Digital BW, The Print

Hi Paul,

Thanks for the input...and good point.  I've avoided glossy paper 
because of all the "historical" problems mentioned here and 
elsewhere.  Maybe I should give it a second chance.

Thanks,

Fred

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "bwinkjet" 
<bwinkjet@...> wrote:
>
> Hi Fred,
> 
> I agree.  On matt paper, both produce wonderful prints.  On glossy 
> paper it is another story.  At least this has been my observation 
> using both printers and both matt and glossy stock.  The ABW 
feature 
> has enabled me not to have to order Image Print for my 3800.
> HTH
> 
> Paul
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "fredila2" 
> <fred@> wrote:
> >
> > I've been using the 3800 for about two weeks.  My previous 
printer 
> > was the 2200 and I used it for about two years.  Most of my b/w 
> > printing on the 2200 employed QTR and Qimage. I probably used 
Epson 
> > Velvet Fine Art about 75% of the time. I was generally satisfied 
> with 
> > the output, most of which consisted of 12x18 prints.  I only 
print 
> > about once a week and make about two or three "keeper" prints 
each 
> > time.
> > 
> > I got the 3800 because of the wider carriage and what I had read 
> > about the K3 inks.
> > 
> > So far, I have done mostly test prints on a wide variety of 
papers 
> > and used the ABW settings as well as QTR.  Frankly, at this 
point, 
> I 
> > don't see much of a difference between the 2200 and the 3800 
> output.  
> > Maybe I'm not picky enough or I just haven't got it hacked yet.  
> Who 
> > knows, maybe I will change my opinion after a few more weeks.
> > 
> > Regards,
> > 
> > Fred
> > 
> > 
> > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Brian Ellis 
> > <bellis60@> wrote:
> > >
> > > "Thank you so much for the helpful information on the 3800.  I 
> have 
> > the 2200
> > > and I have not been happy with the BW images. I am a 
traditional 
> > darkroom
> > > guy so I am pretty picky"
> > >
> >
>