For the benefit of anyone else who may be facing the same decision, here's how the current cost difference breaks down between the R1800 & R2400: Refurbished R2400 = $500 minus rebate - $ 75 ------------------------- Total R2400 = $425 Refurbished R1800 = $350 minus rebate - $ 75 plus MIS MK ink + $ 30 plus QTR + $ 50 ------------------------ Total R1800 = $355 Cost of new ink cartridges for both printers seem to be equivalent (though I'm not sure yet about ink usage). For me this means I'll be choosing almost entirely based upon subjective considerations. The R1800 (with the 100% carbon approach) offers the highest standard in archival B&W on matte papers, as well as great color prints on matte papers (with Paul's approach) and glossy papers (using Epson inks). The potential downsides are those that Clayton mentioned: clogging, refilling and rechipping carts and an extra layer of complexity (QTR). The R2400 offers archival quality probably sufficient for most people's needs (I realize that is highly subjective), a streamlined and intuitive B&W workflow, excellent color and B&W results with both glossy and matte papers (though you have to swap) with no additional software, custom curves, tweaking, etc. However, most people say that color glossy results are better on the R1800. Their dimensions and weight are almost exactly the same, and their are custom paper profiles widely available for both. Tough choice!
Message
[Digital BW] Re: R1800 "pure carbon" approach?
2007-08-30 by chriskjezp
Attachments
- No local attachments were found for this message.