Digital BW, The Print

I am currently running a 1280.  Thinking about a new printer.  Noted 
the following differences in the specs:

2200 - 2880x1440 dpi, 4 pic droplet, 7 inks

1800 - 5760x1440, 1.5 pic, 8 inks (gloss optimizer)

These numbers seem to indicate the 1800 is more capable of producing 
finer images.

Is that the case?

Is the 1800 the better choice of the two for B&W?

Help appreciated, Val

Val

I think you need to think about one more input first. Would you ideally run
the 1800 with your own inks and a RIP (when available)?  Supposedly, out of
the box the R1800 is not expected to be as good for B&W as the 2200.  It
lacks the light grey ink, and the LM and LC inks to cool the blacks.  The UC
inks also have a better colour gamut on matte paper.  All that goes out the
window though if you were to use MIS refillable cartridges and a dedicated
ink set with a RIP like QTR if/when it supports the R1800.  Then I would
much rather have the 1.5 pic, 5760x1440, and, most of all, the glop.

Steve

> From: Val Brunell <vbrunell@...>
 
> 
> 
> I am currently running a 1280.  Thinking about a new printer.  Noted
> the following differences in the specs:
> 
> 2200 - 2880x1440 dpi, 4 pic droplet, 7 inks
> 
> 1800 - 5760x1440, 1.5 pic, 8 inks (gloss optimizer)
> 
> These numbers seem to indicate the 1800 is more capable of producing
> finer images.
> 
> Is that the case?
> 
> Is the 1800 the better choice of the two for B&W?
> 
> Help appreciated, Val
>

> Is the 1800 the better choice of the two for B&W?
> Help appreciated, Val

Go to this link for the full comparison between the 2200 and 1800...about 2/3rds down 
the page.

http://www.inkjetart.com/R1800/index.html

Here's a copy and paste of some of the info:

Q: How is the R1800 different than the 2200?

A: In a nutshell, the R1800 has the better color gamut and lack-of-gloss-differential 
advantages of the 1280, and the greater longevity advantages of a pigmented inkset (the 
R1800 UltraChrome inkset has even greater fade-resistance than the 2200's UltraChrome 
inkset). In most instances, users will prefer the output of the R1800 for glossy, luster and 
semigloss prints over the output of the 2200. However, even though the R1800's dual-
black "plumbing" (having both photo and matte black ink cartridges ready to use), makes 
it easier to switch back and forth between matte and glossy media, discerning matte and 
fine art printers will notice a slight advantage in quality with the 2200. 

Here is a list of some of the main differences between the R1800 and the 2200: 


The R1800 is about $150 less than the 2200.
Part of that price difference is because the R1800 does not include a automatic paper 
cutter for those using roll paper (90% of the 2200 owners rarely use this attachment 
anyway, so it's not much of a loss).

The R1800 has a slightly better highest-printing-resolution of 5760 x 1440 dpi vs. the 
2200's 2880 x 1440 dpi (this is mainly advertising hype to match other manufacturer's 
specs, than any practical use application).

The R1800 has a smaller ink droplet size of 1.5 picoliter vs. the 2200's 4 picoliter smallest 
droplet size. This advantage can be noticed in the highlights of some prints (resulting in 
slightly better highlight separation and detail).

The R1800 is plumbed with both the Photo Black and the Matte Black ink, so no switching 
of black ink cartridges is necessary -- you only have to indicate your paper choice and the 
change is made automatically for you. This is a clear advantage in time and a savings (of 
about $1-$2) in ink not wasted compared to when one manually switches black ink 
cartridges on the 2200.

Speed: The R1800 appears to be faster than the 2200. Advertised 11x14 "Photo" printing 
time for the R1800 is several seconds faster (at 1 minute, 51 seconds) than the "Photo" 
printing time for an 8x10 (2 minutes, 6 seconds) on the 2200.
No gloss differential (or "bronzing") when using the R1800's Hi-Gloss UltraChrome inks on 
gloss, luster and semigloss papers - whereas 2200 users will continue to have this 
problem that is annoying to some people (but only when viewing a print held in your 
hands, instead of one displayed behind glass, in a frame). The R1800 has no visual 
advantage over the 2200 when using matte surface papers. In fact, the opposite is true. 
Epson 2200 matte prints have a slight advantage in quality over prints made with the 
R1800.

Longevity: The R1800 uses a red and a blue ink cartridge vs. the light magenta, light cyan 
and light black used in the 2200 (which is the same ink that is used in the Epson 4000, 
7600 and 9600). The Red and blue inks are more fade-resistant than the three light or 
"photo" inks, and the estimated longevity rates with some of Epson papers are greater 
(104 years vs. 84 years for the Epson Premium Glossy, and 200 years vs. 92 years for the 
Epson Watercolor Paper Radiate White). NOTE: The R1800 uses the same cartridges as the 
R800.

Inkset neutrality for black and white printing: We interviewed several Epson employees 
about this issue, and they indicated that because the R1800 inkset does not have the light 
black ink (like the 2200, 4000, 7600 and 9600), it will not produce as neutral black and 
white prints as does the 2200, especially with matte and fine art papers. (Editor's Note: In 
May 2002, Epson shared research information with us about their new UltraChrome inkset 
that was going to be introduced with the new 2200, 7600 and 9600 printers. Epson told 
us that their scientists had reviewed the possibility of going with a black, magenta, cyan, 
yellow, green and orange inkset to increase the color gamut range. Although colors like 
green and orange, or red and blue could greatly increase color gamut, they decide instead 
to go with the UltraChrome inkset that used light black, light cyan and light magenta 
because this inkset had better neutral control, and was more in line with the projected 
needs of their photo and fine art markets.)

Thick media handling: Unlike the Epson 2200, the Epson Stylus Photo R1800 does NOT 
have a straight through paper path for thicker media. The R1800 has a separate top-
loading position for single, 13x19 sheets (as well as a standard auto-feed, top-loading 
position), but the thickest media it is designed to handle is Epson's new 325gsm 13" x 19" 
UltraSmooth Paper (which will be introduced to the market within a few weeks). This new 
paper is about 19 mils thick. The 2200, with its straight through paper path, can handle 
media up to 1.3mm thick (51 mils)!

The "B&W" samples from an R1800 that I saw were bad.  I will take a shot at
a dedicated inkset in the future, but I would not buy one for B&W now.

At this point, the 2200 is the best B&W option, but with dedicated B&W
inksets, the 1280 can make prints that are just as good.  For color and B&W,
the 2200 with a rip is it.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Val Brunell [mailto:vbrunell@...]
> Sent: Sunday, April 10, 2005 4:52 AM
> To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Digital BW] 2200 vs R1800
> 
> 
> 
> I am currently running a 1280.  Thinking about a new printer.  Noted
> the following differences in the specs:
> 
> 2200 - 2880x1440 dpi, 4 pic droplet, 7 inks
> 
> 1800 - 5760x1440, 1.5 pic, 8 inks (gloss optimizer)
> 
> These numbers seem to indicate the 1800 is more capable of producing
> finer images.
> 
> Is that the case?
> 
> Is the 1800 the better choice of the two for B&W?
> 
> Help appreciated, Val
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 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
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>

Paul, John and Steve...Thanks for the good input.  I appreciate 
it...Val




--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark" 
<paul.roark@v...> wrote:
> The "B&W" samples from an R1800 that I saw were bad.  I will take 
a shot at
> a dedicated inkset in the future, but I would not buy one for B&W 
now.
> 
> At this point, the 2200 is the best B&W option, but with dedicated 
B&W
> inksets, the 1280 can make prints that are just as good.  For 
color and B&W,
> the 2200 with a rip is it.
> 
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com 
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Val Brunell [mailto:vbrunell@d...]
> > Sent: Sunday, April 10, 2005 4:52 AM
> > To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: [Digital BW] 2200 vs R1800
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > I am currently running a 1280.  Thinking about a new printer.  
Noted
> > the following differences in the specs:
> > 
> > 2200 - 2880x1440 dpi, 4 pic droplet, 7 inks
> > 
> > 1800 - 5760x1440, 1.5 pic, 8 inks (gloss optimizer)
> > 
> > These numbers seem to indicate the 1800 is more capable of 
producing
> > finer images.
> > 
> > Is that the case?
> > 
> > Is the 1800 the better choice of the two for B&W?
> > 
> > Help appreciated, Val
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 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
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >