Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2011 00:14:30 -0800 From: David Southwell <david@vizion2000.net> To: perryh@pluto.rain.com Cc: emulation@freebsd.org Subject: Re: epson printers on amd64 Message-ID: <201111200014.30960.david@vizion2000.net> In-Reply-To: <4ec8ce86.SUQIYIhDcM4XkICl%perryh@pluto.rain.com> References: <201111190050.05726.admin@vizion2000.net> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1111191331080.12780@wonkity.com> <4ec8ce86.SUQIYIhDcM4XkICl%perryh@pluto.rain.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sunday 20 November 2011 01:55:18 perryh@pluto.rain.com wrote: > Warren Block <wblock@wonkity.com> 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. 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. So do make sure you know what you are ta;lking about and do not put all inkjet printers into an "inkspitter" category! You cannot however produce goood prints without profiling. > > BTW, to the OP: a single posting, to a single list, would have been > sufficient. I saw 4 postings of the same (or nearly the same) question, > spread over 2 lists. It was intentionally posted to the two relevant list - ports and emulation. Unfortunately the emulation list initially bounced the first post two attempts but then their server accepted them as well as the third - possibly a soft bounce interpreted as a hard or a hard bounce return instead of a soft. David
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201111200014.30960.david>