Canon 6700D but I'm not sure
>>> how it compares, and I'm bummed that in the USA it can't print on
>>> CD's or DVD's. I'm not sure what to do.
>>>
>>>> Maybe machines are not very bad, but I never was able to get a
>>>> good quality of my pictures, in most cases these brainless
>>>> operators decided to reformat, reframe the images so that
>>>> sometimes I was getting the trees without the top part, the
>>>> portraits were without the part of the face, etc. They were
>>>> explaining that with the wrong format, wrong H/W ratio of my
>>>> shots... Yea-yea. I guess the hands are the most serious
>>>> reason.

>>
>> Many of the cheaper Epsons will print on CDs with very decent
>> results. I used to use (and still have) a cheap Epson JUST for
>> printing onto writable-surface CD/DVDs, but when you want 200 disks,
>> it's a pain in the neck, because it requires your attention
>> throughout.
>>
>> A year ago, I switched to a dedicated DVD duplicator that will burn
>> and print 100 disks without intervention from me...all unattended.
>> It's called the Rimage 2000i, and you can see it in my office here:
>> http://www.pbase.com/markuson/image/66057618/original
>>
>> If you nee

>
> Sweet effing office!!!!!!!!!


Ya, well..you should see it right now...
....Big effing MESS!


--
Images (Plus Snaps & Grabs) by MarkČ at:
www.pbase.com/markuson


 
Reply With Quote
 
MarkČ
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-10-2007
Just D wrote:
>>> A year ago, I switched to a dedicated DVD duplicator that will burn
>>> and print 100 disks without intervention from me...all unattended. It's
>>> called
>>> the Rimage 2000i, and you can see it in my office here:
>>> http://www.pbase.com/markuson/image/66057618/original

>
> What's on the right side made of white metal or plastic? Fridge with
> beer?
> Just D.


That's a Rimage 2000i CD/DVD duplication system. I can put in a stack of
100 disks, and it will burn, and print labels onto the disks robotically, &
unattended. The black box to the right of it is a dedicated PC that
controls it. My main PC is dark, and to the left of the monitor. I use that
monitor for both systems right now, as my other monitor just died.

--
Images (Plus Snaps & Grabs) by MarkČ at:
www.pbase.com/markuson


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Does Costco, Walmart, etc. reduce image resolution when printing? Paul D. Sullivan Digital Photography 39 02-11-2007 09:08 PM
Costco (UK): digital photo -> CD problem John Briggs Digital Photography 13 06-10-2004 05:03 PM
Epson photo paper at Costco Dave Digital Photography 4 08-23-2003 12:52 PM
Re: Sam's Club, Costco, etc. 1 hour digital photo printing? David Seaman Digital Photography 2 07-17-2003 03:49 PM
Re: Sam's Club, Costco, etc. 1 hour digital photo printing? Ron Chusid Digital Photography 0 07-17-2003 02:47 AM



Advertisments