PeterN
On 11/30/2013 5:58 PM, Floyd L. Davidson wrote:

Floyd L. Davidson
PeterN <peter.newnospam@verizon.net>wrote:

PeterN
On 11/30/2013 4:47 AM, Floyd L. Davidson wrote:

Floyd L. Davidson
Tony Cooper <tonycooper214@gmail.com>wrote:

Tony Cooper
On Fri, 29 Nov 2013 17:45:26 -0900, floyd@apaflo.com (Floyd L. Davidson) wrote:

Floyd L. Davidson
Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com>wrote:

Savageduck
[...] most importantly I have a feeling your hardline choice of OS is your real problem, and it is distracting you from paying attention to improving your photography.

Floyd L. Davidson
That in fact seems to be *your* most serious impediment to improving your photography.

The OP seems to be well aware that a more functional OS is eventually going to allow him to produce better results...]

Tony Cooper
I am curious how you come up with this. To me, it's like saying a better developing pan will lead to better photographs when working with film.

Floyd L. Davidson
No, it's more like having a drawer full of different sized trays means the user can choose which one is most efficient for any given job. That leads to a more effective system than one where the only trays available come in just one size (that fits all, supposedly).

Since most people never printed anything larger that an 8x10, they don't see a difference. But for the photographer that pushes the limits, trays large enough for 16x20 and 20x24 prints make a huge difference. Not to mention they immediately bought something like an El Nikkor lens rather than use the one that came with the enlarger.

And while a 35mm enlarger from Ponder and Best or Durst, or even the low end Beseler or Omega models might seem like a great production tool for many, real darkroom workers wouldn't consider anything less that a Beseler 23C, and would rather have either a Beseler or an Omega 4x5 enlarger, even if all they ever work with is 35mm film.

PeterN
I used a 23C, IIRC I had three heads for it. Color, condenser and fluorescent.

Floyd L. Davidson
I never had the fluorescent head for mine. I also used Omega 4x5 enlargers, though if I'd had the choice the Beseler 4x5 would have been the one.

It's the difference between printing today with an Epson 2800 or using an Epson 4880 or 7890.

PeterN
Many a fine art print has been made with the 2880 and 3880. IMO the 4880 is designed for higher output. I may have been told wrong, but i thought the 4880 produced prints that were equal in quality to the other two, but was designed for higher production rates, and larger format.

Floyd L. Davidson
It may well be that many prints are made with even a 2880, and the 3880, but that isn't the point at all. A 4880 is a vastly nicer printer to use in many ways. Just for starters it's got a much higher quality build, second it has larger ink cartridges and therefore both lower cost and less hassle. It has a vacuum assisted paper feed, and uses roll paper. (On the down side it costs about $60 to change from MK to PK ink too.)

And yes, you just don't do 17" wide prints on the 2880. But you can't do 24" wide prints on the 4880 either, and the 7890 has a more robust cutter that can be used on canvas, larger ink carts for even lower cost and switching MK to PK is only a couple bucks. Of course the 7890 is a total hassle with sheets too.

The point is that while you can nit pick any of those printers, just as you can any OS, there are differences that make printers designed for commercial work much nicer to use than those meant for consumers. OS's are exactly the same. But with printers and OS's there is a non-monetary cost to higher quality, and frankly most consumers don't want or need the cost of professional quality.

PeterN
Many professionals use the smaller printers. If you have no need for the extra production capacity, why spend the extra money. Having said that, the last time I looked, the cost of the 4880 was not significantly more than the cost of the smaller printers, because more ink is supplied with the machine. So cost of the machine is not a factor.

Floyd L. Davidson
Regardless of how satisfied someone is with a consumer grade printer, it is absurd to claim it is nicer to use than commercial printers.

PeterN
Epson claims it solved the ink clogging problem with the 4880. There is no question that the larger printers are cheaper to run. An Epson salesman told me that since I print about ten prints a month, and do not do large format printing, it would be silly for me to get anything larger than the 3880.

-- PeterN