> Has anyone done this?
Every day!
> Is there a good reason... that everyone uses ink jets for printing
> photos rather
> than laser printers?
Quality. I have not seen a color laser that was the equal of even a
fairly inexpensive inkjet.
I call my laser printing service "magazine quality" vs the "photo
quality" I sell on the Roland giclee printer.
> Per page costs are always lower with laser printers as I
> understand it.
Sometimes, incredibly cheaper. You would not want to do a "give out"
brochure on inkjet, for example!
Another selling point for color laser is speed. By the time the fuser
warms up, it might be four minutes to get the first print, but you get
one every fifteen seconds after. With the inkjet, it's four minutes the
second print, four the third print...
That said, I have done a lot of laser prints for photographers. Some
things seem to work better than others. Texture is generally nice,
smooth gradients not so much so.
BTW: the Xerox you're considering is really a strange cross between the
two. It's basically a solid ink jet with a page rasterizer. The output
does not do well in a windows-up car on a hot, sunny day -- but they
make GREAT fire starters! I'm not so sure the per-page costs are that
great, either. They were actually GIVING these away recently if you
would agree to purchase a certain amount of ink each month. I took a
long, hard look at these printers when I got my HP 8500DN, and I've
been pretty happy with the decision.
Summary: for finest quality, one-offs, choose inkjet. For anything more
than 10 copies per image when absolute best quality is not so
important, choose color laser.
:::: ECONOMIST: a person who, upon encountering an auditorium
containing 40,000 destitute, unemployed people and Bill Gates, says,
“On average, I see a room full of millionaires!”
:::: Jan Steinman <http://www.Bytesmiths.com/Van>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|