Digital BW, The Print

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., Robert Morrison 
<rmorrison@p...> wrote:
> I remember, I believe Martin saying that you might be able to 
switch down to
> 1440 printing (better) and still get approximately equal quality 
with the
> piezo driver.  My guess is that this would not be the case with 
either the
> epson driver or imageprint...they will produce better output at 
the highest
> setting.
>

This is definitely true, I use 1440 (better) quality on the 1280 with 
no visible difference over best quality w/the piezo driver.

> > The quality between the 1280/7000 and the 3000 is different.
> > The newer printers frequently show teeny tiny bands which 
run in
> > the direction of the head travel. I've seen this in the print
> > exchange prints and (4) 1160s and my 1280.  The 3000 
doesn't
> > have this artifact.  When my 3000 works, I the print quality the
> > best out of all the printers.
> 
> Not universally true...I have 1280 prints with absolutely no 
banding on
> matte papers. The first 1280 that I got I had to be replaced 
because of
> banding...Epson did it for free.  I have two 1270's that show no 
banding. I
> have 1160's that used not to band...but do now after several 
thousand
> prints. My 7000 is currently due to have its heads replaced next 
week
> because of banding...but when the nozzles all fire...there is 
absolutely no
> banding to a 8x lupe. It is impossible to make generalizations 
because
> printers differ from one to another even within technology class 
and across
> their lifespan. It is true that the lower print quality of the 3000 
with its
> huge droplet size does tend to hid banding...particularly with 
the piezo
> driver...but the ultimate print quality is as a result lower.  To get 
the
> ultimate print quality you have to be willing to keep a close eye 
on things
> including head alignment.
> 

This thread started off as what printer should I get.  May be I 
should have communicated my first reply differently so let me 
approach this a bit differently.  While I don't necessarily disagree 
with what Robert said, I think it's not central to the following 
important issues.  They are:

1) The which printer should I get question might be better framed 
as some thing along the lines of:  I'm an accomplished silver 
printer and want to shift to quadtone inkjet printing.  I print every 
weekend and make primarily 11x14 prints.  So in a situation like 
this, what is the likely hood the printer will produce satisfactory 
prints is the most important question.

2) I believe that generalizations can be made.  I have examined 
somewhere between 25 - 50 prints from 1160s, 1280s, 7000s, 
and 9000s.  So there are likely 30 - 40 indiviidual printers.  About 
90% of the prints exhibited very fine, teeny, tiny bands which I can 
see unaided (I have good visual perpection in this regard) in the 
direction of the print head motion.  That says volumes.  And in 
fact this behavior seems independent of the inks since it's 
present in MIS and Cone samples printed w/the Cone 
Piezography driver.  May be you have to print 50 pages before the 
banding stops.  I've been had 3 1160s which have this problem.  
My 1280 has decided to run perfectly.  So if you don't like this 
artifact and you don't print frequently, chances are very high you 
will be unsatisfied.  I don't print w/the Epson driver or ImagePrint 
RIP so I don't know if the artifact is present w/them.

3) I would like to spend more time making art and less time 
running test prints.  So the important question around droplet  
size differences between the 1280 & 3000, is whether there is 
visible difference in quality between matched prints from these 2 
printers.  So far, I can't see any difference between my 3000 and 
1280.  Remember that 35mm lens perform quite closely to the 
theortical maximum limits of the lens design.  Modern 4x5 lens 
are nowhere close, but that doesn't stop anyone from shooting 
4x5 or getting stunning prints.

Dave G.