Thanks, Paul.
I like simple and the Y = EZW in the 2400 printer sounds simple enough.
I'm going to do some reading this morning of yours and others'
comments re the 2400 and decide shortly.
I NEED to decide shortly. My 1280 seems to have died this morning. The
local service center thinks it's probably the head (which they
replaced under warranty 10 months ago). Of course, it's now out of
warranty and will cost nearly $200 if that is in fact the problem. I
suspect the failure is due to all the wear and tear of trying to get
the spongeless color carts to work over the past year—repeatedly
removing and reinstalling the cart, scores of cleaning cycles, etc.
As far as your belief that the problem is a combination of
printer/cart/carbon inks, I have to lay most of the blame on the cart.
My first 1280 worked for about four years with VM and then UT2 inks. I
rarely turned it off and rarely ran cleaning cycles or even nozzle
checks. That's why I bought the second one with the plan to continue
using UT2. Maybe the silver version (which my second one is) made the
difference. But, whatever the reason, the difference in performance
between my two 1280s was like night and day.
Thanks once again for all your help.
Tom Keesling
Hoosier Recollections
Indianapolis
--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark"
<paul.roark@...> wrote:
>
> Tom,
>
>
>
> One shortcoming in the 2400 approach that uses the Epson driver is
that no
> pure carbon print can be made. I happen to like pure carbon for
> restorations, but some prefer the neutral tones. If the clients like
> neutral, then the 2400 with Y = EZW is about as good as any. It's easy
> enough to switch the yellow cart.
>
>
>
> The 1280 problem is almost certainly a combination of the 1280, the
carts,
> and pigments - all pigments. That degree of problem has not recurred in
> other printers. The main problems I've had with MIS have been QC with
> respect to inks, and some of that problem is clearly coming from their
> supplier. You'll note I'm moving to a competitive sourcing, user QC
> position. I would never give my B&W film to be developed by
another. Why
> would I be satisfied with generally acceptable ink tolerances
either? So,
> the picky like me will be able to solve the problems easily if they are
> beyond what is reasonable for the larger market.
>
>
>
> Paul
>
> www.PaulRoark.com <http://www.paulroark.com/>
>
>
>
>
>
> _____
>
> From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
inteldes
Show quoted textHide quoted text
> Sent: Monday, October 02, 2006 10:54 AM
> To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@...m
> Subject: [Digital BW] Advice on switching from 1280/UT2/Roark curves to
> Epson 2400?
>
>
>
> The continuing problems with the MIS spongeless carts in my 1280 are
> forcing me to consider scrapping it and getting a 2400.
>
> My question is: Can I easily duplicate the prints I'm producing with
> the 1280/UT2 inks/Roark curves on the 2400 using the OEM inks? The key
> word here is "easily".
>
> I do photo restorations for clients and produce historical images for
> sale primarily, but occasionally produce color images as well. For the
> historical images, I'm using the carbon curve solely and need to
> duplicate that look. That will be one of the key considerations I must
> make. Would that be easy to do on the 2400 without any additional
> expense on my part? The cost of the printer and using the Epson inks
> will be enough of a financial hit.
>
> I really don't want to screw with 3rd party inks again if I can avoid
> it. The MIS VM and UT2 inks have been great, but this horrible
> experience with my second 1280 and the spongeless carts over the past
> year has been incredibly expensive in terms of all the wasted time and
> missed client deadlines. I need reliability like I had with the first
> 1280 and the NoMoreCarts CIS.
>
> What do you suggest?
>
> Thanks...
>
> Tom Keesling
> Hoosier Recollections
> Indianapolis
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>