Digital BW, The Print

Hey Chros

We've been through this before when the new printers came out.  In short I
do think there is a significant overall improvement.  First and foremost,
the Adv B&W solution is _dramatically_ easier to use.  No mess no fuss.
Out-of-the-box work is so much better.  You had to really work on a 21/2200
to get decent output - say with a RIP like QTR.  I would argue that unless
you are worried about the use of yellow ink by Epson Adv B&W, you do not
need the QTR print module for the 2400.  The K3 inks are better on both
photo paper (reduced bronzing and no gloss differential except where there
is no ink and the reflectance of the paper differs from the inked areas) and
matte paper (one more grey and better colour density for colour work).  So
at the OEM level it's a slam dunk improvement by the 2400, at the third
party RIP/OEM ink level it's still a slam dunk improvement in terms of ease
of use and ink, and only at the 3rd party inks/3rd party RIP level does the
race become even close.  Couple Epson Adv B&W with QTR ICC profile
management and you've really got something that works well and easily.  Of
course from there you can start playing with dedicated inks and all that
sort of stuff but....

Cheers

Steve


> From: Chris Hargens <chargens@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Sun, 09 Oct 2005 00:22:05 -0000
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: [Digital BW] 2200 QTR vs 2400 ABW
> 
> What with all the talk concerning/comparing different printers,
> inksets, etc., I'd be interested in hearing from someone who has
> printed with both the 2200 using the UC inkset with QTR and the 2400 in
> ABW mode -- on matte paper. Is the 2400 ABW noticeably better, and if
> so, in what ways?
> 
> Chris Hargens