Digital BW, The Print

This was also discussed a long while ago when speculation was rife as 
to what inkset would be used in the 4000. 
I guess the answer I remember seeing then is still valid now.  The 
4000 is a professional machine designed for medium to high volume 
exhibition quality prints.  The R800 is designed for the home photo 
enthusiast market.
Put a 5760dpi 1.5pl head in a machine the size of the 4000 and it 
will slow down to a crawl, killing it's viability as a fast 
commercial machine.  One of the ways the R800 printer succeeds so 
well in removing the Cl and Ml inks is that the dots are so small the 
lighter inks are not needed.  The droplet size of the 4000 is limited 
to 3.5pl and in it's current guise could not take the R800 inkset.
I guess therefore reckon on the *600 replacements and 4000 
replacements continuing to be evolutions of their current 
stablemates, perhaps the *600 replacements will take some of the 4000 
advantages, the dual black inks, the faster print head, higher nozzle 
count, better profiles, smaller droplet size etc.  The R800 inks 
will, you can pretty much be sure, find their way into a 13" carriage 
at some point, but I really suspect it will stay in the domestic 
domain - maybe the '1380' who knows.

Steve


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, hogarth 
<hogarth@s...> wrote:
> Like all things digital, be they cameras, computers, printers, TV,
> whatever...
> 
> When you need to buy, buy the biggest bang for your buck and don't 
look
> back.
> 
> 
> On Fri, 2004-04-16 at 02:12, Joe Davajon wrote:
> 
> > Fellow Photographers,
> > My quandary is this:  Should I lay out almost two grand for the 
present Epson 
> > 4000 and shortly after find that Epson has updated the 4000 to 
include a gloss optimizer 
> > and replacing two inks with two different inks producing a 
machine that would be 
> > significantly superior to the original 4000 and making my 4000 
worth a lot less and being 
> > relegated to dinosaur status and a severe drop in value?  
> > Joe Davajon
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]