Digital BW, The Print

Hi there, I have just taken delivery of my 4000 and I wanted to give 
you folks an insight into how I find this printer compared to the 
numerous other systems I have seen / used.

I have used :

1. Piezography (old version, 1290)
2. MIS VM inks (1290)
3. MIS UT inks (1290)
4. MIS UT2 inks (1290)
5. Black only printing (Eboni, 1290)

and have had exposure to 

1. 2200 full colour B&W prints
2. 2200 Black only prints (ultrachrome)
3. 7600 full colour + IP5.6 prints.

When I saw some images I had given to Epson to demo, I was less than 
happy with the output, Black ink prints were the usual dotty output 
and the colour ink variants all had pretty bad colour shifts and 
metamarism.  I figured the colour was fantastic, the black and white 
was better than my 1280 dye prints out of the box, but not by much.
I have since had a chance to play with the printer myself and it 
takes pride of place in my office.  My findings have suprised me.  It 
sits next to two printers, both 1290s installed with MIS UT and UT2 
hextones.
I had to mess around with the colour settings for ages as I couldn't 
for the life of me remember my colour management basics - but this is 
not the printers fault...(the MIS workflow is so different).
I have printed slightly warm toned images (full inkset), neutral 
images (full inkset) and black only prints.  I also printed the same 
image, with matched tones on the two MIS fed machines.  I laid these 
all out and have asked a number of colleagues, and my wife (who knows 
exactly what to look for now) which was which / which was better and 
why.  The results pretty much tallied with my own conclusions.
1. UT2 inks have the smoothest highlight transistions but do not seem 
to have the best definition and detail in the mid tones.
2. UT inks are well down the list (this may well be because the 
curves used for this inkset and my 1290 printer are extreme and there 
seems to be some accepted variance between printers that can cause 
issues with tonal transitions - I actally preferred the VM set, and 
by far the UT2)
3. The toned Ultrachrome 4000 prints were all but indistiguishable 
from the sepia/warm toned UT2 prints (I had to turn them over myself 
on more than one occaision).  There could be a slight tendancy 
towards blocking of the deepest shadows and some 'split-toned' effect 
as the shadows start to block but it is minimal, perhaps not as good 
for really dark prints.
4. The neutral Ultrachrome 4000- prints were really pretty good.  No, 
they were not as smooth as the UT2 set, but they are acceptable to my 
eyes.  Put them in a print at a foot away and you'd struggle to tell 
the difference.  

The big issue though is metamarism.  It is still there and that is 
where the difference comes between the UT2 and the Ultrachromes - the 
tone WILL shift.  It is not as dramatic as in previous pigment 
printers, but it is still there.  I assume Imageprint will get rid of 
most of this, but boy is it expensive.  And there is another way....

I was frankly stunned by the 4000 black only performance.
I have done this many times on the 1280/90 series and even on the 
2200 but was never totally happy with it.  Yes the luminance, 
contrast, detail and overall impression from a framed print was 
always stunning, but I couldn't stand those dots.  I have pretty keen 
eyes and with my 4000 prints (matt only so far, Ultrasmooth and 
Velvet art papers) I REALLY have to strain to see the dots, more than 
a few inches away and they're gone.  The prints are stunning and 
everyone picked these as the best.  No metamarism (no toning though, 
unless you play with the papers you print on), no shifting with time 
(the black ink seems to last for ever according to the longevity 
tests), no colour management issues.   I honestly never thought I 
would go this route after 4 years of trying pretty much everything on 
the market, I am happy.  Incidentally, the prints that came back from 
Epson were printed at 360dpi, hence the more visible dots, at 
1440+super it is great, still a grainy-ish apprearance, but I love it.

I will keep tweaking and playing, who knows, maybe I will have a 
different opinion when I try printing high key images with lots of 
highlights or much smoother transitions (for the minute I will keep 
my UT2 for wedding prints - very testing subject...) I will report 
back.

PS - the printer itself is fantastic, fast, quiet, self adjusting - 
could have done with a 'quickstart' though - to just have a 396page 
manual (all English) to play with was a little much...

Have fun.

Steve