Bad link to the P600 info. Here it is http://www.redrivercatalog.com/infocenter/articles/epson-surecolor-p600-review-introduction.html
Sent from my iPad > On Apr 18, 2015, at 12:07 PM, Paul Sorenson <[email protected]> wrote: > > Yes. The R3000 is probably a better choice for b/w, what with three separate > shades of black ink. Then again if budget is a consideration the R3000 is > about $250 more expensive. > > But...the R2000 does do a great job with b/w, but then I'm careful to use > software and the correct icc profile to control the output. > > A comparison of the two is here. > > http://www.redrivercatalog.com/infocenter/articles/compare-epson-r2000-vs-epson-r3000-which-to-purchase.html > > > And...for anyone interested in the P600 which Godfrey mentioned, here's some > info on it. > > http://www.redrivercatalog.com/infocenter/articles/epson-surecolor-p600-review-introduction.ht-p > > Sent from my iPad > >> On Apr 18, 2015, at 8:11 AM, Paul Stenquist <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Yep. The R2000 is apparently the successor to the high gloss printer. The >> R3000 is the K3 ink printer and successor to the 2880. For Ann, who prints >> a lot of BW, the R3000 would be a better choice. >> >> Paul via phone >> >>> On Apr 18, 2015, at 8:48 AM, Paul Sorenson <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> You're thinking of the 2000P...a completely different animal from the >>> R2000. Different ink set, different print engine. >>> >>> http://t.epson.com/cgi-bin/Store/ProductQuickSpec.jsp?oid=8987&utm_referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2F >>> >>> -p >>> >>> Sent from my iPad >>> >>>> On Apr 18, 2015, at 7:35 AM, Paul Stenquist <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> That must be a new version of it. The original was a big beige boat and >>>> succeeded the R 1200. >>>> >>>> Paul via phone >>>> >>>>> On Apr 18, 2015, at 7:50 AM, Paul Sorenson <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> No. You're wrong. The R2000 is still in production. >>>>> >>>>> http://t.epson.com/cgi-bin/Store/jsp/Product.do?BV_UseBVCookie=yes&sku=C11CB35201 >>>>> >>>>> -p >>>>> >>>>> Sent from my iPad >>>>> >>>>>> On Apr 18, 2015, at 6:24 AM, Paul Stenquist <[email protected]> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Do you mean the R 3000? The 2000 has been out of production for at least >>>>>> ten years. >>>>>> >>>>>> Paul via phone >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Apr 18, 2015, at 2:30 AM, Paul <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Ann - >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I would agree with Mark C re: to get the exact output you want you can >>>>>>> best do it by printing your own images. Not only do you have more >>>>>>> control over the process, you have a wider range of paper surfaces from >>>>>>> which to choose. Plus...it's most impressive when you can report that >>>>>>> the print was created by the photographer and not sent out for a lab to >>>>>>> do the printing. And, of course, you never call them "inkjet" prints, >>>>>>> you call them "Giclée" <vbg> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I have been using an Epson R2000 for the past several years and the >>>>>>> resulting prints are great. Unlike some of the other Epson photo >>>>>>> printers, the R2000 has both matte black and photo black in its ink >>>>>>> lineup so you don't need to swap black inks when going from a matte >>>>>>> paper to luster or glossy, thus not having to waste ink purging the ink >>>>>>> system. The R2000 will make prints from 4x6 to 13x38. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Red River Paper has done some tests to determine the cost of ink for >>>>>>> several different printers and sizes of paper. See it here: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> http://www.redrivercatalog.com/cost-of-inkjet-printing.html >>>>>>> >>>>>>> They also have some longevity info on pigment vs dye ink here... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> http://www.redrivercatalog.com/infocenter/articles/dyerorpigmentink.htm >>>>>>> >>>>>>> IMO pigment is the only way to go if you want prints that will last. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -p >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 4/17/2015 9:05 PM, Ann Sanfedele wrote: >>>>>>>> I don't think I can do this too soon, but I wish I had a way to make my >>>>>>>> own 11 x 17 or 12 x 18 prints >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> reviews? suggestions? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> ann >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Being old doesn't seem so old now that I'm old. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>>>>>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >>>>>>> follow the directions. >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>>>>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >>>>>> follow the directions. >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>>>> [email protected] >>>>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>>>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >>>>> follow the directions. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>>> [email protected] >>>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >>>> follow the directions. >>> >>> -- >>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>> [email protected] >>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >>> follow the directions. >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> [email protected] >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >> follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
