On Fri, 27 Jun 2003 02:02:01 GMT, "Rabworc" wrote:

Rafe,

Thanks for your insight. Do you have any recommendations as to which printer
would best suite my needs? If you know of one that would do the job better
than these two for around the same cost, I would love to hear about it.


I've reconsidered my answer. Get the HP. Here's why.

1. Epson 2200 may have issues with metamerism unless
you're very careful.. Since you are primarily interested
in color accuracy, you don't want that headache.

2. Epson 2200 has pigment inks. This means that it
has a narrower color gamut than the HP. That means
the HP will be able to hit a higher portion of the full
Pantone color range. (But neither printer will be
able to cover 100%)

3. The HP has integral color calibation.

4. If you do end up going with color management
and printer profiles, you'll find dye inks generally
easier to profile than pigments.


The ONLY reason you might not want to go with the
HP is if you must have longevity for your prints.
HP makes no claims whatsoever as to the longevity
of prints made with the 10ps. Contrast that to an
advertised 80 years for prints on the 2200 -- under
ideal conditions and "approved" media.



rafe b.
http://www.terrapinphoto.com