Not bad, but higher than the Canon Pixma iP4500’s 13p.Īll told, it’s hard to recommend the Epson Stylus Photo R285. coli (70 comments total) 3 users marked this as a favorite. Martins work discussed here before: 1 2 3. They don’t cost much to replace – under a fiver each, exc VAT – but there’s a lot of them, bringing the overall cost up to 19p per photo. Names in Time babyfilter Martin Wattenberg has crafted an elegant interactive visualization of this baby-name data (discussed mefiwise here ).
Kodi for mac os x 10.2.8 plus#
The R285 takes six cartridges (cyan, magenta, yellow and black, plus light magenta and light cyan), and we were able to print 100 photos before they started running out. Colours were vibrant, gradients smooth and dark areas had a real solidity to them that was lacking from the Canons’ efforts.Īnother plus: the Epson is reasonably cheap to run. Colour printing on plain paper was bright, but solid colours were filled with tiny speckles.Īs you’d expect, the Stylus Photo R285’s strongest performance by far was in the photographic tests. Standard quality text came out dark grey, and letter forms were inconsistent, with smearing clearly visible. Quality results in our other tests were, thankfully, better, but the R285 still struggled to compete with HP and Canon. Black text came out a muddy brown and letters were crudely and inaccurately rendered, impeding readability. And with this printer we wouldn’t recommend that, as print quality in draft mode was hands down the worst we’ve seen. But, that only redeems the R285 if you do the majority of your printing in draft mode. Everyone who uses the forum must read and follow the Forum rules and our Piracy policy Please be aware of the rules when posting, especially the rules concerning piracy and the rules about solicitation.
Kodi for mac os x 10.2.8 pro#
In draft mode it averaged 17.5ppm, beaten only by the HP Officejet Pro K5400n. Support > General Support > Mac OS X Donate Forum rules. The HP Photosmart was an incredible five times quicker. Photo printing was laggardly too, with only the Lexmark taking longer to produce our 10 x 15in print and A4 photomontage. Nor is it fast: in our standard-quality print tests it came last, averaging just 4ppm.
0 kommentar(er)
