Digital BW, The Print

I have looked through past comments, and most of them are fairly old 
at this point, so from the perspective of today - how much of an 
upgrade is the 2400 over the 2200.  Not looking for a feature 
comparison, just qualitative (which is valuable info from this 
group).  I know it has the next generation of inks, and an extra 
black, etc....I have been reading...just never seen a print.

Some background:  On the 2200, I can get pretty nice prints on matte 
papers, with or without QTR, and with QTR I have been able to get 
good prints on luster type paper (Epson Prem Luster and Ilford Smooth 
Pearl).  Bronzing is usually not too bad, but not exactly good 
either, and sometimes terrible.  No metamerism.  Still, I think the 
prints couild be better.

Everyone raved that the 2400 cured all kinds of ills.  But then 
again, I recall when many people were saying the 2200 marked the 
arrival of true B&W right out of the box.  Not.  It was way better 
than anything else at the time, but a move up from "terrible" is not 
much of an endorsement.

But...I have seen more postive comments on the 2400 over time, so I 
am strongly considering the upgrade.  But then again, I see people 
headed for 3rd party inks and RIPs which, for the 2200, were 
necessary to fix some pretty bad problems.

So....the 2400....is it "for real?"  Will I pull a print out of the 
tray and say, "oh yeah....that's is MUCH better?"  Or will I stare at 
it with a loup and say, "uh....yeah....maybe there is a little 
improvement here... I think....."

Hello Andy,

Lots of things to cover here...

>I recall when many people were saying the 2200 marked the 
>arrival of true B&W right out of the box.

Those must have been early statements based on it being the first oem
pigment ink set with MK/PK and LK.  But as we all know, it's not a
good out-of-the-box BW solution.  As for the other things:

- K3 has better longevity

- K3 has LLK

- K3 has little if any metamerism

- K3 printers have the built in ABW driver which makes excellent
out-of-the-box BW without a 3rd party RIP, and can be used with a RIP
if different results are desired.

- On glossy papers K3 has greatly reduced gloss diff and bronzing

- On matte papers there is not as big a difference in appearance of
final prints (compared to UC with RIP), but still better longevity.

- If using MIS inks + RIP instead of K3 then the above advantages
compared to 2200/MIS/RIP are reduced.  However, the MIS K4 inks can be
used with the ABW driver, so there is still some advantage there if
you want to use it that way.

- K3 inks work beautifully with the new Silver Rag type papers (and
MIS K4 too, I think), but I don't think the UC or UT7 inks do well
there.  So if you like those new papers...

- Finally, from my own experience after several years with an 870 and
a 2200 with a variety of inks and techniques, using a 2400 with K3 and
ABW is a dream machine and has totally changed my printing life.  It's
a huge improvement as it comes, and can only get better if you are
willing to tinker with additional inks/RIPs/curves, etc.  I can't
recommend a 2400 highly enough, but as Walt said, check out the new
3800 before
deciding.  Article #9 at the link below outlines a simple and
effective K3/ABW workflow.

I hope this sums it up well.  Someone please jump in here if I missed
something.

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Clayton Jones" 
<cj@...> wrote:
>
> Hello Andy,
> 
> Lots of things to cover here...
> 
> >I recall when many people were saying the 2200 marked the 
> >arrival of true B&W right out of the box.
> 
> Those must have been early statements based on it being the first 
oem
> pigment ink set with MK/PK and LK.  But as we all know, it's not a
> good out-of-the-box BW solution.  As for the other things:
> 
> - K3 has better longevity
> 
> - K3 has LLK
> 
> - K3 has little if any metamerism
> 
> - K3 printers have the built in ABW driver which makes excellent
> out-of-the-box BW without a 3rd party RIP, and can be used with a 
RIP
> if different results are desired.
> 
> - On glossy papers K3 has greatly reduced gloss diff and bronzing
> 
> - On matte papers there is not as big a difference in appearance of
> final prints (compared to UC with RIP), but still better longevity.
> 
> - If using MIS inks + RIP instead of K3 then the above advantages
> compared to 2200/MIS/RIP are reduced.  However, the MIS K4 inks 
can be
> used with the ABW driver, so there is still some advantage there if
> you want to use it that way.
> 
> - K3 inks work beautifully with the new Silver Rag type papers (and
> MIS K4 too, I think), but I don't think the UC or UT7 inks do well
> there.  So if you like those new papers...
> 
> - Finally, from my own experience after several years with an 870 
and
> a 2200 with a variety of inks and techniques, using a 2400 with K3 
and
> ABW is a dream machine and has totally changed my printing life.  
It's
> a huge improvement as it comes, and can only get better if you are
> willing to tinker with additional inks/RIPs/curves, etc.  I can't
> recommend a 2400 highly enough, but as Walt said, check out the new
> 3800 before
> deciding.  Article #9 at the link below outlines a simple and
> effective K3/ABW workflow.
> 
> I hope this sums it up well.  Someone please jump in here if I 
missed
> something.

I didn't see the link info to the workflow that you mentioned.  Can 
you re-post that link?  Thanks.

Steve
>

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Steve
Holderfield" <steve@...> wrote:

>>Article #9 at the link below outlines a simple and effective 
>>K3/ABW workflow.

>I didn't see the link info to the workflow that you mentioned.  Can 
>you re-post that link?  Thanks.


Oops, sorry.  Too quick on the Send button.


Regards,
Clayton


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