Printer resolution vs ink consumption

[AndyPandy]

I'm looking at a couple of middling (£100-£200) Epson printers for the office. Main differences are that one is 600x600 and one is 4800x2400 dpi for printing.

On the basis that we are printing documents with logos, not photos or hi-res graphics (we have other options if we need that) then will a higher res printer use more ink than a low res one for documents? If so, is it a significant amount (If not, then we might as well get the higher res one to keep our options open)

[redsturgeon]

I'm looking at a couple of middling (£100-£200) Epson printers for the office. Main differences are that one is 600x600 and one is 4800x2400 dpi for printing.

On the basis that we are printing documents with logos, not photos or hi-res graphics (we have other options if we need that) then will a higher res printer use more ink than a low res one for documents? If so, is it a significant amount (If not, then we might as well get the higher res one to keep our options open)

I think you are confusing print resolution vs screen resolution. 600dpi is a typical print resolution. 300 dpi is good enough for most things including photos. 4800x2400 is the measure of a computer screen in pixels or perhaps the size of a source image ( in this case about 11.5 megapixels ) and nothing to do with dpi.

dpi measurements will just be one figure eg. 600 or 1200 but not a matrix like 4800x2400.

John

[AndyPandy]

I'm looking at a couple of middling (£100-£200) Epson printers for the office. Main differences are that one is 600x600 and one is 4800x2400 dpi for printing.

On the basis that we are printing documents with logos, not photos or hi-res graphics (we have other options if we need that) then will a higher res printer use more ink than a low res one for documents? If so, is it a significant amount (If not, then we might as well get the higher res one to keep our options open)

I think you are confusing print resolution vs screen resolution. 600dpi is a typical print resolution. 300 dpi is good enough for most things including photos. 4800x2400 is the measure of a computer screen in pixels or perhaps the size of a source image ( in this case about 11.5 megapixels ) and nothing to do with dpi.

dpi measurements will just be one figure eg. 600 or 1200 but not a matrix like 4800x2400.

John

John,

Thanks for the feedback but no confusion.
http://www.staples.co.uk/inkjet-printer ... tion=False

http://www.staples.co.uk/inkjet-all-in- ... =297693257

If you scroll down to the tech spec at the bottom, you will see the different print resolutions. I've seen this before for printers as the resolution has grown over the years and just assume that it's a limitation of the technology in either moving the head across or pulling the paper through.

On the basis that higher resolution just means smaller dots but more of them, I don't think that there will be an appreciable difference in cost. As you say, 300dpi is good enough for most photos although, from experience, the 600 min that each of these come with will give a noticeably better depth of colour, all other factors being equal.

Thanks.

[RedSnapper]

I think there's some confusion here between image resolution and print resolution. 300dpi is the usual maximum image resolution required for a high quality print (strictly speaking this is ppi, Pixels per Inch). This defines the input quality (to the printer).

The resolution of the printer then defines the output quality. For high quality image prints I typically use 1440 x 720 dpi and would never (usually) go above 2880 x 1440. All at 300ppi image resolution. The higher print resolution certainly gives better colour gradation when printing larger prints (A1 up), but any difference is negligible at any smaller size.

If printing purely text and lo-res logos I'd be quite happy at 600x600. In fact, if you're printing on normal printer paper (as opposed to high quality coated art or photographic paper), any higher resolution would be wasted as you just wouldn't see the difference.

RedSnapper - self-publishing photographer and printer to the fine art industry......

[forlesen]

A glance at Epson's own specifications for these printers shows that both of them have print resolution stated as follows:

Printing Resolution: 4,800 x 2,400 DPI

See
https://www.epson.co.uk/products/printe ... ifications
and
https://www.epson.co.uk/products/printe ... ifications

I have no idea why Staples' specifications are different.

Purely in terms of printing, the only difference between the two models in terms of Epson's specifications is that (strangely) the less expensive model is rated slightly faster for some flavours of printing.

[Urbandreamer]

Main differences are that one is 600x600 and one is 4800x2400 dpi for printing.
...
Thanks for the feedback but no confusion.
http://www.staples.co.uk/inkjet-printer ... tion=False

http://www.staples.co.uk/inkjet-all-in- ... =297693257

If you scroll down to the tech spec at the bottom, you will see the different print resolutions. I've seen this before for printers as the resolution has grown over the years and just assume that it's a limitation of the technology in either moving the head across or pulling the paper through.

On the basis that higher resolution just means smaller dots but more of them, I don't think that there will be an appreciable difference in cost. As you say, 300dpi is good enough for most photos although, from experience, the 600 min that each of these come with will give a noticeably better depth of colour, all other factors being equal.

Thanks.

Well I for one am very confused.

You say that the main differences are resolution? I would have thought the fact that one uses paper twice as big as the other (A3 v A4) as more than a minor difference.

It could also be possible that a printer might take a bit longer if the paper size significantly increased.

[jfgw]

The resolution of my last inkjet printer was, "I hereby resolve to block my jets and require the use of copious amounts of expensive ink in an attempt to unblock them". This may not be a problem with an office printer that is used many times per day but my LED printer (similar to a laser printer) is immune. It could be left over the Christmas shut-down (or even for a period of months) and produce good results (28 pages per minute in colour) the next time it is used.

Julian F. G. W.

[AndyPandy]

Main differences are that one is 600x600 and one is 4800x2400 dpi for printing.
...
Thanks for the feedback but no confusion.
http://www.staples.co.uk/inkjet-printer ... tion=False

http://www.staples.co.uk/inkjet-all-in- ... =297693257

If you scroll down to the tech spec at the bottom, you will see the different print resolutions. I've seen this before for printers as the resolution has grown over the years and just assume that it's a limitation of the technology in either moving the head across or pulling the paper through.

On the basis that higher resolution just means smaller dots but more of them, I don't think that there will be an appreciable difference in cost. As you say, 300dpi is good enough for most photos although, from experience, the 600 min that each of these come with will give a noticeably better depth of colour, all other factors being equal.

Thanks.

Well I for one am very confused.

You say that the main differences are resolution? I would have thought the fact that one uses paper twice as big as the other (A3 v A4) as more than a minor difference.

It could also be possible that a printer might take a bit longer if the paper size significantly increased.

Fair points, but for myself, who will only be printing a max of A4, size is not important ( ) and with low volumes required of it, neither will speed be. Anyway, I've gone for the A4 one. Thanks all.