To Ron Baird /Kodak Product Suggestion

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

What would really be nice is if Kodak could come out with an
imaging device that prints onto tradition RA photo papers like a
Chromira, only smaller something on par with the 16x20 size
papers.

It would allow me to use RA4 chemistry and
the less expensive photo paper I can easily obtain through my
current photodealers thus enabling me to use the same paper
I make optical prints on yet also enabling me to retouch imagery
as needed- and have a interface like firewire- so that I can output
digital files from my computer price, granted you would still need a
paper processor priced 3k that-------- would be nice.

--
LF Website @ http/members.verizon.net/~gregoryblank

"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong,
is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable
to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Gregory Blank wrote:
> What would really be nice is if Kodak could come out with an
> imaging device that prints onto tradition RA photo papers like a
> Chromira, only smaller something on par with the 16x20 size
> papers.
>
> It would allow me to use RA4 chemistry and
> the less expensive photo paper I can easily obtain through my
> current photodealers thus enabling me to use the same paper
> I make optical prints on yet also enabling me to retouch imagery
> as needed- and have a interface like firewire- so that I can output
> digital files from my computer price, granted you would still need a
> paper processor priced 3k that-------- would be nice.
>
> --
> LF Website @ http/members.verizon.net/~gregoryblank
>
> "To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
> or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong,
> is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable
> to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918

Gregory,
Kodak had one of the first scanning printers, the Pegasus, a local lab
had one about 10 years ago, only went up to 20x24. This eliminated the
larger print size the Durst Lamda could do, which was where the big
money was, and they couldn't make a go of the printer. At that time the
printer cost $50K or so, plus you needed a processor for the paper.
Have you seen the new Epson 4800 less than $2K and the prints will last
longer. Also give you another skill set.

Tom

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Greetings Gregory,

Interesting, Greg, I can understand your interest.

In fact, Kodak has introduced a number of applications that fit your
thoughts. I actually worked on a project at the beginning of the digital age
and at the start of the web. The CRT digital printer could make prints up to
8.5 inches wide and I forget how long, but it used roll paper. It also used
an very high definition black and white CRT that would display the image and
project it up to the paper position. filters would move in and out of the
light path for correct color. This all happened quite fast, but it gave labs
the ability to print digital images on paper the same as that used for
negatives... RA4 based. There were other systems early on as well and
currently there are printers that do this at an amazingly high rate.

Dye Sublimation printers are also extremely good. They use heat to create
the gases that are deposited to the paper rather than chemical change. Both
end up with similar longevity and paper features. Truth is, you can get
printers that will print an 8x12, 8x10, or true A4, or print multiple images
with 2-5x7, 2-6x8, or 4-4x6-inch photos per sheet in a bout 90 seconds at
quality equal to RA4 printers. No 16x20 lower cost printers just yet, but
they are out there if you have the money.

Talk to you soon, Greg, let me know if you have any ideas, I am glad to
share with you.

Ron Baird
Eastman Kodak Company







"Gregory Blank" <greg@greg_____photo.com> wrote in message
news:greg-B861F0.23093712072005@news.verizon.net...
>
> What would really be nice is if Kodak could come out with an
> imaging device that prints onto tradition RA photo papers like a
> Chromira, only smaller something on par with the 16x20 size
> papers.
>
> It would allow me to use RA4 chemistry and
> the less expensive photo paper I can easily obtain through my
> current photodealers thus enabling me to use the same paper
> I make optical prints on yet also enabling me to retouch imagery
> as needed- and have a interface like firewire- so that I can output
> digital files from my computer price, granted you would still need a
> paper processor priced 3k that-------- would be nice.
>
> --
> LF Website @ http/members.verizon.net/~gregoryblank
>
> "To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
> or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong,
> is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable
> to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In article <1121280921.929300.319280@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
"tomm101" <monego@valley.net> wrote:
>
> Gregory,
> Kodak had one of the first scanning printers, the Pegasus, a local lab
> had one about 10 years ago, only went up to 20x24. This eliminated the
> larger print size the Durst Lamda could do, which was where the big
> money was, and they couldn't make a go of the printer. At that time the
> printer cost $50K or so, plus you needed a processor for the paper.

At that price it was geared towards labs, and maybe larger studios.
Seems like the little guy is missed a lot, though realistically we are
where the long term money is (for these companies).....which is why
Epson and others are doing well.


> Have you seen the new Epson 4800 less than $2K and the prints will last
> longer. Also give you another skill set.
> Tom

I am certainly tempted.

If you had limited capitol would you go for the
Nikon 9000 scanner or a nice 4800 printer

I have a 1280 and a 2450 Perfection, so for me either or
is an upgrade.

--
LF Website @ http/members.verizon.net/~gregoryblank

"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong,
is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable
to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918