Digital BW, The Print

Good morning....

I have been trying to follow the discussions here as a way of learning more about B&W digital printing. I admit I'm pretty much lost on lots of the technical details regarding inks, curves, QTR, RIP and the other acronyms floating around. But I'm learning!

I currently have an Epson RX500 all-in-one that I use to print my photos. They are pretty good but I want better and bigger. I would like to print up to 11x14 which is what my preferred size was in the wet darkroom. And I would like to get rid of, or at least control, the slight color cast I get on the RX500 prints.

I'm looking at the Epson 1280 and 2200; they both print the size I want and I can get the MIS inks for them, too. The price difference has me leaning toward the 1280 but if there is significant improvement by going with the 2200, I would consider that option.

Any advice you have to offer will be appreciated.

Kathy



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> From: Kathy Ryan [mailto:kt.ryan@...]
>
> I have been trying to follow the discussions here as a way of
> learning more about B&W digital printing. I admit I'm pretty much
> lost on lots of the technical details regarding inks, curves,
> QTR, RIP and the other acronyms floating around. But I'm learning!
>
> I currently have an Epson RX500 all-in-one that I use to print my
> photos. They are pretty good but I want better and bigger. I
> would like to print up to 11x14 which is what my preferred size
> was in the wet darkroom. And I would like to get rid of, or at
> least control, the slight color cast I get on the RX500 prints.
>
> I'm looking at the Epson 1280 and 2200; they both print the size
> I want and I can get the MIS inks for them, too. The price
> difference has me leaning toward the 1280 but if there is
> significant improvement by going with the 2200, I would consider
> that option.

As you probably know, the 1280 stock inks are dyes, which fade pretty
quickly, but that's not an issue with the MIS pigs. The 2200 has some
advantages over the 1280, but not really in output quality. Its advantages
are: somewhat faster; higher dot resolution in one dimension; FireWire
interface; 7 color (adding light black); individual ink tanks; automatic
roll paper cutter. So all in all, if you're going to print single sheets and
use a CIS, the advantage isn't that great.

--

Ciao,               Paul D. DeRocco
Paul                mailto:pderocco@...

Kathy,

the 2200 is by far the printer of choice, especially if you are considering 
bw pigment inks like those from MIS. Even if you change your mind
down the road, having 7 inks offers nice options in inksets. Also,
out of the box, with its own inks, you can get very respectable bw
prints if you use software like IJC / OPM or QTR. 


Consider that the 1280 was designed for dyes and may not have enough
power to handle pigment black, possibly not providing the
blackest black possible - depending on inkset and paper.
Its dots are fine enough, but it seems very slow compared to the
2200, which will make a difference if you print 13x19 in any 
quantity.

About those acronyms.....    IJC = Inkjet Control, 
OPM = OpenPrintmaker, QTR = Quadtone RIP
they all run on OS X;  QTR runs on Windows too.

Antonis


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Kathy Ryan" 
<kt.ryan@v...> wrote:
> Good morning....
> 
> I have been trying to follow the discussions here as a way of learning more 
about B&W digital printing. I admit I'm pretty much lost on lots of the technical 
details regarding inks, curves, QTR, RIP and the other acronyms floating 
around. But I'm learning!
> 
> I currently have an Epson RX500 all-in-one that I use to print my photos. 
They are pretty good but I want better and bigger. I would like to print up to 
11x14 which is what my preferred size was in the wet darkroom. And I would 
like to get rid of, or at least control, the slight color cast I get on the RX500 
prints.
> 
> I'm looking at the Epson 1280 and 2200; they both print the size I want and I 
can get the MIS inks for them, too. The price difference has me leaning toward 
the 1280 but if there is significant improvement by going with the 2200, I 
would consider that option.

> 
> Any advice you have to offer will be appreciated.
> 
> Kathy
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Kathy-

The short non-answer is that you can get great prints from either printer.

Some other things to consider are:

1. If you are in the early part of the learning curve you may want to
consider black only (BO) printing.  Clayton Jones has an excellent
description of the process and its pros and cons.  This would work on
both printers.  It looks very good on the 2200.

2. With the 2200 you can get good color and B&W prints which is an
advantage if you don't want to dedicate a printer to B&W only.

3. With the 2200 you don't need to buy MIS or other's inks.  The epson
inks - ultra chromes (UC) - are pigment inks and have a good archival
life.  The UC inks are much more expensive though.

4. With the 1280 and MIS inks there are several ways to get excellent
prints: (1) you can use Paul Roarks photoshop curves applied to the
image and printed with the epson driver that came with the printer;
(2) if you have a mac (and shortly if you have a PC) you can use the
quadtone rip (QTR) produced by Roy Harrington and "curves" (not
photoshop curves) produced by others to print the image from photoshop
or other image applications; (3) you can use Ink Jet Control and Open
Print Maker (IJC/OPM) to print files using curves produced by others
(or make your own); or you can buy Image Print (IP).  I've listed the
options in order of expense (free, $50, $250, $500/printer).

5. If you use the MIS (or piezotone) black ink sets you will have to
pick one of the options in point 4 but you will not get any color casts.

6.  If you use the UC inks in the 2200 and use the Epson driver you
will get some color casts (although much much less) and you will also
get some metamerism.  This means the print will change color slightly
depending on what light you view it in (tungsten, halogen, sunlight,
flouresent etc).  If you use third party software to print (IJC/OPM,
QTR, IP) with the UC inks on the 2200 you can eliminate metamerism and
 make neutral prints.

7. With the 2200 you can print to glossy and semi-gloss papers as well
as matte papers (although you have to manually swap the photo-black in
k for the matte-black ink).

Some of the big differentiators are:

1. if you want to use glossy or semi-gloss papers relatively trouble
free pick the 2200

2. if you want the blackest possible black pick the 2200 with the UC
inks on Ilford Smooth Perl paper (I think?)

3. if you want to use it for color as well pick the 2200

4. if you want to minimize the ink costs pick the 1280.

I hope that helps some.

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Kathy Ryan"
<kt.ryan@v...> wrote:
> Good morning....
> 
> I have been trying to follow the discussions here as a way of
learning more about B&W digital printing. I admit I'm pretty much lost
on lots of the technical details regarding inks, curves, QTR, RIP and
the other acronyms floating around. But I'm learning!
> 
> I currently have an Epson RX500 all-in-one that I use to print my
photos. They are pretty good but I want better and bigger. I would
like to print up to 11x14 which is what my preferred size was in the
wet darkroom. And I would like to get rid of, or at least control, the
slight color cast I get on the RX500 prints.
> 
> I'm looking at the Epson 1280 and 2200; they both print the size I
want and I can get the MIS inks for them, too. The price difference
has me leaning toward the 1280 but if there is significant improvement
by going with the 2200, I would consider that option.

> 
> Any advice you have to offer will be appreciated.
> 
> Kathy
>

Well, there is a significant difference between the 1280 and the 
2200.  The inks in the 2200 are the Ultrachrome pigmented inks, not 
the older epson inks which change color under different lighting 
(metamorism).  In addition, with the 2200, you get both a black ink, 
and a light grey ink, giving you much better tone control of both 
color and greyscale images.  If you plan to print greyscale images, 
or slightly toned images, you should definitely go the 2200 route.

Now, if you can afford it, and want to get up to 16x20 prints, the 
state of the art printer on the market today is the Epson 4000.  
With the 2200, you have to choose between matte black and photo 
black inks.  If you're printing on glossy or semi gloss paper, you 
would use the photo black.  On matte, the matte black ink.  You can 
use either one for either paper, but the profiles cover one or the 
other and you just don't get such deep blacks with the photo black 
ink on matte paper, but it prints and you might not notice unless 
you're a perfectionist, or comparing prints side by side.  I notice 
the difference, but you can make it work.  On the 4000, it holds 
both the matte black and the photo black ink, solving that choice 
problem.  It knows by the paper you choose which ink to use.

If I were getting a new printer today, I'd do the 4000.  I have a 
7600 and might add the 4000 just so I don't have to switch inks and 
could print on other papers.  But on the other hand, I really like 
the matte papers.  Took me a while to get used to them, but now I'm 
converted.

If I couldn't afford the 4000 (it's quite expensive at 1795), I'd do 
the 2200.  If I couldn't afford the 2200, I'd wait till I could.

Mike Askew
www.michaelbaskew.com









--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Kathy Ryan" 
<kt.ryan@v...> wrote:
> Good morning....
> 
> I have been trying to follow the discussions here as a way of 
learning more about B&W digital printing. I admit I'm pretty much 
lost on lots of the technical details regarding inks, curves, QTR, 
RIP and the other acronyms floating around. But I'm learning!
> 
> I currently have an Epson RX500 all-in-one that I use to print my 
photos. They are pretty good but I want better and bigger. I would 
like to print up to 11x14 which is what my preferred size was in the 
wet darkroom. And I would like to get rid of, or at least control, 
the slight color cast I get on the RX500 prints.
> 
> I'm looking at the Epson 1280 and 2200; they both print the size I 
want and I can get the MIS inks for them, too. The price difference 
has me leaning toward the 1280 but if there is significant 
improvement by going with the 2200, I would consider that option.

> 
> Any advice you have to offer will be appreciated.
> 
> Kathy
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hi Kathy
 
I use the 1280 with the MIS UT2 ink setup.  I am very happy with the results.  I just finished showing some images at a bookstore.  At the opening reception, people thought the prints were from the traditional darkroom.  Everyone could not believe the prints were made digitally.
 
In my opinion, by the 1280 and save your money for film, ink, and paper.
 
Good luck
 
Ross

"Michael B. Askew" <mbaskew@...> wrote:
Well, there is a significant difference between the 1280 and the 
2200.  The inks in the 2200 are the Ultrachrome pigmented inks, not 
the older epson inks which change color under different lighting 
(metamorism).  In addition, with the 2200, you get both a black ink, 
and a light grey ink, giving you much better tone control of both 
color and greyscale images.  If you plan to print greyscale images, 
or slightly toned images, you should definitely go the 2200 route.

Now, if you can afford it, and want to get up to 16x20 prints, the 
state of the art printer on the market today is the Epson 4000.  
With the 2200, you have to choose between matte black and photo 
black inks.  If you're printing on glossy or semi gloss paper, you 
would use the photo black.  On matte, the matte black ink.  You can 
use either one for either paper, but the profiles cover one or the 
other and you just don't get such deep blacks with the photo black 
ink on matte paper, but it prints and you might not notice unless 
you're a perfectionist, or comparing prints side by side.  I notice 
the difference, but you can make it work.  On the 4000, it holds 
both the matte black and the photo black ink, solving that choice 
problem.  It knows by the paper you choose which ink to use.

If I were getting a new printer today, I'd do the 4000.  I have a 
7600 and might add the 4000 just so I don't have to switch inks and 
could print on other papers.  But on the other hand, I really like 
the matte papers.  Took me a while to get used to them, but now I'm 
converted.

If I couldn't afford the 4000 (it's quite expensive at 1795), I'd do 
the 2200.  If I couldn't afford the 2200, I'd wait till I could.

Mike Askew
www.michaelbaskew.com









--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Kathy Ryan" 
<kt.ryan@v...> wrote:
> Good morning....
> 
> I have been trying to follow the discussions here as a way of 
learning more about B&W digital printing. I admit I'm pretty much 
lost on lots of the technical details regarding inks, curves, QTR, 
RIP and the other acronyms floating around. But I'm learning!
> 
> I currently have an Epson RX500 all-in-one that I use to print my 
photos. They are pretty good but I want better and bigger. I would 
like to print up to 11x14 which is what my preferred size was in the 
wet darkroom. And I would like to get rid of, or at least control, 
the slight color cast I get on the RX500 prints.
> 
> I'm looking at the Epson 1280 and 2200; they both print the size I 
want and I can get the MIS inks for them, too. The price difference 
has me leaning toward the 1280 but if there is significant 
improvement by going with the 2200, I would consider that option.
> 
> Any advice you have to offer will be appreciated.
> 
> Kathy
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other resources as they are often being updated.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint

If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same page.

Please follow these basic guidelines:
- As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep them short.
- Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames. Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from the membership without notice.
- Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital B&W printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be removed from the membership.
- By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group Owner and Moderators. See �Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines� in the Files section:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/

BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE �OWNER� AND �MODERATORS� OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS, GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF THE  �OWNER� AND �MODERATORS� OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE INABILITY TO USE THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR ALTERATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP.



Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT


---------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

   To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/
  
   To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
  
   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 


		
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

>I'm looking at the Epson 1280 and 2200; they both print the size I want and
I can get the MIS inks for >them, too. The price difference has me leaning
toward the 1280 but if there is significant improvement by >going with the
2200, I would consider that option.

>Any advice you have to offer will be appreciated.


I own both printers. I use MIS VM inks in the 1280 and Epson color inks in
the 2200 for color and for occasional BO printing.. I see no consistent,
discernable difference in the quality (tonal range and gradations,
"sharpness," and d max) of the prints from either one, they both do an
excellent job.This is based on observation, not from scientific tests or
study with a loupe.

Of course I'm comparing color to MIS b&w and BO to MIS b&w. Differences
might be more apparent if the comparisons were more exact. The 2200 is a
better color printer than the 1280 from the standpoint of ink permanence and
QTR seems to offer an inexpensive way to use the same inks for b&w and color
so if you had any thoughts at all of ever doing color that might tip the
scales to the 2200.  However, from reading all the questions and answers
here about QTR it looks to me as though you almost need to be a computer
programmer to install it and I'm not so I haven't tried that. If you have no
thoughts at all of ever doing color I'd probably get the 1280 just because
of the price difference. If physical size of the printer is relevant at all
to you, the 2200 is considerably larger than the 1280.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Kathy Ryan" <kt.ryan@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, August 28, 2004 7:40 AM
Subject: [Digital BW] Printer recommendations, please


Good morning....

I have been trying to follow the discussions here as a way of learning more
about B&W digital printing. I admit I'm pretty much lost on lots of the
technical details regarding inks, curves, QTR, RIP and the other acronyms
floating around. But I'm learning!

I currently have an Epson RX500 all-in-one that I use to print my photos.
They are pretty good but I want better and bigger. I would like to print up
to 11x14 which is what my preferred size was in the wet darkroom. And I
would like to get rid of, or at least control, the slight color cast I get
on the RX500 prints.

I'm looking at the Epson 1280 and 2200; they both print the size I want and
I can get the MIS inks for them, too. The price difference has me leaning
toward the 1280 but if there is significant improvement by going with the
2200, I would consider that option.

Any advice you have to offer will be appreciated.

Kathy



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other resources as
they are often being updated.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint

If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to
unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same
page.

Please follow these basic guidelines:
- As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep
them short.
- Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames.
Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from the
membership without notice.
- Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital B&W
printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be removed from
the membership.
- By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and
guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group Owner and
Moderators. See "Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines" in the Files section:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/

BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT
YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE "OWNER" AND
"MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU
FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR EXEMPLARY
DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS,
GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF THE  "OWNER" AND
"MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE
POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE INABILITY
TO USE THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR
ALTERATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY
THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER
MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP.

Yahoo! Groups Links

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Kathy Ryan" 
<kt.ryan@v...> wrote:
> I currently have an Epson RX500 all-in-one that I use to print my 
photos. They are pretty good but I want better and bigger. I would 
like to print up to 11x14 which is what my preferred size was in the 
wet darkroom. And I would like to get rid of, or at least control, 
the slight color cast I get on the RX500 prints.

If I were you (and I'm in the same boat - I want a large format 
printer), I'd wait.

Epson's done quite a bit in the new R800 printer.  It begs for a 
wide carriage version.  With the recent price cuts on the 1280, and 
Christmas buying season fast approaching, I think a new printer is 
in the wings.  I don't think the 4000 is it.

I have NO inside information to base this speculation on.  Just an 
educate guess on my part.

Until then, work on color management to clear up the color cast in 
the RX500.  That's a good printer (same print engine as the rest of 
the R printers, IIRC).  When was the last time you profiled your 
monitor?  Does your printer profile match your inks and papers 
you're using?  You'll be fighting the same battle with any printer, 
so might as well practice on the RX500 while you wait for the next 
generation large format home inkjet.

Anne

If you can find an Epson 1160 (watch the lists), get it, and start 
with MIS grayscale inks along with Moab or Red river paper; you will 
be thrilled with the results, but there is a learning curve to 
master the system. (Hint; start with black-only, then the Epson 
driver, then move to the Roark curves...but to make those curves 
work, you need to develop transfer curves for each curve/paper 
combo.) I would vote then for the 1280 as a second printer...you can 
then decide to make your 1160 color and black-only, or the 1280 as 
that.

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "annekersaway" 
<annekersaway@y...> wrote:
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Kathy Ryan" 
> <kt.ryan@v...> wrote:
> > I currently have an Epson RX500 all-in-one that I use to print 
my 
> photos. They are pretty good but I want better and bigger. I would 
> like to print up to 11x14 which is what my preferred size was in 
the 
> wet darkroom. And I would like to get rid of, or at least control, 
> the slight color cast I get on the RX500 prints.
> 
> If I were you (and I'm in the same boat - I want a large format 
> printer), I'd wait.
> 
> Epson's done quite a bit in the new R800 printer.  It begs for a 
> wide carriage version.  With the recent price cuts on the 1280, 
and 
> Christmas buying season fast approaching, I think a new printer is 
> in the wings.  I don't think the 4000 is it.
> 
> I have NO inside information to base this speculation on.  Just an 
> educate guess on my part.
> 
> Until then, work on color management to clear up the color cast in 
> the RX500.  That's a good printer (same print engine as the rest 
of 
> the R printers, IIRC).  When was the last time you profiled your 
> monitor?  Does your printer profile match your inks and papers 
> you're using?  You'll be fighting the same battle with any 
printer, 

> so might as well practice on the RX500 while you wait for the next 
> generation large format home inkjet.
> 
> Anne

>>However, from reading all the questions and answers
>>here about QTR it looks to me as though you almost need to be a 
>>computer
<<programmer to install it and I'm not so I haven't tried that.

Hm.... Let's not scare the lady on that point...I'm testing the 
Windows version with QTRGui on a 7600 and the whole thing has been 
drop-dead easy and yields a clean neutral tone if desired, and a 
nice wide range of sepias. Now if I could only get the print head 
aligned really, really well...

Steve K

>I'm looking at the Epson 1280 and 2200; 
>they both print the size I want and I can get the MIS inks for them, too.
>The price difference has me leaning toward the 1280 
>but if there is significant improvement by going with the 2200, 
>I would consider that option.

>Any advice you have to offer will be appreciated.

I've been out of the loop lately, so I apologize if I'm repeating things.
Since I have both running side-by-side here, let me add my 2 cents worth.

For standard matte prints, the results are visually equal, although the 2200
is a bit faster.

There are, however, several reasons I prefer the 2200.

For cheap, artifact-free glossy prints, the 2200's ink load adjustment
allows a noticeably better dmax on Epson Glossy Photo Paper.  The 2200, UT7
ink, and this cheap glossy paper make a great combination for glossy,
non-archival prints.  Unlike pigments on the more modern and expensive
papers with "micro-porous" coatings, no post-printing sprays are needed on
Epson Glossy Photo paper to hide the bronzing -- because there is none to
speak of.  (Whether Wei T'o deacidification spray can make these prints
archival is an open and very interesting question.)

The ink load adjustment and light black ink make the best prints on
non-coated papers, like Arches Hot Press (not their overpriced inkjet
paper).  For limited artistic reasons some may prefer this uncoated paper.
I see very little impact from the light black ink except for this situation.


For those who really get into the inks, the separate ink carts of the 2200
allow custom ink arrangements very easily.  If one does not like sepia
prints, for example, the LC ink can be put in that position, making the easy
(no curves and grayscale file) prints more neutral.  I really appreciate the
separate tanks.

The 2200, being made for pigments as opposed to dyes, seems to be more
reliable in terms of having a perfect nozzle checks regularly -- and even
after having sat for a month without use.  This could be, of course, just
the particular printers I have.  However, the pigment printers do have
noticeably more built-in cleaning cycles.

I suspect the newer Epson printers are more consistent in their production
tolerances, making the canned curves and profiles more likely to work well
without fine tuning.

At any rate, both printers can do a great job.  These are just some factors
that come to mind that may or may not apply to your situation.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

Hello Kathy,

One thing nobody else mentioned, the 2200 has a rear paper feeder that
handles thick papers, canvas boards, etc, with ease.  A 2200 can print
on things that would never go through a 1280.


Regards,
Clayton


Info on black and white digital printing at    
http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm