At 18:53 05-06-1998 +0200, you wrote:
>>Dave Beebe wrote:
>
>
>>I'm not sure the higher resolution (1440)
>>will be needed for confocal images, as the original image resolution is
>>usually the resolution limit in most of our work.
>
>remember that it is 1440x720 dpi with 3 (Stylus 600/800) or 6 (?) colors
>(new Epson Photo-Printers, Stylus Photo had 720 dpi).
>This means a much lower resulotion for "real color"!
>One pixel has to contain many dots (which are in 1440 dpi) to reproduce the
>color.
>So the high resolutions are not the "real resolution" for color prints.
>
>

On a face-to-face comparison, the Stylus Photo produces MUCH BETTER images
than the 600/800 (we have them both in the lab), specially with the EPSON
glossy and special film (not with the HP; the glossy HP produces a orange
peel pattern which is absent with the Epson). With some patience (15 min)
the results for fluorescence, brightfield or confocal can be superb in the
Epson special film (altough it costs 4x more than the glossy). Definitly
better than the last generation of HP's (I don't know about the ones
released last month; these should be better). On a one-to-one match with
the Phaser Tektronics, I must allow that 90% of the times I like better the
output of the Stylus Photo. Not mentioning prices.
I have no comercial interest...


ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
o                                                     o
o Jose' A. Feijo', Prof.                                      o
o                                                     o
o Dep. Biologia Vegetal, Fac.Ciencias Univ. Lisboa    o
o Campo Grande, Ed.C2, P-1700 LISBOA, PORTUGAL        o
o                                                     o
o tel. +351.1.7500069, fax +351.1.7500048             o
o e.mail: [log in to unmask]                         o
o URL: www.fc.ul.pt/departs/biologia_vegetal/ejf.html o
o                                                     o
ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo