Whats better 1,2,3,4, or 5 picolitre printing ???

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Ive been just looking at the specs for the printers. Cannon ones. Most
of the stuff i can understand fine but this picolitre thing confuses
me


Not sure if the lower it is the better or the other way round ???

Thank you if you can reverse my confusion


/ps just looking for thebest photo printer with all the stuff i want
in a printer.

Thanks.

 

[Jim]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

"Digital Sheep" <1@2> wrote in message
news:0u03411q8alfe8ahenugko83in8stvmegs@4ax.com...
>
>
> Ive been just looking at the specs for the printers. Cannon ones. Most
> of the stuff i can understand fine but this picolitre thing confuses
> me
>
>
> Not sure if the lower it is the better or the other way round ???
The idea is to design a printer which has as small a drop as possible
because that allows the driver to optimize the output better. So, smaller
is better from that standpoint.
However, a small drop can result in an increase in clogs. So, larger is
better from that standpoint.
As usual, there is no single best way to design a printer.
Jim

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

The Canon IP4000 is a 2picoliter and is a fabulous printer. The IP5000
is a 1picoliter and is very good. The 5000 is substantially better for
text business documents while the IP4000 is marginally better on
photos. The IP4000 is $50.00 cheaper. If the IP5000 is prone to a
clogging issue is still out to the jury. I have NOT read any reports of
that to be the case but it has not been available for as long a time as
the IP4000.

I have an IP4000 and I like it.

Jim wrote:

>"Digital Sheep" <1@2> wrote in message
>news:0u03411q8alfe8ahenugko83in8stvmegs@4ax.com...
>
>
>>Ive been just looking at the specs for the printers. Cannon ones. Most
>>of the stuff i can understand fine but this picolitre thing confuses
>>me
>>
>>
>>Not sure if the lower it is the better or the other way round ???
>>
>>
>The idea is to design a printer which has as small a drop as possible
>because that allows the driver to optimize the output better. So, smaller
>is better from that standpoint.
>However, a small drop can result in an increase in clogs. So, larger is
>better from that standpoint.
>As usual, there is no single best way to design a printer.
>Jim
>
>
>
>

 

[Larry]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

In article <HNi0e.14777$C47.9058@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com>,
measekite@yahoo.com says...
> The Canon IP4000 is a 2picoliter and is a fabulous printer. The IP5000
> is a 1picoliter and is very good. The 5000 is substantially better for
> text business documents while the IP4000 is marginally better on
> photos. The IP4000 is $50.00 cheaper. If the IP5000 is prone to a
> clogging issue is still out to the jury. I have NOT read any reports of
> that to be the case but it has not been available for as long a time as
> the IP4000.
>
> I have an IP4000 and I like it.
>
>

I am constantly AMAZED at the quality of the photo prints from the ip4000. I
use it a lot, and I have 2 i960 Canons and an i950, as well as a couple of
Epsons that I use. These others are all 6 color printers and sometimes I
cant tell which print is from the 4 color ip4000. (close examination with a
loupe will show the difference but most of the time they look alike to the
naked eye)


--
Larry Lynch
Mystic, Ct.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

In article measekite says...
> The Canon IP4000 is a 2picoliter and is a fabulous printer. The IP5000
> is a 1picoliter and is very good. The 5000 is substantially better for
> text business documents while the IP4000 is marginally better on
> photos.
>
You should attribute this to PCMag so that people know that you have no
personal experience of this.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Yes this is from PCMAG. I never said this was from personal
experience. That still does not make it Not So.

colinco wrote:

>In article measekite says...
>
>
>>The Canon IP4000 is a 2picoliter and is a fabulous printer. The IP5000
>>is a 1picoliter and is very good. The 5000 is substantially better for
>>text business documents while the IP4000 is marginally better on
>>photos.
>>
>>
>>
>You should attribute this to PCMag so that people know that you have no
>personal experience of this.
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Try to find an a3 printer that prints on DVDs and cds ? never though
that would be so hard for Canon to make ?


On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 14:46:51 -0500, Larry <larrylynch3rd@comcast.net>
wrote:

>In article <HNi0e.14777$C47.9058@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com>,
>measekite@yahoo.com says...
>> The Canon IP4000 is a 2picoliter and is a fabulous printer. The IP5000
>> is a 1picoliter and is very good. The 5000 is substantially better for
>> text business documents while the IP4000 is marginally better on
>> photos. The IP4000 is $50.00 cheaper. If the IP5000 is prone to a
>> clogging issue is still out to the jury. I have NOT read any reports of
>> that to be the case but it has not been available for as long a time as
>> the IP4000.
>>
>> I have an IP4000 and I like it.
>>
>>
>
>I am constantly AMAZED at the quality of the photo prints from the ip4000. I
>use it a lot, and I have 2 i960 Canons and an i950, as well as a couple of
>Epsons that I use. These others are all 6 color printers and sometimes I
>cant tell which print is from the 4 color ip4000. (close examination with a
>loupe will show the difference but most of the time they look alike to the
>naked eye)

 

[JustMe]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

"Digital Sheep" <1@2> wrote in message
news:175441179aummlr6g2bl4rjjsdsb8bqc1g@4ax.com...

Try to find an a3 printer that prints on DVDs and cds ? never though
that would be so hard for Canon to make ?


Could be that Canon doesn't feel there is a large enough market for them. I
know I would never buy one.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Try the i9950, that DOES print to DVD/CD.

"JustMe" <Inkspots@spam.com> wrote in message
news:cRD0e.202873$pc5.50859@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
>
> "Digital Sheep" <1@2> wrote in message
> news:175441179aummlr6g2bl4rjjsdsb8bqc1g@4ax.com...
>
> Try to find an a3 printer that prints on DVDs and cds ? never though
> that would be so hard for Canon to make ?
>
>
> Could be that Canon doesn't feel there is a large enough market for them.
> I
> know I would never buy one.
>
>
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

A picolitre is a volume measurement, equal to 0.000,000,000,001
litter or 10 to the negative 12.

The measurement doesn't exactly translate to a diameter, because it is
basically a sphere when it leaves the head, and it must become a flat
surface, meaning it can spread (bleed) as it is incorporated into the
paper surface.

In general, smaller minimum picolitre size is better, as the smaller the
dot, the less visible any one will be to the naked or assisted eye.

The smaller the dot, the more dots the printer needs to produce to print
a certain gradient. That means the printer can be slower at printing,
unless it has a lot of nozzles.

Lower dyeload ink sets can have larger picolitre sizes because the low
dye load inks are less dense and a larger dot won't be an visible.

In general, a smaller dpi means the more resolution and less visible dots.

Art



Digital Sheep wrote:

>
> Ive been just looking at the specs for the printers. Cannon ones. Most
> of the stuff i can understand fine but this picolitre thing confuses
> me
>
>
> Not sure if the lower it is the better or the other way round ???
>
> Thank you if you can reverse my confusion
>
>
> /ps just looking for thebest photo printer with all the stuff i want
> in a printer.
>
> Thanks.
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

That was supposed to read "liter" or "litre" not "litter"...

Arthur Entlich wrote:

> A picolitre is a volume measurement, equal to 0.000,000,000,001
> litter or 10 to the negative 12.
>
> The measurement doesn't exactly translate to a diameter, because it is
> basically a sphere when it leaves the head, and it must become a flat
> surface, meaning it can spread (bleed) as it is incorporated into the
> paper surface.
>
> In general, smaller minimum picolitre size is better, as the smaller the
> dot, the less visible any one will be to the naked or assisted eye.
>
> The smaller the dot, the more dots the printer needs to produce to print
> a certain gradient. That means the printer can be slower at printing,
> unless it has a lot of nozzles.
>
> Lower dyeload ink sets can have larger picolitre sizes because the low
> dye load inks are less dense and a larger dot won't be an visible.
>
> In general, a smaller dpi means the more resolution and less visible dots.
>
> Art
>
>
>
> Digital Sheep wrote:
>
>>
>> Ive been just looking at the specs for the printers. Cannon ones. Most
>> of the stuff i can understand fine but this picolitre thing confuses
>> me
>>
>>
>> Not sure if the lower it is the better or the other way round ???
>>
>> Thank you if you can reverse my confusion
>>
>>
>> /ps just looking for thebest photo printer with all the stuff i want
>> in a printer.
>>
>> Thanks.
>>