Digital BW, The Print

Hi Ken, in my opinion, you're on the right track. I have a whole farm of
Epson printers -- a 3000, a Photo EX, a 1280, a 2200 -- even a dusty old
1500. I use most of them primarily for my graphic design work, and they're
all pushed by both the Epson drivers and by sundry Epson RIPs (since
postscript is vital to me). I can even still run a page by Birmy PowerRIP
and Adobe's PressReady if I'm in the mood to drive myself nuts. At any rate,
I've become pretty well versed in using these lower-end software RIPs and
the alchemy of getting good prints off an Epson printer.

My experience with the Epson RIP for the 2200 has been terrific. After a
couple of tries and experiments, I started producing what I think are fine
b&w prints (OEM inks (PK), epson rip, and EEM). I am by no means a pro,
though I sometimes provide photography (not prints) for my clients, but I
consider myself a reasonably talented amateur. (And as a veteran designer, I
certainly know lousy reproduction when I see it.) With the OEM inks
installed and a reliable monitor profile, I can warm it up or cool it down
easily, too. And the 2200 sometimes sits for better than a week without
running -- never had a clog yet. As a Mac guy I'm greatly intrigued by IJC,
but at this time I just can't justify the (very reasonable) $200 for the
full program. I think, if I had more time to devote to the photography and
less demand for the graphics, I'd look into that just because it offers more
control. That being said, I look at my prints made on the Epson RIP and
wonder how much better they could be (in terms of reproduction, that is --
I'm not talking about my skills behind the lens here).

Cheers,
Matthew Born


On 6/4/03 6:29 AM, "DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com"
<DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

> Am I on the right track?  I don't want to compromise on quality, but I
> really don't want to waste time purging cartridges, etc. either.   Thanks
> and apologies for the long post.