Digital BW, The Print

Hi Allan,

Don't believe everything you read on the LL website...if you value fine B&W
prints at all I would be willing to bet that you'd be very unhappy in a
short amount of time using the Epson 2200 and UC inks--straight out of the
box--to print grayscale images. I would highly recommend the Epson 1280 with
UT inks and Paul Roark's curves.

Based on your anticipated print volume you shouldn't have too much trouble
with clogs; depending on where you live, of course. I had an Epson 1160 with
UT inks which I used about once a week; one or two cleanings following a
nozzle check before printing and I was good to go. I live in the desert.
However, if the printer sat for 2-3 weeks because I was busy with other
responsibilities...no good. That was a recipe for trouble. I spent the
better part of 3 hours a couple of weekends ago clearing a stubborn clog
because I hadn't run the printer for a few weeks. I finally decided to "bite
the bullet" and go with IP for my 2200.

I've never run an Epson 1280 with UT inks, but I would guess that if you
follow a regime of head cleanings with nozzle checks about once a week, and,
also do some printing you should be fine.

Alan Huntley

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Allan Chen" <kaiyen@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, October 27, 2003 3:06 PM
Subject: [Digital BW] Kind of the 1280 vs 2200 question


>
> >All,
>
> I've been following this group for...I think over a month now, and have
> been eating up digital BW information here and on the web voraciously for
> longer than that.  I'm getting increasingly frustrated with my options for
> printing in BW traditionally, since I have to go to the local college
> darkroom (which also means I have to sign up for a class), and am now
> firmly committed to getting a digital BW system after I move in
> December.  But..I'm a bit confused now as to what to do.  These questions
> are, in many ways, just more advanced versions of ones I asked when I
first
> joined this board.
>
> I was re-reading the Luminous Landscape review of the 2200, and noticed
how
> a Piezography system was abandoned in favor of the 2200 with OEM inks,
> because of the clogging problelms on the old system but also because the
> quality was "that good."  Now there have been all these posts about
> horrific clogging experiences on all printers, ranging from 1160's to
2200's.
>
> Is it possible to use the 1280, with the UT inks, on a regular but not
> high-volume basis, and not have these horror-stories about clogging?  I
was
> figuring that I probably would only print...5 prints a week.  I could
space
> them out so that I printed 1 every day to day and a half, but that's about
> the highest volume I can get (between finding time to take pictures, to
> scanning them, to editing them and then printing, I just don't put out
> enough volume).  Am I sending myself up a creek without a paddle here?
>
> sigh.
> allan