Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
PhotoKB Home
Discussion Groups
Digital Photography
Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot Cameras
Film Photography
35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther Equipment
Photo Technique
Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique General
General Photo Topics
General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK Photography
DirectoryPhoto Clubs

Photo Forum / Digital Photography / Digital Photo / November 2005

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Review of HP 8750 Printer

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
wayne - 27 Nov 2005 06:31 GMT
Hi All,

I just posted my review of the HP 8750 photo printer on DIMi at
<http://www.dimagemaker.com/article.php?articleID=346>

Cheers,

Wayne

Wayne J. Cosshall
Publisher, The Digital ImageMaker, http://www.dimagemaker.com/
Assistant Director, International Digital Art Award
Writer and educator in graphic design, photography, digital technology
Personal art site http://www.artinyourface.com/
wayne@dimagemaker.com
Digital Photography Now - 27 Nov 2005 14:05 GMT
Hi Wayne, can't agree with your conclusion on the HP 8750's print quality,
I'm afraid. Out of the box and using HP premium glossy paper I found the
tonality hard and some over-saturation, plus poor detail in areas with a lot
of red.

I also found little evidence to support HP's claims of extended blue gamut.

However, the 8750 is cable of much better results when custom profiled,
suggesting that the standard profiles HP supplies are not very good.

Using the standard drivers, if you compare back to back with prints from a
Canon i9950 or either an Epson R1800 or R2400, you should see markedly
superior results than the HP. Profile the HP and then it's much harder to
distinguish the results.

One outstanding feature of the 8750 is - and I think we agree on this - is
its black and white capability, though if you are willing to spend a bit
more, the R2400 is just as good and offers better archival properties.

Ian

Digital Photography Now
http://dpnow.com

> Hi All,
>
[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
> Personal art site http://www.artinyourface.com/
> wayne@dimagemaker.com
wayne - 29 Nov 2005 04:30 GMT
Hi Ian,

Well I didn't see the hard tonality and over-saturation that you did. I
was using the HP Colorfast Glossy paper. I did see the extended blue
performance, but then I was using some of my fractal images with very
strong blues over a range of blue hues to test this. I did do some
playing with the color profile selections that the driver uses, but
only from within the provided choices, no custom ones.

Yes, personally I prefer the Canon and Epson's but I was impressed with
the capabilities of this printer.

Cheers,

Wayne

http://www.dimagemaker.com
Digital Photography Now - 29 Nov 2005 18:13 GMT
Hi Wayne,

I have published some gamut plots various A3 ink jet printers. The HP 8750
gamut is quite small compared to the competition, even in the blue spectrum.

See: http://dpnow.com/1867a.html

I also had some problems with the straight through feed mechanism and when
printing on HP Premium Plus glossy paper and there isn't as much of the
glossy shine retained as with Epson or Canon dye-based printers. And you
have to wait for the inks to dry and the ink will run if they get wet again.
Even the latest Epson Ultrachrome pigment inks produce a reasonably good
shine on glossy paper now.

I don't have it in for HP, indeed I get on well with their people and have a
lot of respect for their R&D, but I was very disappointed with the 8750 in
particular.

Ian

> Hi Ian,
>
[quoted text clipped - 13 lines]
>
> http://www.dimagemaker.com
wayne - 30 Nov 2005 09:19 GMT
Hi Ian,

I see where you are coming from and agree substantially, though I did
find the blue performance excellent on the test images I used and I
didn't have the problems with the straight through paper path.

I've had mixed feelings about HP of recent times. Some nice products,
so duds, so not so bad ones (I'd personally put the 8750 in there but I
can see where you might otherwise). I find many of their product
decisions strange, like the shared color ink carts. Others, like the
paper handling problems in the HP 130, just bad design (a printer that
showed a lot of potential that I am working up an extend use report on
as I have one here).

Personally, at present I'd put HP behind Epson and Canon for photogs
and artists.

Cheers,

Wayne

Wayne J. Cosshall
Publisher, The Digital ImageMaker, http://www.dimagemaker.com/
Assistant Director, International Digital Art Award
Writer and educator in graphic design, photography, digital technology
Personal art site http://www.artinyourface.com/
wayne@dimagemaker.com
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2008 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.