Richard,

As suggested by others on this list, you may want to consider an alternative
to purchase of any of these expensive printers. Someone on this list recently
indicated that the Epson Stylus Photo gives publication-quality prints when
used with high quality glossy paper (who ever that was, THANK YOU!). Based on
that suggestion I purchased one and tried it out. I recently used it to
prepare my poster for the Cell Biology Meetings in Washington DC. The poster
had several confocal images printed on a Tektronix Phaser dye sub printer (300

dpi) and several on the Epson (720 dpi). If anything, prints made with the
Epson were better, with truer, richer colors (and of course, better
resolution). When I pointed out to those visiting the poster that the images
were produced on a printer costing (substantially) less than $500, all were
amazed. I was even able to print the title board for the poster on this
printer, as it does images up to 44" in length (limited to 8.5" width).

My university has a contract with MicroWarehouse as our preferred provider of
computer supplies. They recently quoted me a price of $347 for this printer
(prices gleaned from sources on the web pegged it at $420-450)! Even better,
the "street" price for Epson HQ glossy paper just dropped from >$30 for 15
sheets to <$13 for 20 sheets!  MicroWarehouse sent me some recently at
$10.20/20 sheets. The printer works with Mac or PC. It is not directly
network-able, but I print to it from our network by cabling it to a PC that is

on the network and using this PC (Win 95) as a server.

One caveat: I have no long-term experience with the stability of prints made
with this printer. However, for all conceivable uses in my lab, this printer
has become my #1, 2 and 3 choice. I don't expect to have to use the Department

network printer again (the Tektronix).

Disclaimer: I have no interest in or association with any manufacturer or
distributor mentioned.

Dave Beebe


David C. Beebe, Ph.D.,  Cataract Research Center
Jules and Doris Stein RPB Professor of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences
Professor of Cell Biology and Physiology, Washington Univ. Sch. Med.
314.362.1621 (office); 314.747.1588 (lab); 314.747.1405(fax)




[log in to unmask] wrote:

>         O.k., all you digital imaging folks:  Looking for comments of any
> kind comparing the Condonics NP-1600 and the Tektronix Phaser 450.
> We're presently in the market to purchase a full page "publication
> quality" dye-sublimation printer, and based on vendor lit.,
> listserver comments, and industry reviews. (Where as the Fuji
> Pictography 3000 looks really nice its just a little out of our
> price range, scarily slow).
>
> Image Sources:
>
> - Need to print via a networked solution, perferably a directly
> networked printer.
>
> - Printing variety of images, but primarily Greyscale EM, color
> Confocal, and full color LM images.  Ranging from 256 x 256, on up to
> over 5,000 x 5,000.  (Fully realizing that at 300dpi 1:1 isn't going
> to happen)
>
> - Printing from Intel PC's (Primarily Win NT) and Some Mac's, and a
> variety of software.
>
> Codonics:
>
>         Whereas this printer comes highly regommended by the Microscopy
> community (Even recommened by a vendor who sold the Tektronix and
> NOT the Condonics) I have some grave concerns about it.
>
> (1)  Considering the highly computer oriented nature of digital
> imaging, the Condonics web site(http:\\www.codonics.com\) is
> pathetic, and last updated Aug, 6, 1997 with the NP-1600 page
> updated Dec, 5, 1995!).  No online tech support, no on-line
> drivers, no FAQ's, no even a downloadable  PDF manual. Whereas the
> "built in floppy drive for easy upgradability" maybe great but where
> do the "upgrades" come from?  Snail mail communications?  Any feeling
> for longer term support?  (Last Codonics I worked with, '90-'94,
> worked great, but 1.5 years after purchase Tech support didn't really
> want to help at all with drivers for Windows 3.1 world, they had
> moved on to better things I guess)
>
> (2)  What, if any, options are there?
>
> (3)  Web search for "codonics" only results in 50-60 different sites
> for "Instructions for printing to the Codonics printer".
>
> (4)  No OS specific drivers, simply allows straight transfer of
> most image formats to the printer (this is nice) or relies on
> Post-Script printing (which is an option? How is it implemented?),
> but does require "loging on" and some rather criptic numerical
> "print-like-this" mode commands.  I take it you are stuck with 1:1
> printing and thus have to scale your image sizes prior to printing.
>
> (5)  From the user end (since most users aren't computer techno geeks
> like some of the rest of us) how user friendly is it really?
>
> (6)  Very fast, to Fastest on market - great.  Any comments,
> particularly compared to Tektronix?
>
> (7)  Handles multiple jobs simultaneously - again great!  Any
> comments?
>
> TEKTRONIX
>
> (1)  Solid support for a variety of printing environs but primarily
> graphics industry, not sci. imaging.
>
> (2)  Solid on-line tech support.
>
> (3)  Requires OS specific drivers - how easily installed?
>
> (4) Requires memory upgrade for larger image printing.
>
>         Any requested confidentiality for candid comments will be strongly
> protected.  Vendors should feel free to reply as well.
>
>         Thank you.
>
> Richard E. Edelmann, Ph.D.
> Electron Microscopy Facility Supervisor
> 352 Pearson Hall
> Miami University, Oxford, OH 45056
> Ph: 513.529.5712        Fax: 513.529.4243
> E-mail: [log in to unmask]
>
> "640K ought to be enough for anybody."
>      -- Bill Gates, 1981



--
David C. Beebe, Ph.D.,  Cataract Research Center
Jules and Doris Stein RPB Professor of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences
Professor of Cell Biology and Physiology, Washington Univ. Sch. Med.
314.362.1621 (office); 314.747.1588 (lab); 314.747.1405(fax)