Digital BW, The Print

<jim0266@y...> wrote:

> from Amex. I can't see spending $600 for a 2200 when I only BO 
print
> and you cannot see any improvement over prints made in the 2200 
over
> the 1280.

Wow, I thought I've had some hard times with this process. I own a 
2200(UC color) and a 1280(UT2)and I can say that the 2200 doesn't 
give me nearly the clogging problems the 1280 has given me whether 
its OEM dye or MIS pigment in the 1280. In fact after a couple years 
with the 2200 I can say that it's never given me 
clogging "problems". I've had maybe two times where a nozzle check 
has a missing gap but one cleaning cycle and the gap is gone. QTR 
also heavily supports the 2200 with pre-made curves using OEM UC 
inks. I can see a slight quality advantage in the resolution of the 
2200 over the 1280. 2880 dpi with the 2200 seems to resolve a little 
more detail (maybe its just some kind of sharpening algorithm?)

> I'm hoping that these new spongeless carts are the answer to our
> clogging prayers. I also think I will avoid running any of the 
black
> dye inks through the printer as suggested here. Can't hurt. 

Even after what I've said above I'm currently committed to making 
the 1280/UT2 combo work and I'm hoping those spongless carts work 
too...primarily because of the ink cost savings.

> Just in
> case I'll have some chicken bones on hand...

 I once saw 12 barefoot Deadheads wearing fake furs cave man style, 
dancing on at least 6 buckets worth of KFC during a Jerry Garcia 
Halloween show. I was there doing research.

Jim