CONFOCALMICROSCOPY Archives

November 1994

CONFOCALMICROSCOPY@LISTS.UMN.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Paul Goodwin <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Confocal Microscopy List <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 18 Nov 1994 10:32:51 -0800
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (37 lines)
I don't have one, but a colleague does. I'm not ditching my Tektronix
Phaser IISDX for one :). The print quality is definately inferior, in
particular, there is a lot of banding on large stretches of constant
shading (e.g.- black areas on confocal images).
 
________________________________________________________________________________
 
 
Paul Goodwin
Image Analysis Lab
FHCRC, Seattle, WA
 
On Fri, 18 Nov 1994, Badri Roysam wrote:
 
> This note follows up on some earlier discussions on this mailing list
> regarding image hardcopy devices..
>
> The recent issue of the Advanced Imaging magazine has an ad
> from Fargo Electronics (800-327-4622)
> for a **dye sublimation** cum **wax thermal** 600x300dpi color
> printer that sells for $1549 (educational price)...
>
> Seems rather attractive compared to the printers we have from Kodak ($10 - 40K).
>
> The reason why this printer is so cheap is because it does not have
> any memory or processor.. it relies on the host machine (mac/pc/workstation)
> to do the work... For someone who is not printing images all day (includes
> myself!), it may be ok to wait 9-12 minutes for a printout.
>
> Does anyone have any experience with this product?
>
> Badri Roysam
> Assistant Professor
> Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY 12180.
> [log in to unmask]
>

ATOM RSS1 RSS2