Yes, it's very helpful. I'd like the bigger output size as well, but I can't afford to spend $1500 or more on a printer. But 16x20 capability would be awesome. Paul
Kenneth Waller wrote: > Paul, from what I've read the 2200 is supposed to be better than the 2000P. (Doesn't > have the Metarism - sp-? issue, like the 2000P. I have used my 2000P for several > years now and have NO complaints with it. My Gallery show was all done (35 images) > with the 2000P, most viewers were amazed that the images were done by a home printer. > My only qualm in thinking about my next printer will be output size, but we're > talking a 2 to 3 X cost increase over the 2200. > Hope this helps. > > Ken Waller > > > Paul Stenquist wrote: > >> > >> My old printer is on its last legs. It's an Epson 1200 and it has > >> produced more than 1000 12 x 18s. It's not printing very well with OS > >> X > >> 10.3 and Photoshop CS. I think the drivers haven't been uptdated > >> beyond > >> system 10.1, which is quite diffferent. Since it's a clunker anyway, > >> I'm > >> thinking of replacing it with the Epson 2200. Is anyone using this > >> printer with OSX 10.3 and PhotoShop CS. Are you happy? Is this printer > >> due to be replaced? Is there a better printer in the $500 to $800 > >> range > >> that's proven itself with PS CS and OSX 10.3? > >> Paul > > > > > > PeoplePC Online > A better way to Internet > http://www.peoplepc.com
