Printers are technology What is a redpilled (rechargeable with

File: sage_7654287.jpg (408KB, 1600x1200px) Image search: [Google]

408KB, 1600x1200px

>>61552579
>redpilled

>>61552589
>implying the muh 6 gorillion shekels/ml prices of printer ink/toner isn't a happy merchant trick

File: ecotank.jpg (65KB, 690x460px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 690x460px

>>61552579
The only thing I currently particularly approve is Epson's EcoTank printers, about the only customer-friendly development on the printer market in the last years.

As for color lasers with decent print quality and speed: Xerox Workcentre 6655.

According to http://www.urefilltoner.co.uk/test-lab-printer-reviews.html

it's the Brother HL-L8250cdn

Is this legit?

>>61552684
If you mainly want colored text, probably?

Even so, the graphics / photo printing is as shit as the worst color inkjets, if not worse.

File: impresora-epson-l1800-D_NQ_NP_935421-MLA20784767981_062016-F.jpg (23KB, 500x250px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 500x250px

>>61552652
Mah nigga
Epson L1800 reporting
Ecotank save the ink printers world

>>61552786
At least they're pushing the other way.

A good photo printer is still absent from the EcoTank lineup, and that's where printing currently is at its worst (worse than in the past).

>>61552841
If you are buying a printer for photography, you are either getting something shitty that doesn't matter as you are just printing shit you took at home or vacation, or you are doing professional quality prints.

getting prints from a photo lab depending on how many can cost as much as the printer itself in that case, and because they are professional printers, they are costly. mix in how few photos we really give one fuck about, and there you go, they cost a lot because people don't need them or care enough and the few they do care about they can either print off their shit box and be happy, or get it done at a print lab and pay the 20~$

If you buy a professional printer, as in the 1000$ range for photography, you could legitimately start a small business.

>>61552770
well, I mainly want to print graphics and brochures.

a photo now and then perhaps

File: medium_1.jpg (35KB, 500x402px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 500x402px

>>61552912
Unsurprisingly having quality on prints still matters to me as much as it does to any god damn professional.

And the "professional printer lab" nonsense can go suck it when we already had very good 4 cartridge large-ish tank photo printers that did even 1200dpi just fine.

What happened is that the printer manufacturers introduced more shitty chips and more smaller ink tanks to jew us off - that's all. Yes, they even do it on the "professional" printers.

> If you buy a professional printer, as in the 1000$ range for photography, you could legitimately start a small business.
You can legitimately get jewed off in much the same way. They generally do not offer consumables cheaper for the professional printers - you again get 12 or whatever different, DRM chipped, still tiny ink cartridges, a set of which costs like $350 bucks or something whereas the ink itself is about $5.

I see nothing that excuses this, it's just lack of competition, possibly the illegal kind because this really goes against what consumers want and already HAD better.

File: IMG_1963.png (229KB, 506x328px) Image search: [Google]

229KB, 506x328px

>>61552841
The main use for the printer is some wife/childs homework/school and random stuff, the A3 size is just a plus for us
>>61552912
This guy knows

>>61552955
It won't be particularly good for the graphics, but as long as they're more like broad bar charts than intricate plots of data sets I figure you can make do without printing them in full page size.

Still, that printer is pretty shit at those, for a laser even and obviously more so compared to an inkjet.

Is ecotank a meme? I don't see any advantage to it unless you need color shit for flyers or whatever. Laser still better for b&w.

>>61553051
>This guy knows
Nope. Just another gullible artfag. I bet he also thought adobe going with a cloud subscription model was in his own interest.

>>61553080
> Is ecotank a meme?
Of course not. It's a printer system that is designed to be refilled with the rather cheap commodity that printer ink actually is - without any ridiculous tricks to raise prices.

> Laser still better for b&w.
Not really, no.

File: dot-matrix-printer-100649621-gallery.jpg (38KB, 580x389px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 580x389px

Matrix printers are the only redpilled printer.