Digital BW, The Print

Hi, 
Using a 2200/UT7 right now, I nevertheless want to get a wide format
printer during this year. As I am not a professional photographer I
have to look at the prices seriously and I must say that a new 7600 is
almost too much for my budget - as there is so much more expensive
stuff in photography that needs/ wants to be bought all the time.

Now the options Epson give me right now are the 4000 and the 7600.
Given the fact that since several years Epson dominated the market for
serious prints of archival photographic prints, I feel that the prices
are higher than they should be and - BTW - I also feel that the 4000
is a much too big and heavy machine for the A2 format. There should be
a printer exactly like the 2100, just wider. 

But am I wrong feeling that times start to change for Epson? 
1. HPs relatively new DJ 130/ DJ 90 (summer 2005) line of printers
with agressive pricing and try&buy policies.

2. Canon comes out - finally - with wide format printers: 
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/pie-show.shtml
Interesting enough, Canon seems to offer the photorag roll paper for
their printers, which suggests that this combination is at least
working - something which seems more unclear for the DJ130 line.

Both brands have lower prices than Epson - and finally start to offer
solutions that can be called archival. I also welcome that the DJs are
much smaller that a Epson 4000 or 7600. 

Of course there are many issues to be thought of. For Epson a wide
aftermarket has established: Black/ grey inks with CIS systems,
shareware or very affordable RIPs (QTR/ Bowhaus) that make neutral BW
available.

Also, the Epson inks somehow still inspire more trust in terms of archival
qualities than the dye inks of HP and Epson. 

So what I think is that the situation just *starts* to change - it
will take some time before serious print makers will be able to trust
in the HP/ Canon solutions. But those companies seem not be willing to
leave the market over to Epson alone.

Which can only be good for us, the printer people.

What are your thoughts?

regards, Bernie

At 11:27 +0000 19.3.2005, Bernie Ess wrote:
*******************************************

>What are your thoughts?

The physical and chemical rules and theory of chaos is valid for 
everybody. So I prefere Epson.

There is no way to "cook" coated pigment particules, there is no way 
to realy control "cooking" printing head - you may only reduce the 
chaotic behaviour of such system by enormous number of nozzles, etc, 
etc.

Martin
--

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Martin Sluka >
 
> There is no way to "cook" coated pigment particules, there is no
way 
> to realy control "cooking" printing head - 

Sorry, I don't understand your somehow enigmatic answer.
 
And regardless of theoretical concepts of chaos theory etc, those who
reviewed the DJ 130 seem to like it, expecially the color prints. As I
already mentioned, the aftermarket/ RIP solutions  are not yet there
(although IP seems to support the DJ in its latest version).

greetings
Bernie

Bernie,

> Using a 2200/UT7 right now, I nevertheless want to get a wide format
> printer during this year. ...

A used 7500 was my initial route to this.  In some respects its better than
the 7600 I just acquired.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

This is a question for the group has anybody in here ever odered the 
FLARR Reports to help determine printers and papers and Giclee Printers
and if so was it worth the money, I'm not a pro but I do want to do some 
  fine art printing and maybe other larger printing photo's.  Thanks 
Anthony


Bernie,

> Using a 2200/UT7 right now, I nevertheless want to get a wide format
> printer during this year. ...

A used 7500 was my initial route to this.  In some respects its better than
the 7600 I just acquired.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com








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 \ufffdGroup Topic, Rules and Guidelines\ufffd 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 \ufffdOWNER\ufffd AND 
\ufffdMODERATORS\ufffd 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 
\ufffdOWNER\ufffd AND \ufffdMODERATORS\ufffd 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

The Flair report is a joke and biased toward products they have an interest in. It is 
essentialy an ad for certain products in the form of a "report".  I don't know anyone in this 
business that has ever taken them seriously. You can't so a serach on the web without 
being dumped into their site. They would claim knowledg about equipment on hearsay 
and rumor. This guy bashed Howtek drum scanners and Epson printers while championing 
Scitek flatbeds and HP thermal printers for years. Guess who gave him operating capital?

You be the judge.

John

Hi Bernie;

Like Paul I too got into wide format with a used 7500, which I'm 
using with the original UT-1 inks and getting quite good prints 
from. However, if you think the 4000 is too big and bulky, you won't 
like the 7500 either. I also have a factory refurbed 760 I paid 
$2000 for with full one -year warranty.
 I am intrigued by, and did some research on, some of the new 
printers, the DJ-130 being one of them. A lot more compact, though 
the price business is misleading: if you buy the version with the 
roll-paper feeder it comes up to the price of a 4000. And I seem to 
remember that the roll feeder was only 17 inches wide? Not sure 
about that detail, though. In terms of space occupied: The full-size 
sheet feed slot is at the back, and almost horizontal, which means 
you can't put the printer against a wall and use large sheets. So if 
you need to use it that way, it will tie up much more space than a 
vertical feed machine. 
One thing that bothers me about the HP is that they don't seem to 
publish ink-droplet sizes. Being in the position of needing to do 
digital internegs for the forseeable future, and also being 
interested in a grain free two K ink (MK +LK)gray-scale solution, a 
very small droplet size such as the the R1800 has is very attractive 
to me, though it may not be an issue for most printers.

I haven't done as much research into the 24" Canon, but I understand 
it uses pigment inks, which at least allows use of third party pigs 
and papers, and will most likely get it some 3rd party support. How 
much is anyone's guess, but I doubt that QTR will support it in the 
next year, though Bowhouse might have the resources to do so. We'll 
see I guess.


Steve Karafyllakis 

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Bernie Ess" 
<albatros-@g...> wrote:
> 
> Hi, 
> Using a 2200/UT7 right now, I nevertheless want to get a wide 
format
> printer during this year. As I am not a professional photographer I
> have to look at the prices seriously and I must say that a new 
7600 is
> almost too much for my budget - as there is so much more expensive
> stuff in photography that needs/ wants to be bought all the time.
> 
> Now the options Epson give me right now are the 4000 and the 7600.
> Given the fact that since several years Epson dominated the market 
for
> serious prints of archival photographic prints, I feel that the 
prices
> are higher than they should be and - BTW - I also feel that the 
4000
> is a much too big and heavy machine for the A2 format. There 
should be
> a printer exactly like the 2100, just wider. 
> 
> But am I wrong feeling that times start to change for Epson? 
> 1. HPs relatively new DJ 130/ DJ 90 (summer 2005) line of printers
> with agressive pricing and try&buy policies.
> 
> 2. Canon comes out - finally - with wide format printers: 
> http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/pie-show.shtml
> Interesting enough, Canon seems to offer the photorag roll paper 
for
> their printers, which suggests that this combination is at least
> working - something which seems more unclear for the DJ130 line.
> 
> Both brands have lower prices than Epson - and finally start to 
offer
> solutions that can be called archival. I also welcome that the DJs 
are
> much smaller that a Epson 4000 or 7600. 
> 
> Of course there are many issues to be thought of. For Epson a wide
> aftermarket has established: Black/ grey inks with CIS systems,
> shareware or very affordable RIPs (QTR/ Bowhaus) that make neutral 
BW
> available.
> 
> Also, the Epson inks somehow still inspire more trust in terms of 
archival
> qualities than the dye inks of HP and Epson. 
> 
> So what I think is that the situation just *starts* to change - it
> will take some time before serious print makers will be able to 
trust
> in the HP/ Canon solutions. But those companies seem not be 
willing to

> leave the market over to Epson alone.
> 
> Which can only be good for us, the printer people.
> 
> What are your thoughts?
> 
> regards, Bernie

Thanks, saved me from being the bad guy and dumping on them.

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "john dean" 
<deanwork2003@y...> wrote:
> 
> The Flair report is a joke and biased toward products they have an 
interest in. It is 
> essentialy an ad for certain products in the form of a "report".  I 
don't know anyone in this 
> business that has ever taken them seriously. You can't so a serach 
on the web without 
> being dumped into their site. They would claim knowledg about 
equipment on hearsay 
> and rumor. This guy bashed Howtek drum scanners and Epson printers 
while championing 
> Scitek flatbeds and HP thermal printers for years. Guess who gave 
him operating capital?

> 
> You be the judge.
> 
> John

I'm still using a 9500 for color work, and see no real reasons to 
update to a newer model. Parts are cheap, easy to repair, no ink 
chips, a wealth of third party inks. The only thing I wish for is a 
light gray ink, but I'll over come that in some other way. Yes it is 
a little slower than a new machine, and you really need a RIP to get 
the best quality, but it still produces beautiful output. And the 
money you can save can be used to get things like a good RIP, or lots 
of paper, or better yet real color management tools. It's easy to rig 
a bootle feed ink system, and that makes it easy to clean out too. It 
takes me about 2 hours to completely empty and clean the ink path, so 
if I really want to, I can swop between color inks, and grayscale 
inks, or a mix of both (still doing research on this which leads me 
to a question for another thread). WOuld I like one of the new 
printers, sure... Then I could join the masses and make UltraGiclee 
prints (shakes head, walks away).

There was a little talk about the Canon printers over at DPReview 
when they first hit the USA, but initial reports were not too 
favorably. I suggest seeing a test before buying one. If you really 
want to watch your budget, you might look into a used Encad printer. 
Some of the 600x600 printers can be had for really cheap prices on 
the used market. For black and white use, these should do very well. 
For color use they were OK. Most of the Encad printers could use 
pigment inks through their thermal heads (Encad GO inks). The colors 
are a little more muted from this, but with Canon now using thermal 
squirt pigment ink, I would bet that better ink is not too far away. 
And for B/W work, it's hard to "burn" a carbon particle any more than 
it is already. To ad to the list, Mimaki, Mutoh, Roland, Colorspan 
are a few others, but they are mostly much more expensive. However 
with expensive you may get features like 8 to 12 inks, and hardware 
configuration so that the printer knows what to do with those 12 
inks. Just think, 6 color inks, plus 4 gray shades, 1 more for photo 
black, and one more for glop. That would be 6 blacks (matte, photo, 
and 4 light shades), plus CcMmY and the GLoss OPtimizer all in one 
printer (one very expensive printer). Sorry to add to your choices, 
probably just made you more confused about what to buy, sorry.


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark" 
<paul.roark@v...> wrote:
> Bernie,
> 
> > Using a 2200/UT7 right now, I nevertheless want to get a wide 
format
> > printer during this year. ...
> 
> A used 7500 was my initial route to this.  In some respects its 
better than

> the 7600 I just acquired.
> 
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Steven
Karafyllakis" <steve@s...> wrote:
> Like Paul I too got into wide format with a used 7500, which I'm 
> using with the original UT-1 inks and getting quite good prints 
> from. However, if you think the 4000 is too big and bulky, you
won't 
> like the 7500 either. I also have a factory refurbed 7600 I paid 
> $2000 for with full one -year warranty.


Thanks so far to everyone who answered. I think it will be easier to
get a 7600 in good shape than a 7500 which seem to be very rare here
in Germany. The new 7600 is about 3500Euro here, I should be able to
get a
good used one for 2500 maybe. Unfortunately "refurbed" items are not
common here in Germany. 

Your all-in-one printer sounds, great, color, b&w, Glop etc, but I
am afraid I cannot afford it neither do I have the space. 

The remark with the 4000 being too large was in respect to the size of
the much smaller 2100 and the DJ90. The Epson 4000 is a monster, but
if I let a monster live in my place, I want it to spit out really big
paper,
not only 17" wide. The difference from 13" (Epson) to 17" is not
enough to justify the bigger size of the machine. In this case the
logical step will be the 7600. 

Probably, as always, with some patience I will find one that will be
ok and not too expensive.

Thanks again, 

Bernie

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Bernie Ess" <albatros-@g...> wrote:
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Martin Sluka >
>  
> > There is no way to "cook" coated pigment particules, there is no
> way 
> > to realy control "cooking" printing head - 
> 
> Sorry, I don't understand your somehow enigmatic answer.
>  
> And regardless of theoretical concepts of chaos theory etc, those who
> reviewed the DJ 130 seem to like it, expecially the color prints. As I
> already mentioned, the aftermarket/ RIP solutions  are not yet there
> (although IP seems to support the DJ in its latest version).

What he's trying to say is that a thermal inkjet (Canon or HP) heats up the ink and uses steam explosions to shoot it at the paper. This works for dye inks, where the dye is actually disolved in a solvent, so that it's dispersed at the molecular level. If you try to heat pigment inks this way, you cook them into sludge in the print head.

Piezo printers physically push the ink out. Because they don't heat the ink, they can spray almost anything. I've loaded Epson print carts with glue, sugar, starch, nitrogen tri iodide (long story), shelac (yes, real shelac, from bettels), fruit juices, food coloring, gum arabic, Scrip, white paint, etc.

Hope this helps...

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Bernie Ess" <albatros-@g...> wrote:
> 
> I also feel that the 4000
> is a much too big and heavy machine for the A2 format. There should be
> a printer exactly like the 2100, just wider. 

It's not. By a long shot.

First, if they just "stretched" a 2200 an extra 4 inches, it would get physically weaker. Even a print head the same size as the one in the 2200 would ride at non-uniform heights above the paper. When it got to the center of the print rails, the longer rails would sag under the weight of the head. The rigidity of long, thin structures, like the rails that the print head rides on, doesn't increase in direct proportion to the thickness of the rails, either. If they made the 13 inch rails 30% longer to get 17 inch rails, they'd also have to make them more than 30% thicker and wider, so the end result is, for a 30% increase in width, you end up making many of the printer's parts 3.8x heavier (1.3 longer, 1.3^2 thicker, 1.3^2 wider).

Now, assume that all you did was keep the 2200 mechanism, stretch it, and make whatever you needed to make thicker to increase strength. A 2200 in high res mode takes nearly 1/2 hour for a 13x19 print. Increase that to 16x24 and you've increased area by 50%. Print a 17x25, and you're up to a 70% increase in area. Or almost an hour for a big print.

And then you're talking about very small ink carts for such a big print.

The end result is, when you stretch a 2200, and keep the machine performing to 2200 standards of reliability and convenience (speed, ink change intervals) you need fater printheads, motors, electronics, and bigger ink carts.

In short, you end up building the 4000.

> > 
> > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Martin Sluka 
>
> >  
> > > There is no way to "cook" coated pigment particules, there is no
> > way 
> > > to realy control "cooking" printing head - 
> > 
> > Sorry, I don't understand your somehow enigmatic answer.
> >  
> > And regardless of theoretical concepts of chaos theory etc, those 
who
> > reviewed the DJ 130 seem to like it, expecially the color prints. 
As I
> > already mentioned, the aftermarket/ RIP solutions  are not yet 
there
> > (although IP seems to support the DJ in its latest version).
> 


WOW, I'm must be really lost. I don't even see that message in the 
group. Guess it must have been sent be email only or is extremely 
delayed.