I've got a HP All-In-One prnter, HP Photosmart 3210xi. Its a printer, copier, and scanner. This particular model has USB port. The next model changed the ports, but was essentially the same machine inside. I got this printer because I needed to have achival quality ink for genealogical records, and to print photos. This printer uses 6 cartridges of HP's Vivera ink, and fixed print heads. This printer has worked well for me. The inks are pricey, but the black cartidge does print a reasonable number of pages. To date, I have run 8000 sheets of paper through this machine. I was concerned about clogging of fixed print heads, but that has not occurred. However, I do follow, without fail, HP's instruction to shut the printer off and allow time for it to store the print heads, before removing power. Other HP printers had the print head on the ink catridges, thus, a clogged print head could be fixed by changing the cartridge. The fixed print head was a concern of mine since I had bad experience with a Tektronix printer with fixed heads at my work (when ink jets first became available way back in the 1980s.) Happily, I have not had a problem with my print heads and I have owned this printer for 2 years. The printer does have a habit that startles the user until he becomes familar with it. The printer has an automatic maintence program built-in to keep the heads and ink supply in shape. Periodically, the maintence program will start and may startle the user. The printer is not available for use while the maintence routine runs. There is no recourse but to wait. The maintence routine lasts from 30 sec to 1 minute. Ink cartridges are sold singlely, or in a pack of 6 cartridges with 50 sheets of 4"x6" photo paper. This photo pack, at first, appears to be a good deal until one learns that there is less ink in these cartridges than the regular ones. There is just enough ink to print the number of photo sheets in the package. I found it was economical to buy a couple of these photo packs collecting more photo paper than I would use for awhile, and then switch to buying the regular cartridges. The inks and printer does print nice photos when the special photo paper is used. One caveat: the ink is not as resistant to running if exposed to water droplets as one might hope based on advertisements. It smears even after a drying time of 1 day. But protect the ink from wetting, and the results are fine.

Chemocurl, Can't give you specifics but in my shopping and online research I'm left with the impression that the Canon cartridges are less expensive that the Epson. FWIW, my problem in finding the right printer is that I'm using an XP home system whereas the DW uses a Win98 system and I need a printer that is compatible with the 98. Found it in the Canon PIXMA iP3300. Couldn't find that printer in a store and Epson online store didn't have it. Salesman said its out of production. After giving up, I got online to Frys Electronics to price some of their stuff and lo and behold. They have a Canon iP3300 in stock. Ordered one and should have it within a week. Bob Central Arizona

I have owned three Epsons and while they were superior to the print output of an HP I was able to try at home, I too noticed the ink dries quickly in them if you don't print often. I also found they were not very intuitive setting up for printing on 4"x6" photo paper. That may have changed/improved since I used my Epson (7+ years ago) but I still want to avoid one because of the ink issue. I'm going to do some comparisons with Canon and HP printers today and make a decision soon I hope. I am in the process of (re)starting my own home-based design business again. I had it for eight years before accepting an offer I couldn't refuse from a high tech company 7 years ago. I left them in September 2012 and wanted to get my travel to Southeast Asia out of the way before I got serious about going back to work.

Your best bet is to take those negatives into a darkroom, the R2400 is your second best bet. If you don't have darkroom equipment, people are just about giving it away these days. I bought three enlarging lenses in the last four months. Each lens new would have cost over $250.00 and I didn't pay more than $20.00 for any one of them. My reason for the darkroom suggestion is this: Photography has always been somewhat paradoxical in its position in the art world. A silver print (B&W) made in the darkroom and properly processed has the longest life expectancy of any known art media -- a stainless steel sculpture might compete. At the same time color photographs hold the position on the opposite end of that scale. It wasn't until the 1970s that color photographs were even tolerated in art museums (Sarkowski bought some Eggleston prints for MOMA). The right inkjet materials are an improvement over old chemical based color, but in comparison to darkroom silver prints inkjet prints are still ephemeral. A B&W print from the R2400 is still made with inks that will fade. Darkroom not a reasonable option, then the R2400 makes really superb B&W prints. I use that printer. I have a friend who just bought the newest Canon (also designed to do B&W) and she is raving about it, so based on her recommendation I'd endorse that option as well. P.S. it is possible to beat a decent B&W print from a "color designed" printer. There are three ways to go. One: Give up on expecting neutral B&W and add a color tint to the image; make a brown and white print and use the color inks. Be happy. Two: Get a custom profile for the printer and software that will allow you to edit that profile (not necessarily cheap) and then painstakingly adjust the profile (could require expert help). Three: There are companies (see link below) that make special inks. Lyson's quad black inks make really nice B&W prints. The problem is you have to take the color inks out of the printer and it becomes a B&W only printer. That could be an option however -- buy a used printer like an Epson 1280 and dedicate it to B&W only. This would cost less than the new R2400. Joe Here is a link that might be useful: Lyson quad blacks