From owner-freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Nov 21 10:02:10 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FB9E1065674 for ; Mon, 21 Nov 2011 10:02:10 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from admin@vizion2000.net) Received: from dns1.vizion2000.net (dns1.vizion2000.net [62.49.197.50]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E0818FC15 for ; Mon, 21 Nov 2011 10:02:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: by dns1.vizion2000.net (Postfix, from userid 1004) id 9528F119C54; Mon, 21 Nov 2011 00:40:34 -0800 (PST) From: David Southwell Organization: Vizion Communications To: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2011 00:40:34 -0800 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (FreeBSD/8.2-RELEASE; KDE/4.7.3; amd64; ; ) References: <201111190050.05726.admin@vizion2000.net> <201111200014.30960.david@vizion2000.net> <4EC940DA.2020900@mittelstaedt.us> In-Reply-To: <4EC940DA.2020900@mittelstaedt.us> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201111210040.34482.admin@vizion2000.net> Cc: Subject: Re: epson printers on amd64 X-BeenThere: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: david@vizion2000.net List-Id: Development of Emulators of other operating systems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2011 10:02:10 -0000 On Sunday 20 November 2011 10:03:06 Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: > On 11/20/2011 12:14 AM, David Southwell wrote: > > On Sunday 20 November 2011 01:55:18 perryh@pluto.rain.com wrote: > >> Warren Block wrote: > >>> On Sat, 19 Nov 2011, David Southwell wrote: > >>>> Anyone up to date on how to do high quality printing with > >>>> epson inkjet printers (in my case r2400 and r2880) on amd64 > >>>> systems. print/pips* reports they require 386 and do not > >>>> compile on amd64. > >>> > >>> print/gimp-gutenprint works pretty well from Gimp, although > >>> I have not figured out how to get consistent color and brightness. > >>> It supports both of those printers. > >> > >> I'm sure I'm not alone in doubting that _any_ ink-spitter is likely to > >> produce "high quality printing" or "consistent color and brightness", > >> regardless of the host support used. Those printers are designed to > >> be manufactured as inexpensively as possible so as to be sold at very > >> low prices, the profit being in the recurring ink sales. "Cheap" and > >> "high quality" tend to be incompatible design goals. > > Every printer out there is designed to be used in a business model where > the profits are in recurring consumables sales. > > > Not so with epson 2400 and 2880 when properly profiled these professional > > printers produce salon quality prints and are not in any way comparable > > with inexpensive consumer "inkspitter" models - I think you are right as > > far as more economically priced printers are concerned. I have many > > prints produced on epson 2400, 2880& larger epson printers accepted > > into international salons and received awards. > > I have a cheaper Epson inkjet myself that uses the same ink setup as the > more expensive ones your referring to and produces similar quality > photos. The main difference between it and the more expensive inkjets > is the paper control, in the better printers the paper is much more > securely held and less likely to slip during printing. > > However, despite the fact that inkjets can be manufactured to produce > excellent output, the caveat is that it is all in the ink. You cannot > get high quality output from an inkjet with standard water-soluble > inks, that's why the epson output is so good, because they use > petroleum-based inks. However, the oil based inks WILL clog the > printhead unless the printer is used frequently. The industry > experimented with wax-based inks for a while, those also produce > excellent output, but the printers also will clog unless they are > used every day. I myself buy aftermarket water-soluble ink cartridges > that are a drop-in replacement for the Epson cartridges, and do > not clog, and are much cheaper. Print quality is lower, though. The alternative to cartridges is to use a high quality inkflow system. I agree the quality of the ink is really significant. If you want to get the best results then use pigment inks. > > These printers are totally unsuitable for the average consumer who just > wants to print a picture once every few months. Furthermore the > cost-per-page is far higher than the current crop of inexpensive > color laserjet printers, that is due to Epson using very small ink > cartridges. Epson does that because larger cartridges have more mass > and more mass has more inertia and is harder to control. Again the inkflow systems reduce the mass. I have solve the tendency for nozzle blockages by adding 2% proproponol to my bulk pigment ink supplies. The cost of high quality ink bought in bulk using an ink flow system gives me a reduction of 80% of the cost of Epson Cartridges plus a much longer print head life and a quality that is at least equal to using epson cartridges. > > Getting back to the original question, if your going to drop $500 into > a professional quality inkjet and at least that every year into > consumables for it in order to print pro-quality pictures on a regular > basis, then setup an older extra 32-bit Intel-based PC as a print server > and send Postscript jobs to it over the network, and have it > convert them to whatever language the printer uses. > I agree that would be a solution but a more sensible, and less energy consuming alternative would be a 64bit compliant driver! It is nuts not to have one! david