It's official! Ink jet prints equal or surpass Eastman's dye transfer prints!

[slackercruster]

I have completed preliminary tests comparing the finest traditional Eastman Kodak dye transfer prints with machine made dye transfer prints aka Ink Jet prints. The preliminary tests show the $1.50 ink jet print to equal or surpass the $250 Eastman's dye transfer print.

I will be sending in a full report within a few weeks. But it wont have dye stability tests done. Those will hopefully be in by Dec. (Although Ctein is not holding his breath, since he says my tests are worse than useless!) But for the rest of you that can see farther than your nose, you may find the report interesting.

If you are not familiar with Eastman's dye transfer process see my earlier post on it:

http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/d...-printing.html

[vinny]

Oh lord. Let the war begin.

[cdholden]

I will be sending in a full report within a few weeks. But it wont have dye stability tests done. Those will hopefully be in by Dec. (Although Ctein is not holding his breath, since he says my tests are worse than useless!) But for the rest of you that can see farther than your nose, you may find the report interesting.

Kudos to Ctein for calling a spade a spade.
Some may find it interesting, but others will recoognize it for what it is: incomplete and possibly biased.
If you're going make bold statements made on comparison, shouldn't all the data be compared instead of just the parts that reinforce your desired outcome?

[slackercruster]

Well sure, it is just a down and dirty test. Half-ass done. But...if the results show a $1.50 inkjet rival a $250 DT, then a better test should yield even better results. This test is what I am willing to offer. If you would like to do a different test, you can do your own.

I have not done any selective testing to skew the results. I took 3 of the best DT prints I could find and reproduced them with ink jet. Yes, I tweaked the scans of the DT with PP some. You cannot scan an original and get 100% reproduction. But the scans, processed as I did are in the 98% 99% area. I had to run off 3 or 4 prints to figure out how make the best ink jet print. But that is about it for doctoring the results.

But PP or not, a printing medium must still have the capability to put out the colors and IQ. And ink jet has shown it is as good or better than Eastman's DT prints.

Results are good enough where no one can tell the difference unless the prints are put right up to ones nose and you know what sharpness details to compare. Or you look at the back of the prints. But colorwise, very equal and color is what I am gauging in this test.And the only reason the sharpness is off about 1-2% is...a scan is never as good as an original. (At least with the equipment I am using.)

In any case, I am very comfortable with my statement / claim.

[bob carnie]

What is the test??? are you saying you can get an exact reproduction of an DT print ? are you saying a inkjet has the same life span of a DT ? I am a bit confused.

[IanG]

It might be your opinion but that doesn't make it official or even right.

Ian

[slackercruster]

What is the test??? are you saying you can get an exact reproduction of an DT print ? are you saying a inkjet has the same life span of a DT ? I am a bit confused.

Ink Jet will give same / better quality IQ as DT

(cured) Ink Jet is infinitely better with water resistance

Dye stabiltiy test will be done in Dec (hopefully) so will wait on that.

Full report with pix to come out in the next week. (I hope)

[slackercruster]

It might be your opinion but that doesn't make it official or even right.

Ian

OK, I agree. You can decide when I post the results.

[ROL]

I don't get it. Why don't you just post your final peer reviewed results, and forgo the hyperbolic pre-run "official" publicity? And wouldn't this claim be better made in the one of the digital forums?

[Jim Noel]

This is probably the first time Ihave ever agreed with Ctein. I think your tests and statements are full of baloney, and that is being nice.