Re: postscript printers for lilypond

[David Wright]

On Mon 28 Jan 2019 at 12:35:31 (+1100), Andrew Bernard wrote:
> The Epson P800 has nine tanks (oneupmanship!) including a _matte black_ ink
> tank, and an eight channel printhead. Resolution is up to 2880 x 1400 dpi,
> so I can't see how there could be a problem printing sharp lines.
> 
> Not double sided, but unless the OP tells us more about his budget, one
> could always print the other side manually like we plebeians do.
> 
> Not an advertisement, purely for reference:
> 
> https://epson.com/For-Work/Printers/Large-Format/Epson-SureColor-P800-Printer/p/SCP800SE
> 
> The above is based on my belief that the requirement for a PostScript only
> printer is a furphy. I am willing to be enlightened!

AIUI for run-of-the-mill printing like most of us do, a PS capability
is a waste of money. Besides, most of the music I have typeset has
been printed in greater numbers on other people's printers: nowadays
it would be unusual to distribute in any other format.

But for specialist printing on an in-house printer of the highest
quality, you really do need PS. Remember how, years ago, photocopies
were not quite the same size or aspect ratio as the original, or
were slightly skewed? Well, most modern printers have similar
infelicities, and serious printers can compensate for this.
It's essential if you really care about dimensional stability,
which of course most of us don't. As for colour, that's way
outside my ken.

I couldn't afford to replenish the ink on the printer above, let
alone purchase it. I can barely afford it on my own. So price
probably isn't the main criterion here. But it would be interesting
to hear about the OP's reasons and use case.

Cheers,
David.