Kodak Easyshare 6000 vs HP PhotoSmart 145

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Larry R Harrison Jr, Dec 21, 2003.

  1. I am considering one of those for casual 4x6 photos. I don't figure an
    inkjet would be appropriate due to the tendency of inkjet photos to fade. I
    want something that is as permanent (or almost, anyway) as regular photos.

    The Kodak comes highly recommended, yet I've also seen that Photosmart for
    sale too. I'm curious as to any opinions persons have of both models, or any
    other models in their price range.

    LRH
     
    Larry R Harrison Jr, Dec 21, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Larry R Harrison Jr

    Harvey Guest

    Make sure you check out the cost of the media for the Kodak. You might be
    shocked.

    "Larry R Harrison Jr" <> wrote in message
    news:3ZmFb.23766$gN.22618@fed1read05...
    > I am considering one of those for casual 4x6 photos. I don't figure an
    > inkjet would be appropriate due to the tendency of inkjet photos to fade.

    I
    > want something that is as permanent (or almost, anyway) as regular photos.
    >
    > The Kodak comes highly recommended, yet I've also seen that Photosmart for
    > sale too. I'm curious as to any opinions persons have of both models, or

    any
    > other models in their price range.
    >
    > LRH
    >
    >
     
    Harvey, Dec 21, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Yes, it's $25 for a 40 photo kit, which is like 60c a print. I'm aware.

    What would you suggest? One thing--permanence is a big deal to me, so I'm
    thinking I should avoid inkjets. Your advice?


    "Harvey" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Make sure you check out the cost of the media for the Kodak. You might be
    > shocked.
    >
    > "Larry R Harrison Jr" <> wrote in message
    > news:3ZmFb.23766$gN.22618@fed1read05...
    > > I am considering one of those for casual 4x6 photos. I don't figure an
    > > inkjet would be appropriate due to the tendency of inkjet photos to

    fade.
    > I
    > > want something that is as permanent (or almost, anyway) as regular

    photos.
    > >
    > > The Kodak comes highly recommended, yet I've also seen that Photosmart

    for
    > > sale too. I'm curious as to any opinions persons have of both models, or

    > any
    > > other models in their price range.
    > >
    > > LRH
    > >
    > >

    >
    >
     
    Larry R Harrison Jr, Dec 21, 2003
    #3
  4. Larry R Harrison Jr

    Larry Lynch Guest

    In article <0qnFb.23769$gN.15627@fed1read05>,
    says...
    > Yes, it's $25 for a 40 photo kit, which is like 60c a print. I'm aware.
    >
    > What would you suggest? One thing--permanence is a big deal to me, so I'm
    > thinking I should avoid inkjets. Your advice?
    >
    >

    Sony has a Dye Sub 4x6 printer, and if you buy the 75
    pack, print costs are slightly less than 54 cents (US)
    even if you buy the 75 pack with no discount.
    --
    Larry Lynch
    Lasting Imagery
    Mystic, Ct.
     
    Larry Lynch, Dec 21, 2003
    #4
  5. Larry R Harrison Jr

    Ron Hunter Guest

    Larry R Harrison Jr wrote:

    > Yes, it's $25 for a 40 photo kit, which is like 60c a print. I'm aware.
    >
    > What would you suggest? One thing--permanence is a big deal to me, so I'm
    > thinking I should avoid inkjets. Your advice?
    >
    >
    > "Harvey" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >
    >>Make sure you check out the cost of the media for the Kodak. You might be
    >>shocked.
    >>
    >>"Larry R Harrison Jr" <> wrote in message
    >>news:3ZmFb.23766$gN.22618@fed1read05...
    >>
    >>>I am considering one of those for casual 4x6 photos. I don't figure an
    >>>inkjet would be appropriate due to the tendency of inkjet photos to

    >
    > fade.
    >
    >>I
    >>
    >>>want something that is as permanent (or almost, anyway) as regular

    >
    > photos.
    >
    >>>The Kodak comes highly recommended, yet I've also seen that Photosmart

    >
    > for
    >
    >>>sale too. I'm curious as to any opinions persons have of both models, or

    >>
    >>any
    >>
    >>>other models in their price range.
    >>>
    >>>LRH
    >>>
    >>>

    >>
    >>

    >
    >

    My advice is to use an inkjet for quick prints and take the flash card
    to Sam's, or Costco for prints.
    MUCH cheaper.
     
    Ron Hunter, Dec 22, 2003
    #5
  6. Larry R Harrison Jr

    Dave Guest

    In article <0qnFb.23769$gN.15627@fed1read05>, Larry R Harrison Jr
    <> wrote:

    > Yes, it's $25 for a 40 photo kit, which is like 60c a print. I'm aware.
    >
    > What would you suggest? One thing--permanence is a big deal to me, so I'm
    > thinking I should avoid inkjets. Your advice?
    >


    The price of 4x6 ink jet paper is about .30¢ a sheet. That is .32¢ a
    sheet less than the easyshare print... BUT when you add the cost of
    ink which is anywhere from .30¢ to .45¢ a sheet, the Kodak Printer Dock
    is much better.
    Spill water on a ink jet print, throw it away.. on the Kodak print.. No
    problem.
     
    Dave, Dec 22, 2003
    #6
  7. Larry R Harrison Jr

    Ron Hunter Guest

    Dave wrote:
    > In article <0qnFb.23769$gN.15627@fed1read05>, Larry R Harrison Jr
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >
    >>Yes, it's $25 for a 40 photo kit, which is like 60c a print. I'm aware.
    >>
    >>What would you suggest? One thing--permanence is a big deal to me, so I'm
    >>thinking I should avoid inkjets. Your advice?
    >>

    >
    >
    > The price of 4x6 ink jet paper is about .30¢ a sheet. That is .32¢ a
    > sheet less than the easyshare print... BUT when you add the cost of
    > ink which is anywhere from .30¢ to .45¢ a sheet, the Kodak Printer Dock
    > is much better.
    > Spill water on a ink jet print, throw it away.. on the Kodak print.. No
    > problem.


    And for $0.18 a shot, you can get a print from Sam's or Costco that is
    the same paper and process as for a 35 mm picture. No contest.
     
    Ron Hunter, Dec 22, 2003
    #7
  8. Larry R Harrison Jr

    Dave Guest

    In article <>, Ron Hunter
    <> wrote:

    > Dave wrote:
    > > In article <0qnFb.23769$gN.15627@fed1read05>, Larry R Harrison Jr
    > > <> wrote:
    > >
    > >
    > >>Yes, it's $25 for a 40 photo kit, which is like 60c a print. I'm aware.
    > >>
    > >>What would you suggest? One thing--permanence is a big deal to me, so I'm
    > >>thinking I should avoid inkjets. Your advice?
    > >>

    > >
    > >
    > > The price of 4x6 ink jet paper is about .30¢ a sheet. That is .32¢ a
    > > sheet less than the easyshare print... BUT when you add the cost of
    > > ink which is anywhere from .30¢ to .45¢ a sheet, the Kodak Printer Dock
    > > is much better.
    > > Spill water on a ink jet print, throw it away.. on the Kodak print.. No
    > > problem.

    >
    > And for $0.18 a shot, you can get a print from Sam's or Costco that is
    > the same paper and process as for a 35 mm picture. No contest.



    Sure it is cheaper to go to Sam's or Costco if you have a membership..
    Oh yeah, I only need to print 4 pictures.. 4x62=$2.48 then add Sam's is
    20 miles away and my SUV get's 17 MPG, so that is 2.25 gal. of gas at
    $1.50 a gal. plus some idiot backs into my car and does $1000 worth of
    damage and my deductalbe is $1000.
    So my 4 pictures end up costing me about $225. each
    Now sure that is going overboard with the car.. but the gas isn't.
    If you have 40 or 50 prints to do, sure it is cheaper, but most people
    want to print a few pictures at a time and the Printer Dock makes that
    easy and affordable.
     
    Dave, Dec 22, 2003
    #8
  9. Larry R Harrison Jr

    Ron Hunter Guest

    Dave wrote:

    > In article <>, Ron Hunter
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >
    >>Dave wrote:
    >>
    >>>In article <0qnFb.23769$gN.15627@fed1read05>, Larry R Harrison Jr
    >>><> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>Yes, it's $25 for a 40 photo kit, which is like 60c a print. I'm aware.
    >>>>
    >>>>What would you suggest? One thing--permanence is a big deal to me, so I'm
    >>>>thinking I should avoid inkjets. Your advice?
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>The price of 4x6 ink jet paper is about .30¢ a sheet. That is .32¢ a
    >>>sheet less than the easyshare print... BUT when you add the cost of
    >>>ink which is anywhere from .30¢ to .45¢ a sheet, the Kodak Printer Dock
    >>>is much better.
    >>>Spill water on a ink jet print, throw it away.. on the Kodak print.. No
    >>>problem.

    >>
    >>And for $0.18 a shot, you can get a print from Sam's or Costco that is
    >>the same paper and process as for a 35 mm picture. No contest.

    >
    >
    >
    > Sure it is cheaper to go to Sam's or Costco if you have a membership..
    > Oh yeah, I only need to print 4 pictures.. 4x62=$2.48 then add Sam's is
    > 20 miles away and my SUV get's 17 MPG, so that is 2.25 gal. of gas at
    > $1.50 a gal. plus some idiot backs into my car and does $1000 worth of
    > damage and my deductalbe is $1000.
    > So my 4 pictures end up costing me about $225. each
    > Now sure that is going overboard with the car.. but the gas isn't.
    > If you have 40 or 50 prints to do, sure it is cheaper, but most people
    > want to print a few pictures at a time and the Printer Dock makes that
    > easy and affordable.


    Easy, yes, affordable, no way. Factor in the cost of the printer and
    consumables and the prints are costing WAY more than that gas. BTW,
    Sam's here have gas stations with $.05 discounts on the usual price of
    gas, so you can save a bundle there too.
     
    Ron Hunter, Dec 22, 2003
    #9
  10. Larry R Harrison Jr

    LHBanchik Guest

    I considered it, but in my case, rejected it because there is a photo shop in
    my town (only 3 blocks from my house) which has the Kodak Easy Share Kiosk. I
    just take my camera down there to get single shots developed and printed on the
    4x6 paper. If that wasn't an option I'd seriously consider the printer dock.


    Mr. Cole's Axiom: The sum of the intelligence of the planet is a constant.
    The population is increasing.
     
    LHBanchik, Dec 22, 2003
    #10
  11. Larry R Harrison Jr

    billy radio Guest

    A Hobsons choice if ever I saw one

    "Larry R Harrison Jr" <> wrote in message news:<3ZmFb.23766$gN.22618@fed1read05>...
    > I am considering one of those for casual 4x6 photos. I don't figure an
    > inkjet would be appropriate due to the tendency of inkjet photos to fade. I
    > want something that is as permanent (or almost, anyway) as regular photos.
    >
    > The Kodak comes highly recommended, yet I've also seen that Photosmart for
    > sale too. I'm curious as to any opinions persons have of both models, or any
    > other models in their price range.
    >
    > LRH
     
    billy radio, Dec 22, 2003
    #11
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. slash
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    646
    Paolo Pizzi
    Nov 21, 2003
  2. Rene

    Kodak Easyshare Dock 6000

    Rene, Dec 11, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    842
    Ron Baird
    Dec 16, 2003
  3. Dana

    Easyshare Dock 6000 Issue

    Dana, Apr 2, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    311
  4. Orak Listalavostok
    Replies:
    83
    Views:
    8,620
    Bob Headrick
    Dec 27, 2004
  5. Bowman

    Kodak Easyshare Dock 6000 vs new Dock 3

    Bowman, Mar 2, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    340
    Bowman
    Mar 3, 2005
Loading...

Share This Page