Hi Marla,

I've also looked at both of those in preparation for the day when my Epson R1900 truly quits. My understanding is that the Canon would be appropriate for cards but the Epson would be better for prints. Two reasons. One, even though the new dye inks resist fading for much longer than the older dye inks, the pigment based inks are even more archival/long lasting. Two, the Canon supposedly produces a brighter more saturated image while the Epson produces more "natural" looking colors. I suppose it depends on what your work is like and this is just what I've read.

I have loved my Epson R1900. Yes, the paper feed can be fussy but the images are beautiful. I'll be interested to hear what other people say.

Happy New Years, Lore


On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 10:38 AM, Marla Coppolino <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
Dear Friends,

I'm considering purchase of an archival quality printer for producing prints of my art and photography work.

One recent online source (not affiliated with any printer company) recommends either:
- Epson SureColor P600 (uses pigment inks; higher end, in the $700 range), or
- Canon Pixma Pro-100 (uses dye inks; lower-mid range, the $300 range).

I am aware that the bigger, longer-term expense is the ink cartridges, plus the obligatory hassle of keeping the machine in regular use to avoid clogging.

I invite opinions on your experiences. Thank you!

Happy and creative wishes to all for 2016!
Marla

________________________________________________

Need to leave or subscribe to the Sciart-L listserv? Follow the instructions at
http://www.gnsi.org/resources/reviews/gnsi-sciart-l-listserv




--
Lore Ruttan, Ph.D.

Lore Ruttan Illustration

Visit my Etsy shop at http://www.etsy.com/shop/Paperlore

________________________________________________

Need to leave or subscribe to the Sciart-L listserv? Follow the instructions at
http://www.gnsi.org/resources/reviews/gnsi-sciart-l-listserv