Digital BW, The Print

Drifting towards the digital darkroom, I joined this forum trying to 
find answers for basic questions: what to buy and how to start. The 
first I noticed was that the forum is quite Epson-centered. So, 
initially I had no doubt about purchasing some good ole Epson piece, 
specifically 1280 as it is dirt cheap right now.

Later I found that the printer has been on market for more than four 
years, which is outrageous IMO.
 If we had the same pace of innovations in digital cameras, we would 
still pay 2K for 3 megapixels. I personally attribute this situation 
to the lack of competition as Epson enjoyed a monopoly in that niche.

As a responsible photographer I have to support competition and, 
therefore, my next printer will be non-Epson. I think about buying HP 
8750 even though I clearly see the following possible drawbacks:
-less variety of paper;
-difficulties to build ICC profiles as PrintFIX doesn't support the 
printer yet;
-less variety of inks;
-no cheap RIP software available.

Being the free market adept sometimes means taking some sacrifice, 
but ... did anybody get some decent  print out of this printer?

Any feedback will be appreciated.
Thank you,
Lev

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "lev_baran" 
<barankin@y...> wrote:
Hi Lev, and welcome to the forum. About your points:

>>I noticed was that the forum is quite Epson-centered. So, 
> initially I had no doubt about purchasing some good ole Epson 
piece, 
> specifically 1280 as it is dirt cheap right now.

This forum is Epson oriented for the same reason the entire fine-art 
B&W printing field is Epson oriented: it was discovered several 
yaers ago that Epson prints will push pigments inks through and 
survive, while no other inexpensive printers will.

> Later I found that the printer has been on market for more than 
four 
> years, which is outrageous IMO.

The 1280 has been on the market for 4 years the same reason the 3000 
has been on the market for ten: it's a good workhorse, and fills a 
niche better than almost anything else, at least until the 2200 made 
its appearance.
>  If we had the same pace of innovations in digital cameras, we 
would 
> still pay 2K for 3 megapixels. I personally attribute this 
situation 
> to the lack of competition as Epson enjoyed a monopoly in that 
niche.
 
Admittedly Epson has a major headstart, but as I said they work. 
Epson itself has not been sitting idle: since the release of the 
1280 they have also realeased a new set of pigment inks (the 
Ultrachromes) and an upgrade for them, the 7600/9600 printers,the 
R800, the 2200, the 4000, and now the R1800 for color, and coming 
soon a whole new line of 13" thru 44" printers with 3 blacks and 
five colors to do both color & B&W in one machine. HP on the other 
hand, has just in the last year released its first real contender in 
the field, and it uses DYES. Sure they get a good rating, but not as 
good as pigments, and as you pointed out, on a very limited range of 
papers.

> As a responsible photographer I have to support competition and, 

Supporting the competition is an admirable concept, but hang out and 
do the research first-unless of course you have money to burn, in 
which case, go for it! To tell the truth I wouldn't mind some 
feedback on that machine myself, I'm still looking for a good way to 
do digital internegs, so if you buy one, keep us posted!(g)

Regards

Steve Karafyllakis

Lev,

There is a reason why Epson is the market leader.  If (a) you want to
produce good prints reliably and quickly and (b) you are OK with matte
papers, you will want to get the Epson UC printers (2200, 4000, 7600, soon
to be 2400) and a RIP such as ImagePrint.  Then, with a calibrated monitor
and careful soft-proofing, you can get excellent color or b&w prints with a
minimum of production time.  If you are OK with 13" wide prints, the 2200 is
about $500, the IP6 RIP is $500, and for $1K plus $250 for the Pantone
Spyder and Optical Pro software you are set (assuming you have a recent
version of Photoshop).  If you are OK with dye inks, the 1280 is about $300
plus $500 for the RIP, or less for other RIP solutions discussed on this
list.  You might want to revisit issues of supporting competition vs.
facilitating your art.  I will also be interested in any responses as to the
8750, since I have an occasional need for a gloss or semi-gloss print.

Regards,

  --Ken Carney
    www.kencarney.com 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com 
> [mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On 
> Behalf Of lev_baran
> Sent: Friday, May 06, 2005 5:05 PM
> To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Digital BW] Any feedback about HP 8750?
> 
> Drifting towards the digital darkroom, I joined this forum 
> trying to find answers for basic questions: what to buy and 
> how to start. The first I noticed was that the forum is quite 
> Epson-centered. So, initially I had no doubt about purchasing 
> some good ole Epson piece, specifically 1280 as it is dirt 
> cheap right now.
> 
> Later I found that the printer has been on market for more 
> than four years, which is outrageous IMO.
>  If we had the same pace of innovations in digital cameras, 
> we would still pay 2K for 3 megapixels. I personally 
> attribute this situation to the lack of competition as Epson 
> enjoyed a monopoly in that niche.
> 
> As a responsible photographer I have to support competition 
> and, therefore, my next printer will be non-Epson. I think 
> about buying HP 8750 even though I clearly see the following 
> possible drawbacks:
> -less variety of paper;
> -difficulties to build ICC profiles as PrintFIX doesn't 
> support the printer yet; -less variety of inks; -no cheap RIP 
> software available.
> 
> Being the free market adept sometimes means taking some 
> sacrifice, but ... did anybody get some decent  print out of 
> this printer?
> 
> Any feedback will be appreciated.
> Thank you,
> Lev
>

> ...the forum is quite Epson-centered.

Superior design. The competitors all fall short in significant ways,
will catch up eventually. But not with current HP technology

I was getting excited about Designjet 130 until I looked closer at
HP...I won't buy just yet, but I'm eagerly awaiting Epson's new 4000
iteration (4800?)...or a good deal on 4000 when it's discontinued :-) 
  
 So, 
> initially I had no doubt about purchasing some good ole Epson piece, 
> specifically 1280 as it is dirt cheap right now.

Decide if you want cheap/good or contemporary/better.  

1280 is as good or better than the HP in every respect but Dmax, and
you can probably match that with non-oem ink.

> 
> Later I found that the printer has been on market for more than four 
> years, which is outrageous IMO.
 
35mm's been around since 1929 in still cameras, has only now got a
replacement...it took 75 years. OUTRAGEOUS! 

I've used Pentium IV's for 6 years, they work beautifully. They'll be
mainstream for another couple of years until Intel's new big thing  
dominates... a 10 year run? Some things last because they're good.

  I personally attribute this situation 
> to the lack of competition as Epson enjoyed a monopoly in that niche.

There's plenty of "competition," but there are winners and losers,
Epson's still the winner. Who wants the loser?


> As a responsible photographer I have to support competition

In other words, a quality-conscious smart photographer isn't a
"responsible photographer?" 

 I clearly see the following possible drawbacks:
> -less variety of paper;
> -difficulties to build ICC profiles as PrintFIX doesn't support the 
> printer yet;
> -less variety of inks;
> -no cheap RIP software available.

...Consider this: HP will dump current tech because of those
"drawbacks" (ie fatal flaws)... 

> Being the free market adept sometimes means taking some sacrifice

Consumers don't/shouldn't make "sacrifices" in the interests of
vendors. Would you buy a Buick to help GM?

> but ... did anybody get some decent  print out of this printer?

Of course ...people get "decent prints" from everything...those that
can't accept the "drawbacks" you mentioned use Epsons. Blame Canon and
HP engineers. 

Djon

> Lev

I think you listed several reasons why you should stick with Epson. You
should listen to your own advice. If you buy the HP printer (for whatever
reasons) you will be wasting large amounts of time trying in vain to make it
perform as good as an Epson.

Just remember, don't say we didn't warn you.

Gary

PS, I have an Epson C86 and a 1280.

www.pbase.com/garyallenbrown
www.gabsculpture.com

----- Original Message -----
From: "lev_baran" <barankin@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, May 06, 2005 3:05 PM
Subject: [Digital BW] Any feedback about HP 8750?


Drifting towards the digital darkroom, I joined this forum trying to
find answers for basic questions: what to buy and how to start. The
first I noticed was that the forum is quite Epson-centered. So,
initially I had no doubt about purchasing some good ole Epson piece,
specifically 1280 as it is dirt cheap right now.

Later I found that the printer has been on market for more than four
years, which is outrageous IMO.
 If we had the same pace of innovations in digital cameras, we would
still pay 2K for 3 megapixels. I personally attribute this situation
to the lack of competition as Epson enjoyed a monopoly in that niche.

As a responsible photographer I have to support competition and,
therefore, my next printer will be non-Epson. I think about buying HP
8750 even though I clearly see the following possible drawbacks:
-less variety of paper;
-difficulties to build ICC profiles as PrintFIX doesn't support the
printer yet;
-less variety of inks;
-no cheap RIP software available.

Being the free market adept sometimes means taking some sacrifice,
but ... did anybody get some decent  print out of this printer?

Any feedback will be appreciated.
Thank you,
Lev







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