Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Digital Photo & Printing (was: Re[2]: [OM] OM Quality images)

Subject: Re: Digital Photo & Printing (was: Re[2]: [OM] OM Quality images)
From: Joe Sutherland <joesutherland@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 09:38:34 -0800
SNIP
>Then there's the printer. While the printer industry would have you
>believe otherwise, there's no such thing as "photo-quality inkjet"; it's
>fairly close to an oxymoron today. It's quite true, they're much better
>than they used to be, so you can get "near" photo quality, not a bad
>match for 3x5-5x7 from the old digital camera, but nothing you're going
>to confuse with a real photo process. 
SNIP

I agree with Dave about the oxymoron.  The manufacturer's tantalize
us with claims of photo-quality, but it takes a lot of work to produce
a really good print.  I've never used a darkroom, so I don't know if
that also happens there; but I usually make several poor prints
before finally getting a good looking print.  Like the rest of the computer
industry, there's also the hardware and software problems that are
everyday occurrences.  An HP printer I previously used had chronic
paper misfeed problems and paper jams were *almost* impossible
to clear.  I had a Lexmark printer for one day.  It just wouldn't 
work and Lexmark technical support people were downright
stupid.  Now I have my second Canon printer.  The first came with
CD software that wasn't readable, so it went right back to the 
dealer.  

It amazes me that the computer industry can get away with this
level of service.  If Olympus built cameras with such poor
performance, they'd be laughed out of the business.

Excuse my ranting and raving, but I guess I'm naive enough
to expect that a $250 inkjet printer will actually work.



< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz