Good all in one inkjet?

[bgoosh]

Helping friends choose a new multifunction printer since their
scanner died and printer is getting flaky.

Simple requirements: want color inkjet but they do little or no
photo printing, just documents, schoolwork, etc.

No networking, no FAXing, no refilling or generic inks, just
regular 8.5x11" paper, no special scanner requirements. For
Windows XP. Doesn't have to be very fast. The average use is
probably low, but ink costs per page should not be exorbitant.

It may not be used every day so should not be subject to
clogging; in general the hardware and drivers should be reliable,
simple, and hassle-free.

Ideally it could do B&W or color copies without PC even being on.

If no particular model, is there a recommended brand?

 

[Dan G]

The Canon MFs are well-liked. Get which ever one suits your needs. The
MP460, MP510 and MP600 are excellent values.

 

[Xainin]

The Canon MFs are well-liked. Get which ever one suits your needs. The
MP460, MP510 and MP600 are excellent values.

Thanks, I've been looking at reviews of these, and also of the related
MP160 and MP180. The "compare" function on Canon's site is useless for
comparing any of these, is there somewhere that summarizes the differences
concisely?

One common mention is that these are slow to start up (like 30 seconds),
and noisy. I'm wondering how noisy - any worse than for instance the HP
960c I have?

Are there any other manufacturers' multifunction printers that are worth
looking at?

 

[measekite]

Thanks, I've been looking at reviews of these, and also of the related
MP160 and MP180. The "compare" function on Canon's site is useless for
comparing any of these, is there somewhere that summarizes the differences
concisely?

One common mention is that these are slow to start up (like 30 seconds),
and noisy. I'm wondering how noisy - any worse than for instance the HP
960c I have?

Are there any other manufacturers' multifunction printers that are worth
looking at?

That depends.

If you want it for business than HP, but if you want it for photos Canon.

 

[Tony]

It's for home use. So Canon's the only good choice?

No
For very good quality photos you cannot ignore Epson provided you print
regularly (a couple of prints per week) or HP.
Both produce exceptional quality photos, Canon do not have a mortgage on
quality photo printing.

Also, it turns out they didn't realize that current printers let you take
the camera memory card and review and print pictures directly, and are
interested in that feature. (I was thinking they wouldn't want it since
they print their photos at local stores).

<snip>


Tony
MS MVP Printing/Imaging

 

[Xainin]

That depends.

If you want it for business than HP, but if you want it for photos Canon.

It's for home use. So Canon's the only good choice?

Also, it turns out they didn't realize that current printers let you take
the camera memory card and review and print pictures directly, and are
interested in that feature. (I was thinking they wouldn't want it since
they print their photos at local stores).

 

[Xainin]

No
For very good quality photos you cannot ignore Epson provided you print
regularly (a couple of prints per week) or HP.

My original post said "It may not be used every day so should not be
subject to clogging", so that would eliminate Epson.

Besides, now that I've spent hours looking at reviews on these things, the
Canon MP600 seems to be a safer bet, getting better reviews overall than
the similarly-priced range HP C4180 or Epson RX580.

 

[Tony]

My original post said "It may not be used every day so should not be
subject to clogging", so that would eliminate Epson.

Fair enough, but once a week will keep an Epson healthy. I have no axe to grind
so you should go with your judgement.

 

[TJ]

It's for home use. So Canon's the only good choice?

Also, it turns out they didn't realize that current printers let you take
the camera memory card and review and print pictures directly, and are
interested in that feature. (I was thinking they wouldn't want it since
they print their photos at local stores).

There are few snapshot-type photos that wouldn't benefit from a bit of
enhancement before being printed. Color balancing, exposure adjustment,
cropping out the strange guy on the side who's grinning and waving like
an idiot - things like that. I know that's certainly true of *my*
photos. Your friends would probably be more satisfied if they were to
load their photos onto their hard drive and work on them a bit, rather
than just print them directly.

Photoshop is the be-all and end-all of photo editing software, and many
would say it's the only one worth using - but it's very pricey and most
folks will never use most of its capabilities. Most photo-capable
printers come bundled with photo editing software, but some of those
programs are better than others. I would say that Picasa, available as a
free download from Google, is a good choice for non-professional photo
editing, especially for the novice.

Whichever printer they decide upon, your friends should try Picasa,
rather than print photos directly from the card. They might even decide
they like playing with this stuff!

Oh, one more tip... Whatever editing software you use, always do your
editing on a copy of the original photo, never the original. That way
you can always at least get back to where you started if things go
wrong. And be sure to use the editing software to convert the original
from the jpeg format most cameras use to a lossless format like png or
tiff. That should be your very first step. Saving and resaving jpeg
files causes loss of detail each time you do it.

TJ

 

[measekite]

Tony wrote:

&lt;snip&gt;



That depends. If you want it for business than HP, but if you want it for photos Canon.



It's for home use. So Canon's the only good choice?



No For very good quality photos you cannot ignore Epson provided you print regularly (a couple of prints per week) or HP. Both produce exceptional quality photos, Canon do not have a mortgage on quality photo printing.


In many respects that is true.&nbsp; Notwithstanding the statements above I took a photo and using the same paper I printed it out on my Canon IP4000 and on a friends Epson R300 without making any adjustments in the jpg file.&nbsp; I then asked a few other friends to judge the photos without telling them they were printed on different printers.&nbsp; All of them chose the Canon print saying the face tones are better and the all around photo looks better.

But Canon does have a mortgage on quality photo printing at the FASTEST SPEED.


Also, it turns out they didn't realize that current printers let you take the camera memory card and review and print pictures directly, and are interested in that feature. (I was thinking they wouldn't want it since they print their photos at local stores).



&lt;snip&gt; Tony MS MVP Printing/Imaging

 

[measekite]

Fair enough, but once a week will keep an Epson healthy. I have no axe to grind
so you should go with your judgement.

But he is in the printer business so more Epsons mean more business
resulting in higher profits. Grrrr

 

[measekite]

There are few snapshot-type photos that wouldn't benefit from a bit of
enhancement before being printed. Color balancing, exposure
adjustment, cropping out the strange guy on the side who's grinning
and waving like an idiot - things like that. I know that's certainly
true of *my* photos. Your friends would probably be more satisfied if
they were to load their photos onto their hard drive and work on them
a bit, rather than just print them directly.

Photoshop is the be-all and end-all of photo editing software, and
many would say it's the only one worth using - but it's very pricey

You can get most of the Photoshop standard features in Photoshop
Elements for about $80.00. Or you can get more photo enhanced features
with Photoshop Light Room for $199.00. It is not mandatory to get CS.

and most folks will never use most of its capabilities. Most
photo-capable printers come bundled with photo editing software, but
some of those programs are better than others. I would say that
Picasa, available as a free download from Google, is a good choice for
non-professional photo editing, especially for the novice.

Whichever printer they decide upon, your friends should try Picasa,
rather than print photos directly from the card. They might even
decide they like playing with this stuff!

Oh, one more tip... Whatever editing software you use, always do your
editing on a copy of the original photo, never the original. That way
you can always at least get back to where you started if things go wrong.

In stead of doing that you can get to the same place by using adjustment
layers. Then you save it in psd format. So in addition to getting back
to the beginning with the jpg file you can use the psd file to turn off
and on various adjustment layers.

 

[TJ]

You can get most of the Photoshop standard features in Photoshop
Elements for about $80.00. Or you can get more photo enhanced features
with Photoshop Light Room for $199.00. It is not mandatory to get CS.

In stead of doing that you can get to the same place by using adjustment
layers. Then you save it in psd format. So in addition to getting back
to the beginning with the jpg file you can use the psd file to turn off
and on various adjustment layers.

I have it on good authority that Photoshop Elements, at least the
version I looked into years ago, doesn't work with layers. So if you
went that route you'd still want to save the originals. The GIMP (Gnu
Image Manipulation Program), which is free for Windows, Mac OSX, and
Linux, will work in layers and will do all you just described, except
that it saves in its native xcf format. Jpeg formats won't save in
layers; they must be "flat." The GIMP will convert to most of the
"standard" formats, but they won't contain the layers as layers. The
GIMP isn't as powerful as Photoshop, but it's closer than anything else
in the consumer market, including Photoshop Elements. The interface does
have a steeper learning curve than PS or PE, but if you're looking for
power without the price, it's well worth it.

It's never a bad idea to save a backup copy of the original of any photo
you think is worth keeping, whatever software you use on it.

TJ

 

[measekite]

I have it on good authority that Photoshop Elements, at least the
version I looked into years ago, doesn't work with layers.

Do you also use a horse and plow.

So if you went that route you'd still want to save the originals. The
GIMP (Gnu Image Manipulation Program),

GIMP is probably good for geeks. It cannot hold a candle to PS

 

[Burt]

There are few snapshot-type photos that wouldn't benefit from a bit of
enhancement before being printed. Color balancing, exposure adjustment,
cropping out the strange guy on the side who's grinning and waving like an
idiot - things like that. I know that's certainly true of *my* photos.
Your friends would probably be more satisfied if they were to load their
photos onto their hard drive and work on them a bit, rather than just
print them directly.

Photoshop is the be-all and end-all of photo editing software, and many
would say it's the only one worth using - but it's very pricey and most
folks will never use most of its capabilities. Most photo-capable printers
come bundled with photo editing software, but some of those programs are
better than others. I would say that Picasa, available as a free download
from Google, is a good choice for non-professional photo editing,
especially for the novice.

Whichever printer they decide upon, your friends should try Picasa, rather
than print photos directly from the card. They might even decide they like
playing with this stuff!

Oh, one more tip... Whatever editing software you use, always do your
editing on a copy of the original photo, never the original. That way you
can always at least get back to where you started if things go wrong. And
be sure to use the editing software to convert the original from the jpeg
format most cameras use to a lossless format like png or tiff. That should
be your very first step. Saving and resaving jpeg files causes loss of
detail each time you do it.

TJ

TJ - all good advice. I would suggest, however, that Photoshop Elements is
a reasonably priced photo editing program that costs less than $100 and has
more features than I presently use after three years of extensive editing
with it. At its easiest level it still surpasses most of the other programs
in its price range, and there are so many features that you learn as you use
it to expand your editing abilities.

One issue that the original poster was concerned with was clogging.
Unfortunately, all inkjet printers can clog when they are permitted to sit
idle. They all have cleaning cycles, both automatic and user controlled, as
the manufacturers realize that, even with use of their own inks, clogging
can occur. Epson printheads are built in and are not user-removable for
more intensive cleaning. We do have a participant, Arthur Entlich, who has
written up techniques for more extensive cleaning of Epson printheads, if
needed, that will clean most clogged printheads in Epsons. Canon printers
(except for one new model with printheads integrated into the ink
cartridges) have removable printheads that can be cleaned after removal from
the printer and can be replaced (sometimes at nearly the cost of the
original printer). Most HP inkjet printers have printheads integrated into
the ink cartridges. If one clogs you simply put in a new cartridge. They
are a bit pricey, but this feature eliminates the concern about a clogged
printhead ruining your printer. Bottom line - an inkjet printer is not
great for people who will let it sit idle for weeks or months at a time or
who print monocolor without somewhat frequently using ink from all the
cartridges. Clogging is almost guaranteed.

 

[Burt]

(snip)

I have it on good authority that Photoshop Elements, at least the version
I looked into years ago, doesn't work with layers. So if you went that
route you'd still want to save the originals. The GIMP (Gnu Image
Manipulation Program), which is free for Windows, Mac OSX, and Linux, will
work in layers and will do all you just described, except that it saves in
its native xcf format. Jpeg formats won't save in layers; they must be
"flat." The GIMP will convert to most of the "standard" formats, but they
won't contain the layers as layers. The GIMP isn't as powerful as
Photoshop, but it's closer than anything else in the consumer market,
including Photoshop Elements. The interface does have a steeper learning
curve than PS or PE, but if you're looking for power without the price,
it's well worth it.

It's never a bad idea to save a backup copy of the original of any photo
you think is worth keeping, whatever software you use on it.

TJ

TJ - PSE, from v.2 on, does use layers and they are quite easy to use.
When saving an edited image in which layers have been used you can chose to
save it in the photoshop image format (psd which is non-losey) with the
separate layers intact. You can then reopen it and still have the ability
to manage the layers you had originally created. The image layers can also
be flattened and saved as a psd, jpg, or several other formats. Entire
groups of images can be converted to the psd format prior to editing if one
wishes. You do need lots of memory to work with these files and multiple
layers.

My cameras save in tiff (non-losey) file format for highest quality and
various levels of compressed jpg formats if less quality images are adequate
for a desired print result. The highest quality jpg file from the cameras
creates sharp, full detailed prints up to 20x30. You are right that
multiple saves in jpg format will degrade images, and you are better off
working in a non-losey format if you need the highest print quality your
equipment will produce.

My preference, within a reasonable price range and with a reasonable
learning curve to get up and running, is to use software that is suitable
for my needs but also has additional strengths I can learn to use when
necessary. PSE has been that kind of software for me. I learn new tricks
to improve my editing ability evey time I use the program. I don't want
dumbed-down software that has very limited capabilities. For the most part,
software that comes with cameras or printers has very limited capabilities.
They are great for people who want to, as easily as possible, get an image
from the camera to paper. I am not putting down the people who lack either
the interest or ability to progress further with more complex software -
whatever works and pleases them is the right way to go. I just want
equipment and software I can grow into.

 

[TJ]

TJ - all good advice. I would suggest, however, that Photoshop Elements is
a reasonably priced photo editing program that costs less than $100 and has
more features than I presently use after three years of extensive editing
with it. At its easiest level it still surpasses most of the other programs
in its price range, and there are so many features that you learn as you use
it to expand your editing abilities.

One issue that the original poster was concerned with was clogging.
Unfortunately, all inkjet printers can clog when they are permitted to sit
idle. They all have cleaning cycles, both automatic and user controlled, as
the manufacturers realize that, even with use of their own inks, clogging
can occur. Epson printheads are built in and are not user-removable for
more intensive cleaning. We do have a participant, Arthur Entlich, who has
written up techniques for more extensive cleaning of Epson printheads, if
needed, that will clean most clogged printheads in Epsons. Canon printers
(except for one new model with printheads integrated into the ink
cartridges) have removable printheads that can be cleaned after removal from
the printer and can be replaced (sometimes at nearly the cost of the
original printer). Most HP inkjet printers have printheads integrated into
the ink cartridges. If one clogs you simply put in a new cartridge. They
are a bit pricey, but this feature eliminates the concern about a clogged
printhead ruining your printer. Bottom line - an inkjet printer is not
great for people who will let it sit idle for weeks or months at a time or
who print monocolor without somewhat frequently using ink from all the
cartridges. Clogging is almost guaranteed.

And I would agree with all of that. However, I maintain that a free
program like Picasa is a good place to start for the novice who doesn't
know if photo-editing is for him. It's easier to decide to dip that toe
in the water with a free, if limited, program, and move up if you like
the results than it is to start with one that costs even as little as $80.

I also think most people, once they see what a little minor editing can
do for their photos, will be likely to print their own more often. That,
of course, will result in fewer clogs - and more complaints about the
cost of ink.

TJ

 

[TJ]

(snip)
TJ - PSE, from v.2 on, does use layers and they are quite easy to use.
When saving an edited image in which layers have been used you can chose to
save it in the photoshop image format (psd which is non-losey) with the
separate layers intact. You can then reopen it and still have the ability
to manage the layers you had originally created. The image layers can also
be flattened and saved as a psd, jpg, or several other formats. Entire
groups of images can be converted to the psd format prior to editing if one
wishes. You do need lots of memory to work with these files and multiple
layers.

My cameras save in tiff (non-losey) file format for highest quality and
various levels of compressed jpg formats if less quality images are adequate
for a desired print result. The highest quality jpg file from the cameras
creates sharp, full detailed prints up to 20x30. You are right that
multiple saves in jpg format will degrade images, and you are better off
working in a non-losey format if you need the highest print quality your
equipment will produce.

My preference, within a reasonable price range and with a reasonable
learning curve to get up and running, is to use software that is suitable
for my needs but also has additional strengths I can learn to use when
necessary. PSE has been that kind of software for me. I learn new tricks
to improve my editing ability evey time I use the program. I don't want
dumbed-down software that has very limited capabilities. For the most part,
software that comes with cameras or printers has very limited capabilities.
They are great for people who want to, as easily as possible, get an image
from the camera to paper. I am not putting down the people who lack either
the interest or ability to progress further with more complex software -
whatever works and pleases them is the right way to go. I just want
equipment and software I can grow into.

I stand (sit) corrected. I looked at PE several years ago, before I
owned a digital camera. The only photos I was editing at the time were
those I scanned from commercial prints. Much of the work had been done
by the processor, with cropping being the main thing I would do. That
can be done successfully with almost anything. PE was much more than I
needed or wanted at the time, and Photoshop itself was out of the question.

The GIMP was included with the first Linux distribution I tried -
Mandrake 8.2 - five years ago. I started playing with it because it was
here, and I'd heard many good things about it. Some of those things, at
the time, were exaggerations, but each succeeding version has been more
capable than the last, and many of those exaggerations aren't
exaggerations any longer. It was difficult at first, as worthwhile
things often are, but once I began to master the basics things became
easier. Now, I still learn something new about the program and the
things it's capable of almost every time I use it.

To each his own, eh?

TJ

 

[measekite]

My God (if there is one and some believe that man created God in his own
image) (others believe the opposite) NoOne has proof. this is a repeat
of what I said. But he has an ego.
I have permitted my Canon IP4000 to sit idle for about a month and it
did not clog. Never even did a head cleaning. Only those who have the
same printer and use Canon ink have ever made that claim.That is correct but one poster stated he refilled an HP cart and it
leaked and ruined his printer. The all say that it takes time and is messy.

 

[measekite]

He likes to repeat what I have said previously but the congregation want
to here is from the pastor
Goodie Goodie My camera saves in both RAW, the highest quality not TIFF
and JPG at the same time
If you have a Canon 5D. That size requires a full frame digital to
attain the HIGHEST quality in that size. Besides he can't print that
size since his printer with his generic ink can only print 8.5x11. Even
the wide format standard printers cannot print that size.
GEEES I am glad he agrees with my previous posts.
That depends on the camera