The difference between these two photos is easy to spot. This is one big reason why I went for the hp 8750 printer. It was also because it was less expensive than the Epson and Canon alternatives at the time, both in terms of initial price and running costs.
The printer is still going well after what must be 50, 000 A-4 sheets, mainly colour and often photo-quality (and some A-3 and A-3+ (13" x 19 ") sheets).
I'm just recovering from re-ordering the genuine hp inkjet cartridges and Premium-plus photo paper. About six month's worth of paper and ink is costing about £ 542, with a discount and lowered VAT. That will give me about 300 proper photo's A-4, a bunch of A-3+ and thousands of normal b+w and colour prints. All these items are made outside the UK, and the pound sterling has collapsed against the Euro, the Dollar, the Ringit . . .
This is what the reviews said it would cost, and it's not cheap, The quality is excellent, about as good as you can get without using a printing profile, I would think.
Newer printers give more economical prints, but this workhorse 8750 is still for sale (Google and it's there).
I buy most all of my ink and photo paper from a long-time supplier here in north London, whose details I will list out just as soon as they get back to me.
I know that if I needed a replacement printer and I had the money, I'd get an Epson Stylus Photo R2880 printer, at
http://www.epson.co.uk/printers/ultrachrome_professional_printers/Epson_Stylus_Photo_R2880_printer.htm
The reviews for that Epson are pretty darn good. Do let me know if you have incisive comments of your own, about the care and feeding of photo-quality printers
No comments:
Post a Comment