So far I’m very impressed with the output quality from the hp8250. Colour is lifelike and more accurate than from my comparable Epson or Canon photo printers. I find, as with other hp printers, that I get better results by turning off all hp’s little auto correction filters and selecting a slightly darker result in the advanced colour control panel. At the moment I find -18 darker looks great.

As always with hp printers, results look best on hp Premium Plus Photo Paper. The Vivera inks seem similar in many ways to older hp dye inks as used in earlier Photosmart photo printers. Color with the Vivera set seems even more accurate and although prints are still delivered with that very slightly tacky feel and an embossed, raised appearance to any darker areas, those characteristics are less obvious with the Vivera inks. Glossy prints look relatively dry in a few hours, rather than a few days with the older inks. The ink cartridge area on the hp8250 certainly looks different and runs almost the whole width of the printer. Will it make a difference to running costs?

Update: One thing I have noticed is that the quantity of ink in each cartridge is even smaller than the usual 11-15ml in most cartridges - The volume quoted for hp 363 series colour inks is 3.5 to 6ml. A tea spoonfull is 5ml ! ! As with all 6 colour printers the light cyan and light magenta didn’t last long. I suspect that the answer to the “does this revolutionary ink system save ink?” is a resounding yes, but hp are the ones making a saving by putting less ink in the cartridges, rather than the user getting more prints for their money, and although hp do some great value for money packs of ink cartridges and paper you’ll still have to buy lots of individual light cyan and light magenta cartridges too, so, in the end, this is an expensive printer to own if you print many photos with it. Still Like the results though.

Conclusion

This is a really good photo printer that could have been a great one. The ink system is a great achievement and the photo results are excellent - far better than the price would make you expect - but only if you use hp’s own Premium Plus Photo Paper. Most other photo papers - apart from Kodak - just don’t work well with any HP printer I’ve used - test results with the 8250 and about six other independent types of paper were poor, so you really do need to use HP or Kodak paper to get good results. On the plus side, HP printers are quite good for printing photos on ordinary copier paper. Results don’t come close to those on proper photo paper but they’re not a soggy mess either.The HP Photosmart 8250’s main downside is running costs. To me anyone who buys a 6 ink photo printer is serious about quality and wants to print a lot of photos, The ink system in the HP Photosmart 8250 gave HP the chance to give buyers a real increase in the output from each cartridge, through reducing waste. That would have made HP very popular with me and I’m sure many others - but instead they reduced the amount of ink in each cartridge so that buyers of this printer are no better off than if they bought a less efficient printer, which is a real shame. To be fair though, even the individual 363 cartridges are much cheaper than most HP cartridges, and if you mainly print 6x4 snapshots the HP packs of ink and paper really are great value.

I’m glad to say that the ink system from the 8250 is used in hp’s new range of printers - including the 7160 and 7360 - all we need now are some high capacity cartridges.