Multi-function Printer/Copier/Scanner

[Snarpy]

I'm in the market for the above device. My immediate need is just for a copier for documents, but thinking of the future I see a possible (probable) need for scanning photos for websites. I can envision needing to scan catalogs or brochures (hopefully glossy) and blow up product images.

I've been thinking of the Canon Pixma line (http://consumer.usa.canon.com/ir/controller?act=ProductCatIndexAct&fcategoryid=105). There's a step in scanner resolution between the MP500 and MP750 - The MP500 has an optical resolution of 1200 x 2400 dpi, and the MP750 is 2400 x 4800. They also list another resolution, which I guess is software enhanced, of 19,200 x 19,200 for the MP500 but only 9600 x 9600 for the MP750.

I have zip experience with this stuff. How much difference does the software enhancing make? What would you think is "enough" on the optical resolution, so I can blow things up and/or start with a higher resolution before processing? I can't go out and try them - the MP500 is fairly popular but it doesn't seem like I can get the MP750 except online. The MP8xx models seem to be available locally, but that's getting more expensive than I want to go.

General opinions on Canon Pixmas are welcome, too, as well as Canon's bubblejet technology and multiple ink system. The reviews I've seen place Canon far ahead of HP on reliability.

[Jeff]

I have yet to find any benefit to scanner "software enhanced" resolutions - 19,200 x 19,200 seems humerous to me as the results would not be CSI-like :) The results I've seen to date have been just like upsampling in photoshop. Most processed photos look 99.9% the same to my eye scanned at 1200 or 2400 dpi on a flatbed scanner... there just isn't that much detail in the photo to start (my latest scanner is a microtek i900 but I rarely use above 600 dpi - I have used 1200 and 2400 dpi to scan black and white high quality original art to blow up, but have yet to make use of 4800 dpi.) Scanning catalogs I suppose you'll make use of the high resolution to scan high and then descreen so you don't end up with moire or the screen from the press - but I doubt you'll use greater than 1200 very often...

[Randall]

Optical resolution is the only number that matters. (And you'll notice that these days it's not symmetrical -- they can control the motor speed well enough to give you those 2400/4800 figures, but the horizontal resolution of the CCD is the limiting factor.) Software enhancement (aka interpolation) is like the digital "zoom" in a camera -- it's the same picture, just bigger and fuzzier.

Not that there's anything wrong with being fuzzy ... it all depends on your context. :wink:

As far as the printing side goes, I don't have any direct experience with Canon. But I've been nudging people in that direction ever since HP started skimping on the ink cartridges. Canon printers are noted for speed, print quality and reasonable ink costs, which is a tough combination to beat.

Randall

[Mandi]

I bought an HP multifunction machine October 2003, and it's been fantastic. It also has built in card readers, which is nice - clients sometimes give you data that way. More than once, I've used it for data rescue, too - for the fixit type clientele. Also, I set the printer preferences to use the "Draft" mode by default, and I use a TON less ink - I only change my cartridge maybe once every 4-5 months at most (and I have successfully refilled it several times too, with an $11 kit from wal mart - you can't do that with some of the brands, something to consider.) I am not exactly frugal about how much I print, either - so I think that's pretty good.

I can't double check - I'm not where it is right now - but [url="http://h10025.www1.hp.com/ewfrf/wc/product?product=79491&lc=en&cc=us&dlc=en&lang=en&cc=us"]I think this is the one I have. The only thing I wish it did more fluidly was network - the next machine I buy will have all that, and print server options too. The one I'm drooling over now has built in wi-fi. (Mine will at least allow printing over a LAN.)

Previously, you had to still have the multifunction machine hang off a PC in order to use the scanning ability - and it couldn't scan over a network. I'm not sure how well the newer network-ready machines handle that aspect, something to ask about for sure.

Anyway, another vote to nudge you towards an HP product.

[Randall]

Anyway, another vote to nudge you towards an HP product. Fight! Fight!

Randall :ytpopcrn:

[Jeff]

My 1998 HP Designjet 750 is still running after running thousands of feet of paper through it :)

[Mandi]

Yeah, I strongly suspect the original HP Deskjet 500 - black and greyscale only, 300 dpi - is still running strong too. Wish I could check with the people I passed it on to - we were gifted a "new to us" color printer and gave away the old one. That was the first inkjet printer HP came out with, about 1992 or 1993, and I don't want to tell you what we paid for it, ugh.

[Randall]

There's no question HP makes good printers. But the MFCs I've tangled with suffered terribly from bad software -- they did a poor job of "integrating" all of the scan/print/fax/copy functionality on the PC side, and I got tired of dealing with the bugs.

The best I could do was fake the machine out using a printer-only driver compatible with its print engine, and disable the other functions in the Device Manager. Then it would work fine as a printer, and fine as a standalone copier and fax machine.

I know some people who've had wonderful experiences with HP all-in-ones, but I wonder if they were just lucky.

Lately we've been buying Brother laser and inkjet MFCs. The print quality isn't quite up to HP standards, but we've had no trouble with their software. For office-type work they do the job.

But I'd lean in the direction of a Canon for graphic design work.

Randall

[Snarpy]

I'm scared off from seeing 30% to 75% negative reviews on the HP Multi-functions that are in my price/feature range. We've always had HP printers in the past, and when I get the new printer Flyboy is going to inherit our current HP for college. (His <1yr old free Dell printer bit the dust.)

I just found out that the Canon Pixma MP750 is out of stock. So now I'm rethinking everything again.
1. Get a less expensive one for office work, and go down to the local printer to get scans for graphic design. (And later, when I've got enough clients, get a good one.)
2. Move up a little more in price.

Decisions, decisions. I'll find out what the printer charges tomorrow or next week.

Keep buying HPs people -you're helping our local economy. 3M has a plant in Columbia that makes those flexible circuits that are on the HP cartridges. I've got a friend who's an engineer there. He gave us a tour of the plant once - super cool.

[Andilinks]

I purchased an HP PSC 1610v for $128. almost a year ago and am pleased with the performance except for an occasionally sticky paper feed.

I bought in this price range because my printing needs are very light. If I had to use it daily for invoices etc I'd get a better quality machine but for my occasional (maybe twice a week) hard copy this one is just perfect. I'd find the sticky paper feed annoying if I used it more often.

Due to my very trying experience with an HP computer I would never buy another HP computer.

[Kevin]

I don't pay much attention to DPI anymore because unless you are trying to print a billboard or something huge anything above 300 DPI on the scanning or 600 DPI on the printing is just pointless.

Of course I am completely happy with my external SCSI scanner from Umax and my networked color laser printer from Samsung ;)

[Randall]

His <1yr old free Dell printer bit the dust. I'll never understand why they went with Lexmark as their supplier. The laser printers are decent, but the low-end inkjets are just ... awful. :eeww: Keep buying HPs people -you're helping our local economy. 3M has a plant in Columbia that makes those flexible circuits that are on the HP cartridges. Looking at HP's business-class inkjets, like the Business Inkjet 1000 (http://www.staples.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/StaplesProductDisplay?storeId=10001&splCatType=1&catalogId=10051&langId=-1&productId=127977), I'm happy to see that they're actually producing printers that cost less to run than the ones we have now. Look at the page yields on those cartridges! But I have mixed feelings about them abandoning the built-in printheads.

Randall

[Jeff]

I have mixed feelings about them abandoning the built-in printheads.As a long-time epson user (because of the quality of the inks) I can definitely appreciate that statement with the espon heads historically becoming a pain in the neck after about 2 years of use. The best would seem to be the high-end hp and many canons with easily user replaceable heads separate from the ink cartridges (as it's gotta cost something to replace all the heads before they're even close to shot, just to be sure... though it's definitely convenient :))

[Randall]

The best would seem to be the high-end hp and many canons with easily user replaceable heads separate from the ink cartridges (as it's gotta cost something to replace all the heads before they're even close to shot, just to be sure... though it's definitely convenient :)) The heads on the model I was looking at (which isn't expensive at all, which is the most surprising thing) are user replaceable, which I guess wasn't an option with Epson.

There is a sense of wastefulness with HP's traditional cartridges. The printheads on this new Inkjet 1000 are rated for tens of thousands of pages, and the ink cartridges are cheaper since there's no built-in printhead. But as you say, it's awfully convenient to get a brand-new, unclogged printhead with every cartridge -- all equipped with Snarpy's flexible circuits, of course. I wonder if the the standalone printheads still use those circuits?

Randall

[Jeff]

Might be a case of head cost increasing with resolution too?

I guess Epson is the only big player to not get it right in my book, yet I keep buying them for their inks :dunno:

[Randall]

Might be a case of head cost increasing with resolution too?
Hmm, good point -- they're claiming 1200 dpi for text now, though I wonder how plausible that is.

It's too bad there's no multifunction equivalent of the Business Inkjet series. You look at the Photosmart 3200 (http://h10010.www1.hp.com/wwpc/us/en/sm/WF08a/18972-238444-410635-421635-f57-439599.html) and the ink capacity is only 4.5ml for the color cartridges, $10 a pop. The #11 color inks used in the Business Inkjets (http://h10010.www1.hp.com/wwpc/us/en/sm/WF08a/18972-236251-236261-24728-f51-411179.html) are 28ml, and they only cost $34. That's $2.22/ml vs $1.21/ml.

Canon doesn't list the capacity of their ink tanks, which is annoying. :grr:

Randall

[kitchin]

More gripes about HP here: http://www.aota.net/forums/showthread.php?t=13751

The HP multifunctions I've used work well, but the software installed is enormous and you can't de-select any of it (unless you are Randall, like he said above).

The Lexmark inexpensive laser printer is not so great. The ink on envelopes smeared. I don't know if you can blame that on our using Staples-brand carts. More likely it just doesn't heat up enough. My only problem with the trusty old HP Laserjet (laser not ink"jet") is when I try to run a page through twice to print both sides. The paper really gets a nice cooking in that printer.

Also, like almost any printer since unix time zero, once you have sent a job to the printer, it is almost impossible to tell the printer to cancel it. With the LaserJet, I turn it off for 30 seconds, then open it up and fish out the piece of paper on the rollers.

[Snarpy]

I don't pay much attention to DPI anymore because unless you are trying to print a billboard or something huge anything above 300 DPI on the scanning or 600 DPI on the printing is just pointless.

Of course I am completely happy with my external SCSI scanner from Umax and my networked color laser printer from Samsung ;)
Well, I guess Kevin isn't a graphic artist, but maybe there's something to this. Since I know nothing about this, I tried to find some good tutorials on the web. So far, this article (http://www.creativepro.com/story/feature/8009.html) is the most informative I've found, although it doesn't discuss enlarging and image processing (it only treats 1 to 1 scans). But the numbers mentioned make me think that I'd probably never need to go over 1200 on the scanning.

Graphic artists, please weigh in. Math analysis welcome.

[Kevin]

Well, I guess Kevin isn't a graphic artist, but maybe there's something to this. Since I know nothing about this, I tried to find some good tutorials on the web. So far, this article (http://www.creativepro.com/story/feature/8009.html) is the most informative I've found, although it doesn't discuss enlarging and image processing (it only treats 1 to 1 scans). But the numbers mentioned make me think that I'd probably never need to go over 1200 on the scanning.

Graphic artists, please weigh in. Math analysis welcome.
OK, I will give you some examples...

Normally when I scan something I do it at 150 DPI. Sometimes I go up to 200 DPI if there is tiny text or even 300 for a real high quality picture.

The other day I scanned a document at 150 DPI and got complaints from the person I sent it to that it was HUGE. The image files were ~1300x1600 for an 8.5x11 inch scan so I had to redo it at only 75 DPI to make her happy.

Not long ago I had a document that I wanted to simply scan and then print back out. Since I didn't plan on keeping the file around I decided to go with the max quality of my printer which is 600 DPI. When I did the scan at 600 DPI the resulting .png file was about 48MB. The print job was about 125MB and it took my printer about 15 minutes to process the image. I went back and did the same thing at 150 DPI and the hard copy looked identical. Note that this is on an actual laser printer not an ink jet where the ink can blur and reduce quality.

[Kevin]

Oh, and btw, it was a professional graphics artist that told me that there was no point in going above 300 DPI unless you planned to make a blowup of some kind later.

[Jeff]

to make a blowup of some kind later
I scan everything at 600 as the default because it allows me to crop or enlarge as necessary.

I can definitely see the difference between 150 and 300 dpi on the printer here. Between 300 and 600 I agree the difference in output is negligible to 99.9% of viewers, even printed on a press where each plate is output at 2540 dpi - most people's vision just isn't that acute (though I did have one customer who is an artist and wears thick glasses - about my 600 dpi laser printer with fiery they said "but this is all made of dots instead of the nicer looking lines which make up a CLC print!" For my workflow though it makes things a whole lot easier to scan at 600 to allow myself to crop or have the images if I need to do larger prints than to scan at 300 and possibly not have the image I need later on when the photo from the client is no longer available. 300 I regard is adequate but 600 gives me room to work on the image without my actions causing a loss in quality.

[Jeff]

Also in my opinion, above 600 dpi there are other factors such as the scanner's dynamic range (dmax), color quality, software included to calibrate to get accurate colors, etc. that will likely play a larger role in percieved quality. Given the originals I typically get, I can't think of too many situations where you'll make use of greater than 1200 dpi -- typical photos that you'll get from non-photographer clients are mostly shot on $50 - $400 cameras and you'll find they just aren't focused sharply enough nor with drug store developing and package lens do they really resolve much if any more detail than a 600 dpi scan and I have yet to see them resolve more detail than 1200 dpi. Photographer clients using film will have their own gear anyway and use $1000+ film scanners or drum scanners anyway to get the most so you won't match that with any multifunction. For the rest of clients 1200 dpi+ might come in handy the one time in a million you're presented with a lineart logo on film or other material where bleed doesn't come in to play. Otherwise, greater than 1200 dpi scanning resolution in my book is for marketing, or simply a biproduct of delivering a scanner that can do very nice scans at commonly used lower resolutoins (but how the two actually go hand in hand I'm not sure.) The optimal resolution needed for scanning and descreening press printed originals is the one unknown in my book because it's a laborious trial and error process to descreen in a manner that preserves maximum detail but no moire and I consider it a last resort for me for projects that require 100% quality instead of 99% quality so I just don't know if added resolution is of benefit there.

[Randall]

I can definitely see the difference between 150 and 300 dpi on the printer here. Between 300 and 600 I agree the difference in output is negligible to 99.9% of viewers Agreed. Even for text printed on a laser you can usually get away with 300 dpi (just make sure you're scanning in line-art mode, or everything will look fuzzy). Typically the all-in-ones use 300 dpi for making copies.

As for photos, with my HP injket I've found that a 300 dpi image actually looks better than a 600 dpi one. Also in my opinion, above 600 dpi there are other factors such as the scanner's dynamic range (dmax), color quality, software included to calibrate to get accurate colors, etc. that will likely play a larger role in percieved quality. And the included software probably doesn't take full advantage of the scanner's capabilities anyway. (Assuming they give you anything at all -- nowadays you'll find manufacturers using the WIA scanning functions built into WinXP. Not exactly professional grade.)

For better control over scan quality you generally have to buy third-party software. Professionals swear by SilverFast Ai (http://www.silverfast.com/show/silverfast/en.html), which is expensive and supports only certain scanners -- and you won't find any all-in-ones on the list (unless it uses the scanning engine of a supported standalone scanner -- don't know if that ever happens). The "beginner (http://www.silverfast.com/show/silverfast-dcse/en.html)" version is cheaper, but again they only support certain scanners.

VueScan (http://www.hamrick.com) is more likely to work with an all-in-one unit, but check the list (http://www.hamrick.com/vuescan/vuescan.htm#supported) before you buy something. The optimal resolution needed for scanning and descreening press printed originals is the one unknown in my book because it's a laborious trial and error process to descreen in a manner that preserves maximum detail but no moire and I consider it a last resort for me for projects that require 100% quality instead of 99% quality so I just don't know if added resolution is of benefit there. Modern noise reduction software like Noise Ninja (http://www.picturecode.com) or Noiseware (http://www.imagenomic.com) may give you good results in that area, and probably doesn't need more than 300 dpi.

Randall

[kitchin]

I bought Epson's top-end consumer-grade scanner (for a coupla hundred bux a coupla years ago). I was unhappy that the pictures did not come out sqaure when I scanned them in the corner of the glass. I gues I need some kind of rig to lay things out in the center. But overall, it is a better scanner than the HP's of that era and price range, which always gave me trouble. Back then it seemed like anybody who bought a $50 parallel port scanner got a better product than I did! Well, better than the HP, maybe not the Epson.

[Jeff]

I was unhappy that the pictures did not come out sqaure when I scanned them in the corner of the glass. You've hit on one of my major annoyances right there, but it seems true of most scanners on the market! Most scanners don't scan to the edge of the glass. So if you lay photos or full-bleed prints down using the edge to keep them from rotating when you put the lid down, the scanner ends up cutting a little bit off. Annyoing and poor design in my opinion, but I guess it saves a few cents by allowing a tiny bit smaller sensor to be used.

[TVB]

Snarpy,

The Sunday newspaper ads delivered on Saturday to my house seem to be having printers as the featured product this week. Just fyi in case you don't get the Sunday paper.