I have to replace my HP printer for something better and was wondering
whether anybody has any advice on an affordable printer with decent
output for photography. I also need a scanner. Are there any printer/
scanner combinations of good quality or should I buy a separate
scanner? I am pretty new at photography and Photoshop and don't
understand some of the terminology/technology. It would appreciate
any advice you can give to a novice. Thank you so much.

On Thu, 28 Feb 2008 19:57:14 -0800 (PST), Lola <gmhurt@comcast.net>
wrote:

>I have to replace my HP printer for something better and was wondering
>whether anybody has any advice on an affordable printer with decent
>output for photography. I also need a scanner. Are there any printer/
>scanner combinations of good quality or should I buy a separate
>scanner? I am pretty new at photography and Photoshop and don't
>understand some of the terminology/technology. It would appreciate
>any advice you can give to a novice. Thank you so much.

A question that will provide only answers that someone else disagrees
with.

I have an Epson Stylus CX4800 printer/scanner/copier combo. I'm very
pleased with it. It prints photos that I'm pleased with, and it scans
flat items just fine. I'm in process of scanning old photos so I can
send disks of the results to my kids. I'm up to about 700 now.

Epson uses a four ink system that produces good photos that don't
smear. I use only Epson ink and only Epson paper. This particular
printer was about $125, but I bought it when both an Epson rebate
offer and a store rebate was in place and ended up with a net cost of
$50. The rebate checks came in without a problem. Epson inks are
pricey, but the results are good.

I scan by importing to Adobe Photoshop, but that employs the Epson
scanning software, and that works fine for me. I do wish that it
printed CDs, but that feature wasn't available when I purchased the
unit.

If something happens to this printer, I'll buy another Epson.
However, I'd take a look at those Kodak combos that use less expensive
ink. I haven't read any reviews about them that would put me off.

I also have an old Microtek scanner (only) that I use when I scan
objects. The combos don't do depth of field. If depth of field is
important to you when scanning, research CCD vs CIS scanners. Combos
generally have (as does the CX 4800) a CIS (Contact Image Sensor)
sensor that works fine for scanning photos. The Microtek has a CCD
(Closed Coupling Device) system and scans objects and produces images
with a depth of field.

I prefer the combo system for everyday use. My combo takes less space
than two units (the Microtek is kept in a closet and only hooked up
for special scans), it's handy, and it's fast enough for my use. I
rarely use the copier function, but it doesn't hurt to have it.

Someone will tell you that combos are bad because if one component
goes out you have to replace the whole thing. Someone will tell you
that three-functions-in-one-unit mean each function is less effective.
Well, I've had this combo for over a year and I use it quite a bit.
Someone will tell you that Epson inks dry out if the printer isn't
used for several days. That does tend to happen, but it's simple to
clear them.

I'm not about to tell you that Epson is better or worse than HP, but I
can tell you that I don't regret my choice.

BTW...when you say "something better", what do you want to do better?

--

Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

"Lola" <gmhurt@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:0af5f384-3c91-4cc9-a453-bcc68de009ea@i29g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>I have to replace my HP printer for something better and was wondering
> whether anybody has any advice on an affordable printer with decent
> output for photography. I also need a scanner. Are there any printer/
> scanner combinations of good quality or should I buy a separate
> scanner? I am pretty new at photography and Photoshop and don't
> understand some of the terminology/technology. It would appreciate
> any advice you can give to a novice. Thank you so much.

After years with Epson, I just got an HP Photosmart C4200 all-in-one and I
love it. This particular model is no longer being made - the C5280 looks
very similar.

I used to use a larger format (13x19 inch) Epson printer. The main reason I
switched was economics. Not only did the Epson cost a fortune in ink, but
it conked out after three years of use. For the difference in price between
the HP (which does very nice letter size as well as borderless 4x6's) I can
order quite a number (20 or so) poster sized enlargements over the net. The
HP's copy function gets a surprising amount of use too, for copying printed
material and color snapshots.
--
Mike Russell - www.curvemeister.com

Lola

You'll probably be happy with any of the current printers from major
manufacturers such as Canon, Epson, and Hewlett-Packard. Go to a store that
carries these and other printers; take in a sample photograph on a CD and
ask to see a sample of what various printers produce. If you're really
fussy, ask to have each sample print made on the paper recommended by the
printer manufacturer. You'll probably see some differences, but those
differences are likely to be dependent on the printer calibration, rather
than on the quality each printer can produce. Make your own judgement.

It's very difficult to compare one printer with another because so much is
involved: the structure of the print head, the way ink is emitted, the
nature of the ink, the paper used, the way the printer processes the paper
after ink deposition, and more. Printer manufacturers recommend that you use
only their software, their paper, and their ink to get the best results.

Don't pay extra for a printer that can produce large prints, unless you
expect to print a large number of them. If you want an occassional print
larger than 8 x 10 inches, have that print made by a service company.

What do you want a scanner for? If you only want to scan full-size
photographs, a combination printer/scanner might do wnat you want. If you
want to scan 35 mm slides, though, you need to purchase a separate scanner
that has adequate resolution for that purpose.

GordonP

"Lola" <gmhurt@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:0af5f384-3c91-4cc9-a453-bcc68de009ea@i29g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>I have to replace my HP printer for something better and was wondering
> whether anybody has any advice on an affordable printer with decent
> output for photography. I also need a scanner. Are there any printer/
> scanner combinations of good quality or should I buy a separate
> scanner? I am pretty new at photography and Photoshop and don't
> understand some of the terminology/technology. It would appreciate
> any advice you can give to a novice. Thank you so much.

I just got a Canon iP4500 that was not expensive and gave me very nice
photo quality prints.
I would not recommend an all in one machine if you want to get top
quality prints or high end scans.
Those are meant to be middle of the road quality in my opinion.

Lola wrote:
> I have to replace my HP printer for something better and was wondering
> whether anybody has any advice on an affordable printer with decent
> output for photography. I also need a scanner. Are there any printer/
> scanner combinations of good quality or should I buy a separate
> scanner? I am pretty new at photography and Photoshop and don't
> understand some of the terminology/technology. It would appreciate
> any advice you can give to a novice. Thank you so much.