Digital BW, The Print

I know this is a B&W forum, but I know some of you use the MIS Pro Inks 
as a replacement for the Epson UC inkset.  Love the price, and my 
printer seems to clog less than it used to.  Perhaps it is the 
cartridge design or the inks themselves.

Those of you who roll your own profiles, how do the MIS Pro inks 
compare in terms of Dmax and color gamut?  I am using a 4000 and 
testing these inks currently on Epson EEM and VFA to get a comparison.  
So far, my tests show less gamut and Dmax on both papers compared to 
profiles built with UC inks and the same 918 patch test target 
(ProfileMaker5 and an Eye One Pro).  Viewed in ColorThink, the gamuts 
are definitely a little smaller and Dmax is also less.  

Targets were printed at 1440 dpi, SuperX turned off, No Color 
Adjustment, slow speed, and all other check boxes turned off.

Any feedback or suggestions?

Thanks,

Lou Dina

Lou  -
   
  At this time I actually have a mixture of MIS and EPSON UC inks in my 9600.  Partly this is due to making a gradual move to the MIS.  I will end up with - unless the MIS magentas get better, using all MIS except for the magentas, which will stay as Epson UC.
   
  Consequently, I don't have any valid comparisons between the UC profiles and the MIS/EPSON profiles.  However, I do not SEE any difference in the color gamut when I compare older prints of the same image with newer ones.  The biggest bang for the buck came from doing my own profiles (Xrite Pulse).  Then I got a quite noticeable improvement in the reds.
   
  As for dmax, it will vary, depending on the particular paper.  Eboni is better on some, not quite so good on others.  So far, the difference has not been enough to warrant changing out the blacks to match paper.  I don't know if there is a difference in the PK's.
   
  Don't know that this helps, but these are my observations.
   
  Tom Baker

Louis Dina <lou@...> wrote:
          I know this is a B&W forum, but I know some of you use the MIS Pro Inks 
as a replacement for the Epson UC inkset. Love the price, and my 
printer seems to clog less than it used to. Perhaps it is the 
cartridge design or the inks themselves.

Those of you who roll your own profiles, how do the MIS Pro inks 
compare in terms of Dmax and color gamut? I am using a 4000 and 
testing these inks currently on Epson EEM and VFA to get a comparison. 
So far, my tests show less gamut and Dmax on both papers compared to 
profiles built with UC inks and the same 918 patch test target 
(ProfileMaker5 and an Eye One Pro). Viewed in ColorThink, the gamuts 
are definitely a little smaller and Dmax is also less. 

Targets were printed at 1440 dpi, SuperX turned off, No Color 
Adjustment, slow speed, and all other check boxes turned off.

Any feedback or suggestions?

Thanks,

Lou Dina



         


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Louis Dina wrote:
> I know this is a B&W forum, but I know some of you use the MIS Pro Inks 
> as a replacement for the Epson UC inkset.  Love the price, and my 
> printer seems to clog less than it used to.  Perhaps it is the 
> cartridge design or the inks themselves.
> 
> Those of you who roll your own profiles, how do the MIS Pro inks 
> compare in terms of Dmax and color gamut?  I am using a 4000 and 
> testing these inks currently on Epson EEM and VFA to get a comparison.  
> So far, my tests show less gamut and Dmax on both papers compared to 
> profiles built with UC inks and the same 918 patch test target 
> (ProfileMaker5 and an Eye One Pro).  Viewed in ColorThink, the gamuts 
> are definitely a little smaller and Dmax is also less.  
> 
> Targets were printed at 1440 dpi, SuperX turned off, No Color 
> Adjustment, slow speed, and all other check boxes turned off.
> 
> Any feedback or suggestions?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Lou Dina

Lou,

I have used them on an Epson 10000 and a friend has used 
them on a 9600 and still uses them on a 9800. The MIS 7600 
version instead of the MIS Pro but there isn't much 
difference in the pigment load. (we tested the MIS Pro but 
there were some problems with printing on canvas: after 
varnish was applied it turned more to yellow than the MIS 
7600 did, probably the different ink base). The MIS Pro 
should be better suited for the Epsons though, less clogging 
and pigment settling. The MIS magenta pigment is like the 
9600 UC magenta but MIS can not get the 9800 K3 magenta 
pigment. On the 10000 the gamut increased with MIS 7600, on 
the 9600 there was hardly a difference, on the 9800 some 
gamut loss in the reds mainly. The last more a result of the 
lower inklimits of the 9800 and its red biased magenta, the 
Dmax is also lower on the 9800 with Eboni black printed on 
Epson coatings but shouldn't be less on HM coatings. With 
the 10000 and the 9600 the Dmax has been higher with Eboni 
black on HM coatings than with the Epson inks. My friend 
used the slider in the 9800 driver to increase the inkload 
but that's a gamma thing only so does nothing on the Dmax. 
His reference for the 9800 has been what he could achieve on 
the 9600's, less to what could be made with the 9800 K3 
inks. With the 4000 you are more in 9600 UC than in 9800 K3 
territory. What used to be a problem was some inconsistency 
between batches of MIS LM inks, a bit too much coloring 
difference in our experience, MIS considered them to be 
within specs. Not so nice when you order a gallon from the 
US to see that you can profile again to get some 
consistency. I have to say that they did send new jars every 
time we complained about that issue.

You could try to use high speed instead for better Dmax, 
sounds strange but a bit of bleeding may make the black 
patch a bit more homogene and by that your readings may go 
up. Any other gain has to come from the paper setting 
choices, we did HM papers only and the watercolor paper 
choice was actually the best choice on all three models.

With the HP Z3100 here the 10000 isn't used anymore, the HP 
is hard to beat on Dmax and by and by I get an increased 
gamut on HM PhotoRag (Bright White) (finding the right paper 
settings + the firmware upgrades). Better than the Epson 
4000 gamut on EEM as I'm printing big prints these days with 
small Epson 4000 UC proofs for reference. Next to other 
advantages the ink used goes for 99% on the paper which is 
something we couldn't achieve with any Epson so far. Carts 
are almost dry inside when empty. That compensates the lower 
cost of the MIS inks. I'm not going back.


Met vriendelijke groeten,  Ernst


|  Dinkla Grafische Techniek  |
|     www.pigment-print.com    |
|             ( unvollendet )            |

Thanks Ernst.  Good report.

I will try the high speed setting.  It never occurred to me that it 
might actually increase the Dmax.

Regards, Lou

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Ernst Dinkla 
<E.Dinkla@...> wrote:
>
> Louis Dina wrote:
> > I know this is a B&W forum, but I know some of you use the MIS 
Pro Inks 
> > as a replacement for the Epson UC inkset.  Love the price, and my 
> > printer seems to clog less than it used to.  Perhaps it is the 
> > cartridge design or the inks themselves.
> > 
> > Those of you who roll your own profiles, how do the MIS Pro inks 
> > compare in terms of Dmax and color gamut?  I am using a 4000 and 
> > testing these inks currently on Epson EEM and VFA to get a 
comparison.  
> > So far, my tests show less gamut and Dmax on both papers compared 
to 
> > profiles built with UC inks and the same 918 patch test target 
> > (ProfileMaker5 and an Eye One Pro).  Viewed in ColorThink, the 
gamuts 

> > are definitely a little smaller and Dmax is also less.  
> > 
> > Targets were printed at 1440 dpi, SuperX turned off, No Color 
> > Adjustment, slow speed, and all other check boxes turned off.
> > 
> > Any feedback or suggestions?
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > 
> > Lou Dina
> 
> Lou,
> 
> I have used them on an Epson 10000 and a friend has used 
> them on a 9600 and still uses them on a 9800. The MIS 7600 
> version instead of the MIS Pro but there isn't much 
> difference in the pigment load. (we tested the MIS Pro but 
> there were some problems with printing on canvas: after 
> varnish was applied it turned more to yellow than the MIS 
> 7600 did, probably the different ink base). The MIS Pro 
> should be better suited for the Epsons though, less clogging 
> and pigment settling. The MIS magenta pigment is like the 
> 9600 UC magenta but MIS can not get the 9800 K3 magenta 
> pigment. On the 10000 the gamut increased with MIS 7600, on 
> the 9600 there was hardly a difference, on the 9800 some 
> gamut loss in the reds mainly. The last more a result of the 
> lower inklimits of the 9800 and its red biased magenta, the 
> Dmax is also lower on the 9800 with Eboni black printed on 
> Epson coatings but shouldn't be less on HM coatings. With 
> the 10000 and the 9600 the Dmax has been higher with Eboni 
> black on HM coatings than with the Epson inks. My friend 
> used the slider in the 9800 driver to increase the inkload 
> but that's a gamma thing only so does nothing on the Dmax. 
> His reference for the 9800 has been what he could achieve on 
> the 9600's, less to what could be made with the 9800 K3 
> inks. With the 4000 you are more in 9600 UC than in 9800 K3 
> territory. What used to be a problem was some inconsistency 
> between batches of MIS LM inks, a bit too much coloring 
> difference in our experience, MIS considered them to be 
> within specs. Not so nice when you order a gallon from the 
> US to see that you can profile again to get some 
> consistency. I have to say that they did send new jars every 
> time we complained about that issue.
> 
> You could try to use high speed instead for better Dmax, 
> sounds strange but a bit of bleeding may make the black 
> patch a bit more homogene and by that your readings may go 
> up. Any other gain has to come from the paper setting 
> choices, we did HM papers only and the watercolor paper 
> choice was actually the best choice on all three models.
> 
> With the HP Z3100 here the 10000 isn't used anymore, the HP 
> is hard to beat on Dmax and by and by I get an increased 
> gamut on HM PhotoRag (Bright White) (finding the right paper 
> settings + the firmware upgrades). Better than the Epson 
> 4000 gamut on EEM as I'm printing big prints these days with 
> small Epson 4000 UC proofs for reference. Next to other 
> advantages the ink used goes for 99% on the paper which is 
> something we couldn't achieve with any Epson so far. Carts 
> are almost dry inside when empty. That compensates the lower 
> cost of the MIS inks. I'm not going back.
> 
> 
> Met vriendelijke groeten,  Ernst
> 
> 
> |  Dinkla Grafische Techniek  |
> |     www.pigment-print.com    |
> |             ( unvollendet )            |
>

Tom, thanks for the response.

What types of problems are you having with the MIS magenta ink?  
Saturation, density, permanence, consistency?

Lou

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Tom Baker 
<tbaker1328@...> wrote:
>
> Lou  -
>    
>   At this time I actually have a mixture of MIS and EPSON UC inks 
in my 9600.  Partly this is due to making a gradual move to the MIS.  
I will end up with - unless the MIS magentas get better, using all 
MIS except for the magentas, which will stay as Epson UC.
>    
>   Consequently, I don't have any valid comparisons between the UC 
profiles and the MIS/EPSON profiles.  However, I do not SEE any 
difference in the color gamut when I compare older prints of the same 
image with newer ones.  The biggest bang for the buck came from doing 
my own profiles (Xrite Pulse).  Then I got a quite noticeable 
improvement in the reds.
>    
>   As for dmax, it will vary, depending on the particular paper.  
Eboni is better on some, not quite so good on others.  So far, the 
difference has not been enough to warrant changing out the blacks to 
match paper.  I don't know if there is a difference in the PK's.
>    
>   Don't know that this helps, but these are my observations.
>    
>   Tom Baker
> 
> Louis Dina <lou@...> wrote:
>           I know this is a B&W forum, but I know some of you use 
the MIS Pro Inks 
> as a replacement for the Epson UC inkset. Love the price, and my 
> printer seems to clog less than it used to. Perhaps it is the 
> cartridge design or the inks themselves.
> 
> Those of you who roll your own profiles, how do the MIS Pro inks 
> compare in terms of Dmax and color gamut? I am using a 4000 and 
> testing these inks currently on Epson EEM and VFA to get a 
comparison. 
> So far, my tests show less gamut and Dmax on both papers compared 
to 
> profiles built with UC inks and the same 918 patch test target 
> (ProfileMaker5 and an Eye One Pro). Viewed in ColorThink, the 
gamuts 

> are definitely a little smaller and Dmax is also less. 
> 
> Targets were printed at 1440 dpi, SuperX turned off, No Color 
> Adjustment, slow speed, and all other check boxes turned off.
> 
> Any feedback or suggestions?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Lou Dina
> 
> 
> 
>          
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

Lou  -
   
  I'm really basing this on what a coule of others have found.  Ernst's comments seem to indicate that the MIS Pro is the same magenta as the Epson UC.  If that's the case, there would be no need to avoid the MIS.  I do use the MIS magentas on my smaller printers.  I haven't actually seen any difference.  But, I've only been using the MIS inks for about a year.
   
  Tom Baker
  

Louis Dina <lou@...> wrote:
          Tom, thanks for the response.

What types of problems are you having with the MIS magenta ink? 
Saturation, density, permanence, consistency?

Lou

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Tom Baker 
<tbaker1328@...> wrote:
>
> Lou -
> 
> At this time I actually have a mixture of MIS and EPSON UC inks 
in my 9600. Partly this is due to making a gradual move to the MIS. 
I will end up with - unless the MIS magentas get better, using all 
MIS except for the magentas, which will stay as Epson UC.
> 
> Consequently, I don't have any valid comparisons between the UC 
profiles and the MIS/EPSON profiles. However, I do not SEE any 
difference in the color gamut when I compare older prints of the same 
image with newer ones. The biggest bang for the buck came from doing 
my own profiles (Xrite Pulse). Then I got a quite noticeable 
improvement in the reds.
> 
> As for dmax, it will vary, depending on the particular paper. 
Eboni is better on some, not quite so good on others. So far, the 
difference has not been enough to warrant changing out the blacks to 
match paper. I don't know if there is a difference in the PK's.
> 
> Don't know that this helps, but these are my observations.
> 
> Tom Baker
> 
> Louis Dina <lou@...> wrote:
> I know this is a B&W forum, but I know some of you use 
the MIS Pro Inks 
> as a replacement for the Epson UC inkset. Love the price, and my 
> printer seems to clog less than it used to. Perhaps it is the 
> cartridge design or the inks themselves.
> 
> Those of you who roll your own profiles, how do the MIS Pro inks 
> compare in terms of Dmax and color gamut? I am using a 4000 and 
> testing these inks currently on Epson EEM and VFA to get a 
comparison. 
> So far, my tests show less gamut and Dmax on both papers compared 
to 
> profiles built with UC inks and the same 918 patch test target 
> (ProfileMaker5 and an Eye One Pro). Viewed in ColorThink, the 
gamuts 
> are definitely a little smaller and Dmax is also less. 
> 
> Targets were printed at 1440 dpi, SuperX turned off, No Color 
> Adjustment, slow speed, and all other check boxes turned off.
> 
> Any feedback or suggestions?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Lou Dina
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>



         


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Ernst,

I tried the High Speed setting and actually did get an improvement in 
Dmax.  Thanks for the great tip.  I still find that turning SuperX 
microweave off gives me better density.  And I know it shouldn't make a 
difference, but increasing the ink density slider by 10% actually 
improved the Dmax just a little more.  

I ran an experiment and printed a QTR calibration test chart on EEM 
using UC inks before the changeover, and again with MIS inks after 
conversion so I could see the individual ink positions and measure 
them.  The Eboni and the MK were pretty close, but all the other inks 
share a common characteristic.  The UC inks print darker toward the 
100% ink density patch, but they have a little less saturation.  The 
MIS inks seem to actually have more chroma, but have a higher L* value 
at the 100% ink patch.  Of course the higher chroma may be due to lower 
density at that point.  

Still is hints that perhaps the MIS inks might benefit from bumping up 
the ink density slider a little bit.  

Thanks for the tips.

Lou

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Louis Dina" 
<lou@...> wrote:

>
> Thanks Ernst.  Good report.
> 
> I will try the high speed setting.  It never occurred to me that it 
> might actually increase the Dmax.
> 
> Regards, Lou

In a message dated 4/25/07 4:03:41 PM, lou@... writes:


> I tried the High Speed setting and actually did get an improvement in
> Dmax.  Thanks for the great tip.  I still find that turning SuperX
> microweave off gives me better density.  And I know it shouldn't make a
> difference, but increasing the ink density slider by 10% actually
> improved the Dmax just a little more. 
> 

Okay, just to quantify the compulsion for deeper blacks, could you specify 
just how much deeper (in Visual Density units or L* units) your blacks are using 
Highspeed, and using +10 density?

thanks,
C. David Tobie
Product Technology Manager
ColorVision Business Unit
Datacolor Inc.
CDTobie@...
www.colorvision.com


**************************************
 See what's free at 
http://www.aol.com.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I tested all my Epson printers recently with several media and the
Water Color media setting DOES give the best dmax. It was
significantly darker than the Smooth Fine Art media settings,
especially on the 10K with NK6 and Hahnemuhle papers.

That is very interesting that you see a better dmax on Epsons by
leaving high-speed on. I am going to try that with the 8 pass mode and
see if that works, with 4 pass on the 10K I would just give me banding.

John





 You could try to use high speed instead for better Dmax,
sounds strange but a bit of bleeding may make the black
patch a bit more homogene and by that your readings may go
up. Any other gain has to come from the paper setting
choices, we did HM papers only and the watercolor paper
choice was actually the best choice on all three models.

With the HP Z3100 here the 10000 isn't used anymore, the HP
is hard to beat on Dmax and by and by I get an increased
gamut on HM PhotoRag (Bright White) (finding the right paper
settings + the firmware upgrades). Better than the Epson
4000 gamut on EEM as I'm printing big prints these days with
small Epson 4000 UC proofs for reference. Next to other
advantages the ink used goes for 99% on the paper which is
something we couldn't achieve with any Epson so far. Carts
are almost dry inside when empty. That compensates the lower
cost of the MIS inks. I'm not going back.


Met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst


| Dinkla Grafische Techniek |
| www.pigment-print.com |
| ( unvollendet ) |

Ernst,

>... The MIS 7600 version instead of the MIS Pro 
> but there isn't much difference in the pigment load.

They are now, apparently, the same inks.

The early versions appeared to have a more yellow base.  The latest base is
closer to neutral.

Have you seen any evidence that the Epson k3 magenta is better or worse than
the k2 magenta with respect to lightfastness? 

It sounds like you're becoming an HP fan.  A service bureau I know here is
becoming a fan of Canon.  It sounds like Epson is losing market share.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark"
<paul.roark@...> wrote:
>
  It sounds like Epson is losing market share.
> 
Hello Paul,

Seems like the competition is making gains. Two locals electronics
stores used to carry several Epson consumers printer models. Nowadays,
they only carry one model each while the aisles are full of Canon and
HP printer models.

Someone I know recently acquired a Canon iPF5000 printer for b&w
printing. Epson wasn't even on his list of potential printer models.
I'm pretty sure that Epson's ink clogging problems are a factor here.

And today I'm reading that Mike Johnston of the T.O.P. website is
saying that he "wouldn't choose any other printer" when speaking of
the HP B9180 printer.

http://tinyurl.com/26xrva


Cheers,
Andre 

www.andremoreau.com

Paul Roark wrote:

>> ... The MIS 7600 version instead of the MIS Pro 
>> but there isn't much difference in the pigment load.
> 
> They are now, apparently, the same inks.
> 
> The early versions appeared to have a more yellow base.  The latest base is
> closer to neutral.

Paul,

On the Roma canvas we used then + Lascaux varnish (from the 
bottle sprayed or rolled) the shift to yellow was just too 
much. A pity they couldn't inform us of possible changes in 
the base then. There was another issue if I recall it 
correctly: the MIS Pro magenta for the 9800 had another 
pigment load (but the same pigment) than the MIS 7600 
magenta for the 9600 had, you couldn't make the same gamut 
the K3's made and you couldn't get the same gamut the 9600 
with UC or MIS 7600 had.

> Have you seen any evidence that the Epson k3 magenta is better or worse than
> the k2 magenta with respect to lightfastness? 

The time the K3 inks were used was very limited. My friend 
bought the 9800 and within maybe a month it was loaded with 
MIS inks. The same method that I used to convert the 10000 
carts for refilling was used on the 9800 carts, similar 
design but smaller parts. MIS actually didn't know then that 
the Epson 9800 carts needed conversion and I guess the very 
first 9800 MIS clone ink in quantity went to Europe, the 
rest was only used for 2400's in the US then. That was our 
impression when we contacted MIS with questions.

> It sounds like you're becoming an HP fan.  A service bureau I know here is
> becoming a fan of Canon.  It sounds like Epson is losing market share.

Epson needed good competition, I do not underestimate 
Epson's skill to deliver better printers in the future but 
when you control the market there's no urge to do major 
upgrades in technology or to change the service policies. 
Even if you have enough innovations up your sleeve. It is 
just a matter of staying a nose length in front and you keep 
the biggest share with the least effort. Every 3 years a new 
generation that had just enough appeal to attract buyers but 
nothing else. The 3800 gloss / matte black ink selection has 
nothing revolutionary, it could have been done years ago 
(and better) but would have cut ink consumption then. Epson 
got that lead 10 years ago. It milked the cow but was asleep 
when Canon and HP entered the arena.

Apart from all the nice HP Z3100 features there's something 
else that makes HP interesting: it is all over the place in 
the printing world right now: The Scitex inkjet wide formats 
(UV curing inks, solvent inks), the HP 9000 etc solvent 
models (Konica piezo heads),  the new stackable HP pi\ufffdzo 
heads for similar inkjet models, the single array head / 
ultra fast printers based on the same thermo head design the 
Z3100 has, the Indigo printer and there's more. A much wider 
field it wants to play on than Epson (including Seiko) and 
Canon want to play on. There are high volume Canon 
electrostatic printers (not comparable with the Indigo 
though) but it doesn't do anything in the sign market. Epson 
  and Seiko have sold some head designs in the sign market 
but there's no big market share and they are losing ground 
against Xaar, Spectra and Konica heads. And unlike Kodak, 
Fuji, Agfa, Oc\ufffd, that all want to play in that wider field 
HP is developing the high tech parts itself to replace what 
it now buys from companies like Xaar. This isn't a half 
hearted attempt, it will stay in this market.


Met vriendelijke groeten,  Ernst


|  Dinkla Grafische Techniek  |
|     www.pigment-print.com    |
|             ( unvollendet )            |

In a message dated 4/25/07 4:40:46 PM, paul.roark@... writes:


> 
> It sounds like you're becoming an HP fan.  A service bureau I know here is
> becoming a fan of Canon.  It sounds like Epson is losing market share.
> 

Its like Apple and the iPod market; everyone keeps predicting they'll crash 
and burn, because when you have a huge monolopy in a market, there's no place 
to go but down. However, if unit sales keep increasing in this market, "down" 
in percentage points may still be "up" in number of units sold. Besides, Canon 
and HP have had their shots at a next generation device. Next it will be 
Epson's turn again, and they don't tend to let much grass grow under their feet. 

C. David Tobie
Product Technology Manager
ColorVision Business Division
DataColor Inc.
CDTobie@...
www.colorvision.com


**************************************
 See what's free at 
http://www.aol.com.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Andre, I think you have a good point.  I have had such problems with 
clogging and some of Epson's self serving policies, that I will 
seriously look at other manufacturers before considering an Epson for 
my next printer.  The market is flattening out and printers, even 
archival ones, will soon be a commodity.  It happens in every market 
as it matures, then it becomes a price war and a features game since 
the differences are too slight to quibble over.  

It always pays in the long run to take care of your customers, even 
at the risk of losing a little revenue over the short run.  Customer 
loyalty means a lot, especially in this day and age.  It costs a 
whole lot more to get a new customer than it does to hold onto 
existing ones.  Having spent a long career in sales and marketing, I 
have seen it time and again.  Epson had better be careful, or they 
could get hurt very quickly and profoundly.  I'm far from alone in my 
attitude toward Epson.

Lou

  

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Andre Moreau" 
<bwscans@...> wrote:
>
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark"
> <paul.roark@> wrote:
> >
>   It sounds like Epson is losing market share.
> > 
> Hello Paul,
> 
> Seems like the competition is making gains. Two locals electronics
> stores used to carry several Epson consumers printer models. 
Nowadays,
> they only carry one model each while the aisles are full of Canon 
and
> HP printer models.
> 
> Someone I know recently acquired a Canon iPF5000 printer for b&w
> printing. Epson wasn't even on his list of potential printer models.
> I'm pretty sure that Epson's ink clogging problems are a factor 
here.

> 
> And today I'm reading that Mike Johnston of the T.O.P. website is
> saying that he "wouldn't choose any other printer" when speaking of
> the HP B9180 printer.
> 
> http://tinyurl.com/26xrva
> 
> 
> Cheers,
> Andre 
> 
> www.andremoreau.com
>

I've had very good results/luck with my 9600.  No clogging problems, turn it on and it prints.  It does everything expected/promised, and I'm completely happy with it.  I didn't upgrade to the x800 series because I had no need.  I still don't have the need.  So, I will need to see visably better results from a new printer to upgrade.  And, when I do upgrade, assuming that reliability is there, I won't care what label is on the printer.
   
  I agree that Epson has rather ignored the future value they may have gained from giving up a little on the profilt margin in the short run.
   
  Tom Baker

Louis Dina <lou@...> wrote:
          Andre, I think you have a good point. I have had such problems with 
clogging and some of Epson's self serving policies, that I will 
seriously look at other manufacturers before considering an Epson for 
my next printer. The market is flattening out and printers, even 
archival ones, will soon be a commodity. It happens in every market 
as it matures, then it becomes a price war and a features game since 
the differences are too slight to quibble over. 

It always pays in the long run to take care of your customers, even 
at the risk of losing a little revenue over the short run. Customer 
loyalty means a lot, especially in this day and age. It costs a 
whole lot more to get a new customer than it does to hold onto 
existing ones. Having spent a long career in sales and marketing, I 
have seen it time and again. Epson had better be careful, or they 
could get hurt very quickly and profoundly. I'm far from alone in my 
attitude toward Epson.

Lou

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Andre Moreau" 
<bwscans@...> wrote:
>
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark"
> <paul.roark@> wrote:
> >
> It sounds like Epson is losing market share.
> > 
> Hello Paul,
> 
> Seems like the competition is making gains. Two locals electronics
> stores used to carry several Epson consumers printer models. 
Nowadays,
> they only carry one model each while the aisles are full of Canon 
and
> HP printer models.
> 
> Someone I know recently acquired a Canon iPF5000 printer for b&w
> printing. Epson wasn't even on his list of potential printer models.
> I'm pretty sure that Epson's ink clogging problems are a factor 
here.
> 
> And today I'm reading that Mike Johnston of the T.O.P. website is
> saying that he "wouldn't choose any other printer" when speaking of
> the HP B9180 printer.
> 
> http://tinyurl.com/26xrva
> 
> 
> Cheers,
> Andre 
> 
> www.andremoreau.com
>



         


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I would imagine that since the new Epson 3800 has auto switching of the
black inks.....I would assume that the new larger formats would have the
same plus other new features.

Anyone out there have experience wit the 3800 for b/w.   I am thinking of
upgrading from my 2200.  I would appreciate any comments.

Regards,
Paul


On 4/25/07 6:29 PM, "john dean" <deanwork2003@yahoo.com> wrote:

>  
>  
>  
> 
> Well, as someone who has a house full of Epsons and has used them
> daily for 7 years..if their next large format machine doesn't
> incorporate auto switching between mk and pk they might as well hang
> it up. 
> 
> john
> 
> Next it will be 
>> > Epson's turn again, and they don't tend to let much grass grow
> under their feet.
>> > 
>> > C. David Tobie
>> > Product Technology Manager
>> > ColorVision Business Division
>> > DataColor Inc.
>> > CDTobie@...
>> > www.colorvision.com
>> > 
>> > 
>> > **************************************
>> >  See what's free at
>> > http://www.aol.com.
>> > 
>> > 
>> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>> >
> 
>  
>     



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

CDTobie@... wrote:
> In a message dated 4/25/07 4:40:46 PM, paul.roark@... writes:
> 
> 
>> It sounds like you're becoming an HP fan.  A service bureau I know here is
>> becoming a fan of Canon.  It sounds like Epson is losing market share.
>>
> 
> Its like Apple and the iPod market; everyone keeps predicting they'll crash 
> and burn, because when you have a huge monolopy in a market, there's no place 
> to go but down. However, if unit sales keep increasing in this market, "down" 
> in percentage points may still be "up" in number of units sold. Besides, Canon 
> and HP have had their shots at a next generation device. Next it will be 
> Epson's turn again, and they don't tend to let much grass grow under their feet. 
> 
> C. David Tobie
> Product Technology Manager
> ColorVision Business Division
> DataColor Inc.
> CDTobie@...
> www.colorvision.com

Apple made the right decisions in the last years to earn 
their money in other markets building on the corporate's 
image. The Apple trademark gets into the ranks of Gucci, 
Porsche etc, that's one thing. The music distribution was a 
good commercial decision where EMI, Sony, and others thought 
that that industry didn't need to innovate itself. But if 
you look at computer system sales Apple actually lost market 
share. The iPhone doesn't look as promising as the iPod 
turned out to be and the proprietary locks on both (music 
format on the iPod, the limited access of third party 
software developers on the iPhone + one provider only in the 
US) will turn against Apple one day. Nothing new there. If 
Epson is as flexible as Apple is now it will continue but in 
a market that is changed.

HP's ultrafast Z6100 42" and 60" models are already 
announced, replacing the 5500 but also a 60" competition for 
Canon's iPF9000 and the rumored Epson 60". HP has to add a 
17" model with roll and sheet feeding I think. I don't think 
we saw all of the next generation from HP yet.


Met vriendelijke groeten,  Ernst


|  Dinkla Grafische Techniek  |
|     www.pigment-print.com    |
|             ( unvollendet )            |

In a message dated 4/26/07 4:38:13 AM, E.Dinkla@... writes:


> But if
> you look at computer system sales Apple actually lost market
> share.
> 

I certainly don't see that; quite the opposite! Every airport I walk through 
is now full of Mac laptops, to the point that I see more of those than PC 
laptops... but Apple was an analogy, not the subject of my post... <G>

C. David Tobie
Product Technology Manager
ColorVision Business Unit
Datacolor Inc.
CDTobie@...
www.colorvision.com


**************************************
 See what's free at 
http://www.aol.com.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I think in the states that is true. The dual core imac and the power 
books are very popular indeed. However,in the rest of the world, 
especially asia, the market share is really really low and they are 
luxury items.

john




-- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, CDTobie@... wrote:
>
> 
> In a message dated 4/26/07 4:38:13 AM, E.Dinkla@... writes:
> 
> 
> > But if
> > you look at computer system sales Apple actually lost market
> > share.
> > 
> 
> I certainly don't see that; quite the opposite! Every airport I 
walk through 
> is now full of Mac laptops, to the point that I see more of those 
than PC 
> laptops... but Apple was an analogy, not the subject of my post... 
<G>

> 
> C. David Tobie
> Product Technology Manager
> ColorVision Business Unit
> Datacolor Inc.
> CDTobie@...
> www.colorvision.com
> 
> 
> **************************************
>  See what's free at 
> http://www.aol.com.
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Louis Dina"
<lou@...> wrote:
>
> I know this is a B&W forum, but I know some of you use the MIS Pro Inks 
> as a replacement for the Epson UC inkset.  Love the price, and my 
> printer seems to clog less than it used to.  Perhaps it is the 
> cartridge design or the inks themselves.

On a slight tangent, I'm very pleased with the MIS PRO color inks in
my Epson C86. I print on Kirkland Glossy using Epson driver glossy
settings, with no ICC's or other special adjustments.

I recently bought the Pro 3800 (first time to use an Epson!), and I 
can vouch for the quality of it's B&W prints. Like all printers an 
important step is to make sure that you are using a well calibrated 
screen, but I have found the printer profiles that come with the 
printer have been excellent, and final prints match what I am 
seeing. I am currently printing using the RGB mode (specifically 
sRGB profiled images) matched with the Epson sRGB setting in the 
Custom section of the print driver. This produces excellent neutral 
prints (at least with the Epson papers)to my eye.  The Advanced 
Black & White feature also produces excellent prints though to my 
eye slightly warmer (only really detectable in the mid-tones)when 
compared to the sRGB prints. The blacks are also deeper in the ABW 
mode. I now print ABW mainly in lower contrast prints, where I need 
slightly more dynamic range in the print (which is provided by the 
darker blacks),a nd use the toning tool to add a little blue to get 
a neutral print I like. Thouroughly recommend it as a printer, and 
perfect size if you are limited in space and mainly print sheet 
(needs more space if you are printing on Fine Art Paper etc, for the 
front and rear feeders). Having come from Canon printers, I am 
delighted with the idea of not having to switch inks! Rgds, K


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Paul Grant 
<gphoto2@...> wrote:
>
> I would imagine that since the new Epson 3800 has auto switching 
of the
> black inks.....I would assume that the new larger formats would 
have the
> same plus other new features.
> 
> Anyone out there have experience wit the 3800 for b/w.   I am 
thinking of
> upgrading from my 2200.  I would appreciate any comments.
> 
> Regards,
> Paul
> 
> 
> On 4/25/07 6:29 PM, "john dean" <deanwork2003@...> wrote:
> 
> >  
> >  
> >  
> > 
> > Well, as someone who has a house full of Epsons and has used them
> > daily for 7 years..if their next large format machine doesn't
> > incorporate auto switching between mk and pk they might as well 
hang

> > it up. 
> > 
> > john
> > 
> > Next it will be 
> >> > Epson's turn again, and they don't tend to let much grass grow
> > under their feet.
> >> > 
> >> > C. David Tobie
> >> > Product Technology Manager
> >> > ColorVision Business Division
> >> > DataColor Inc.
> >> > CDTobie@
> >> > www.colorvision.com
> >> > 
> >> > 
> >> > **************************************
> >> >  See what's free at
> >> > http://www.aol.com.
> >> > 
> >> > 
> >> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >> >
> > 
> >  
> >     
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

Thank you so much for the helpful information on the 3800.  I have the 2200
and I have not been happy with the BW images. I am a traditional darkroom
guy so I am pretty picky.  I have not strayed from the standard Epson inks
and was hoping the 3800 would save me all the grief.

 

Sounds like it's the way to go.

 

I do appreciate the feedback.

 

Paul

-----Original Message-----
From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of shangheye
Sent: Sunday, April 29, 2007 9:19 PM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] MIS Pro Inks - color printing

 

I recently bought the Pro 3800 (first time to use an Epson!), and I 
can vouch for the quality of it's B&W prints. Like all printers an 
important step is to make sure that you are using a well calibrated 
screen, but I have found the printer profiles that come with the 
printer have been excellent, and final prints match what I am 
seeing. I am currently printing using the RGB mode (specifically 
sRGB profiled images) matched with the Epson sRGB setting in the 
Custom section of the print driver. This produces excellent neutral 
prints (at least with the Epson papers)to my eye. The Advanced 
Black & White feature also produces excellent prints though to my 
eye slightly warmer (only really detectable in the mid-tones)when 
compared to the sRGB prints. The blacks are also deeper in the ABW 
mode. I now print ABW mainly in lower contrast prints, where I need 
slightly more dynamic range in the print (which is provided by the 
darker blacks),a nd use the toning tool to add a little blue to get 
a neutral print I like. Thouroughly recommend it as a printer, and 
perfect size if you are limited in space and mainly print sheet 
(needs more space if you are printing on Fine Art Paper etc, for the 
front and rear feeders). Having come from Canon printers, I am 
delighted with the idea of not having to switch inks! Rgds, K

--- In DigitalBlackandWhit
<mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint%40yahoogroups.com>
eThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Paul Grant 
<gphoto2@...> wrote:
>
> I would imagine that since the new Epson 3800 has auto switching 
of the
> black inks.....I would assume that the new larger formats would 
have the
> same plus other new features.
> 
> Anyone out there have experience wit the 3800 for b/w. I am 
thinking of
> upgrading from my 2200. I would appreciate any comments.
> 
> Regards,
> Paul
> 
> 
> On 4/25/07 6:29 PM, "john dean" <deanwork2003@...> wrote:
> 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Well, as someone who has a house full of Epsons and has used them
> > daily for 7 years..if their next large format machine doesn't
> > incorporate auto switching between mk and pk they might as well 
hang
> > it up. 
> > 
> > john
> > 
> > Next it will be 
> >> > Epson's turn again, and they don't tend to let much grass grow
> > under their feet.
> >> > 
> >> > C. David Tobie
> >> > Product Technology Manager
> >> > ColorVision Business Division
> >> > DataColor Inc.
> >> > CDTobie@
> >> > www.colorvision.com
> >> > 
> >> > 
> >> > **************************************
> >> > See what's free at
> >> > http://www.aol. <http://www.aol.com.> com.
> >> > 
> >> > 
> >> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >> >
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

"Thank you so much for the helpful information on the 3800.  I have the 2200
and I have not been happy with the BW images. I am a traditional darkroom
guy so I am pretty picky"

I too am a traditonal darkroom guy (20 years) and am pretty picky - 4x 
enlargements of 4x5 negatives and 8x10 contact prints from 8x10 negatives). 
I also used a 2200 until buying the 3800 just a few weeks ago (mainly to 
gain the K3 inks and larger print size). I found that the 2200 with UC inks 
made outstanding b&w prints if QTR was used. If your only reason for 
thinking of a switch to the 3800 is unhappiness with the 2200 for b&w you 
might consider trying QTR with your 2200 first  assuming you're not already 
using it.

I haven't made enough b&w prints using Advanced B&W in the 3800 to form a 
definite opinion but with the few I've made my impression is that Advanced 
B&W in the 3800 does as good a job as the 2200 with QTR but if it's better 
the difference hasn't yet shown up to my eyes without a side-by-side 
comparison.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Paul Grant" <gphoto2@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, April 30, 2007 2:36 AM
Subject: RE: [Digital BW] MIS Pro Inks - color printing


Thank you so much for the helpful information on the 3800.  I have the 2200
and I have not been happy with the BW images. I am a traditional darkroom
guy so I am pretty picky.  I have not strayed from the standard Epson inks
and was hoping the 3800 would save me all the grief.



Sounds like it's the way to go.



I do appreciate the feedback.



Paul



-----Original Message-----
From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of shangheye
Sent: Sunday, April 29, 2007 9:19 PM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] MIS Pro Inks - color printing



I recently bought the Pro 3800 (first time to use an Epson!), and I
can vouch for the quality of it's B&W prints. Like all printers an
important step is to make sure that you are using a well calibrated
screen, but I have found the printer profiles that come with the
printer have been excellent, and final prints match what I am
seeing. I am currently printing using the RGB mode (specifically
sRGB profiled images) matched with the Epson sRGB setting in the
Custom section of the print driver. This produces excellent neutral
prints (at least with the Epson papers)to my eye. The Advanced
Black & White feature also produces excellent prints though to my
eye slightly warmer (only really detectable in the mid-tones)when
compared to the sRGB prints. The blacks are also deeper in the ABW
mode. I now print ABW mainly in lower contrast prints, where I need
slightly more dynamic range in the print (which is provided by the
darker blacks),a nd use the toning tool to add a little blue to get
a neutral print I like. Thouroughly recommend it as a printer, and
perfect size if you are limited in space and mainly print sheet
(needs more space if you are printing on Fine Art Paper etc, for the
front and rear feeders). Having come from Canon printers, I am
delighted with the idea of not having to switch inks! Rgds, K

--- In DigitalBlackandWhit
<mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint%40yahoogroups.com>
eThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Paul Grant
<gphoto2@...> wrote:
>
> I would imagine that since the new Epson 3800 has auto switching
of the
> black inks.....I would assume that the new larger formats would
have the
> same plus other new features.
>
> Anyone out there have experience wit the 3800 for b/w. I am
thinking of
> upgrading from my 2200. I would appreciate any comments.
>
> Regards,
> Paul
>
>
> On 4/25/07 6:29 PM, "john dean" <deanwork2003@...> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Well, as someone who has a house full of Epsons and has used them
> > daily for 7 years..if their next large format machine doesn't
> > incorporate auto switching between mk and pk they might as well
hang
> > it up.
> >
> > john
> >
> > Next it will be
> >> > Epson's turn again, and they don't tend to let much grass grow
> > under their feet.
> >> >
> >> > C. David Tobie
> >> > Product Technology Manager
> >> > ColorVision Business Division
> >> > DataColor Inc.
> >> > CDTobie@
> >> > www.colorvision.com
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > **************************************
> >> > See what's free at
> >> > http://www.aol. <http://www.aol.com.> com.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



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

I've been using the 3800 for about two weeks.  My previous printer 
was the 2200 and I used it for about two years.  Most of my b/w 
printing on the 2200 employed QTR and Qimage. I probably used Epson 
Velvet Fine Art about 75% of the time. I was generally satisfied with 
the output, most of which consisted of 12x18 prints.  I only print 
about once a week and make about two or three "keeper" prints each 
time.

I got the 3800 because of the wider carriage and what I had read 
about the K3 inks.

So far, I have done mostly test prints on a wide variety of papers 
and used the ABW settings as well as QTR.  Frankly, at this point, I 
don't see much of a difference between the 2200 and the 3800 output.  
Maybe I'm not picky enough or I just haven't got it hacked yet.  Who 
knows, maybe I will change my opinion after a few more weeks.

Regards,

Fred


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Brian Ellis 
<bellis60@...> wrote:
>
> "Thank you so much for the helpful information on the 3800.  I have 
the 2200
> and I have not been happy with the BW images. I am a traditional 
darkroom
> guy so I am pretty picky"
>

Hi Fred,

I agree.  On matt paper, both produce wonderful prints.  On glossy 
paper it is another story.  At least this has been my observation 
using both printers and both matt and glossy stock.  The ABW feature 
has enabled me not to have to order Image Print for my 3800.
HTH

Paul

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "fredila2" 
<fred@...> wrote:
>
> I've been using the 3800 for about two weeks.  My previous printer 
> was the 2200 and I used it for about two years.  Most of my b/w 
> printing on the 2200 employed QTR and Qimage. I probably used Epson 
> Velvet Fine Art about 75% of the time. I was generally satisfied 
with 
> the output, most of which consisted of 12x18 prints.  I only print 
> about once a week and make about two or three "keeper" prints each 
> time.
> 
> I got the 3800 because of the wider carriage and what I had read 
> about the K3 inks.
> 
> So far, I have done mostly test prints on a wide variety of papers 
> and used the ABW settings as well as QTR.  Frankly, at this point, 
I 
> don't see much of a difference between the 2200 and the 3800 
output.  
> Maybe I'm not picky enough or I just haven't got it hacked yet.  
Who 
> knows, maybe I will change my opinion after a few more weeks.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Fred
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Brian Ellis 
> <bellis60@> wrote:
> >
> > "Thank you so much for the helpful information on the 3800.  I 
have 

> the 2200
> > and I have not been happy with the BW images. I am a traditional 
> darkroom
> > guy so I am pretty picky"
> >
>

Hi Paul,

Thanks for the input...and good point.  I've avoided glossy paper 
because of all the "historical" problems mentioned here and 
elsewhere.  Maybe I should give it a second chance.

Thanks,

Fred

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "bwinkjet" 
<bwinkjet@...> wrote:
>
> Hi Fred,
> 
> I agree.  On matt paper, both produce wonderful prints.  On glossy 
> paper it is another story.  At least this has been my observation 
> using both printers and both matt and glossy stock.  The ABW 
feature 
> has enabled me not to have to order Image Print for my 3800.
> HTH
> 
> Paul
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "fredila2" 
> <fred@> wrote:
> >
> > I've been using the 3800 for about two weeks.  My previous 
printer 
> > was the 2200 and I used it for about two years.  Most of my b/w 
> > printing on the 2200 employed QTR and Qimage. I probably used 
Epson 
> > Velvet Fine Art about 75% of the time. I was generally satisfied 
> with 
> > the output, most of which consisted of 12x18 prints.  I only 
print 
> > about once a week and make about two or three "keeper" prints 
each 
> > time.
> > 
> > I got the 3800 because of the wider carriage and what I had read 
> > about the K3 inks.
> > 
> > So far, I have done mostly test prints on a wide variety of 
papers 
> > and used the ABW settings as well as QTR.  Frankly, at this 
point, 
> I 
> > don't see much of a difference between the 2200 and the 3800 
> output.  
> > Maybe I'm not picky enough or I just haven't got it hacked yet.  
> Who 
> > knows, maybe I will change my opinion after a few more weeks.
> > 
> > Regards,
> > 
> > Fred
> > 
> > 
> > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Brian Ellis 
> > <bellis60@> wrote:
> > >
> > > "Thank you so much for the helpful information on the 3800.  I 
> have 
> > the 2200
> > > and I have not been happy with the BW images. I am a 
traditional 

> > darkroom
> > > guy so I am pretty picky"
> > >
> >
>

At 04:25 AM Thursday 4/26/2007, you wrote:
>At this time I actually have a mixture of MIS and EPSON UC inks in my 9600. Partly this is due to making a gradual move to the MIS. I will end up with - unless the MIS magentas get better, using all MIS except for the magentas, which will stay as Epson UC.

I've ordered some MIS Pro carts for my 2100 but am concerned about the magentas, too.

Two possibilities occur to me: one, switching back to the UC K2 carts only for display prints and two, using UC Magenta/Light Magenta as you use. That would mean less custom profiles as I'd only be using one set of inks.

My question is this: on lustre papers, what does a mix of MIS and UC have on  gloss differential? The MIS are less glossy than the UC so I'm concerned about having regional gloss differential where there is magenta ink.

The other thing is that I print 90% BW, so in those images I imagine the differences in gloss between using the two inksets at once would be much less evident - so it may not be a problem there. 

I do like matte papers however (and they are all I currently use, due to the bronzing and gloss differential with UC K2 inks), so I suppose the simple solution is to stick to matte and enjoy the cost benefit of refilling five of my carts with MIS Pro inks.

Your thoughts would be appreciated, Tom.

thanks,
Richard 
--
http://smallfield.vze.com
http://photos.smallfield.vze.com (Photos web site)
http://warkworth.vze.com/ (Warkworth photo essay)
http://picasaweb.google.com/rsmallfield/ (Recent work) 

   "Now, now my good man, this is no time for making enemies." 
   --Voltaire (1694-1778) on his deathbed in response to a priest 
   asking that he renounce Satan.

I use the MIS Pro ink with the glossy papers.  However, these prints are not for sale.  Just folks to hang family pictures on the wall.  But, the glossy prints are just fiine.  When viewed under normal conditions they are perfectly fine.  Not qjuite up to the Claria inks, but just fine.
   
  Tom Baker

Richard Smallfield <r.smallfield@...> wrote:
          At 04:25 AM Thursday 4/26/2007, you wrote:
>At this time I actually have a mixture of MIS and EPSON UC inks in my 9600. Partly this is due to making a gradual move to the MIS. I will end up with - unless the MIS magentas get better, using all MIS except for the magentas, which will stay as Epson UC.

I've ordered some MIS Pro carts for my 2100 but am concerned about the magentas, too.

Two possibilities occur to me: one, switching back to the UC K2 carts only for display prints and two, using UC Magenta/Light Magenta as you use. That would mean less custom profiles as I'd only be using one set of inks.

My question is this: on lustre papers, what does a mix of MIS and UC have on gloss differential? The MIS are less glossy than the UC so I'm concerned about having regional gloss differential where there is magenta ink.

The other thing is that I print 90% BW, so in those images I imagine the differences in gloss between using the two inksets at once would be much less evident - so it may not be a problem there. 

I do like matte papers however (and they are all I currently use, due to the bronzing and gloss differential with UC K2 inks), so I suppose the simple solution is to stick to matte and enjoy the cost benefit of refilling five of my carts with MIS Pro inks.

Your thoughts would be appreciated, Tom.

thanks,
Richard 
--
http://smallfield.vze.com
http://photos.smallfield.vze.com (Photos web site)
http://warkworth.vze.com/ (Warkworth photo essay)
http://picasaweb.google.com/rsmallfield/ (Recent work) 

"Now, now my good man, this is no time for making enemies." 
--Voltaire (1694-1778) on his deathbed in response to a priest 
asking that he renounce Satan. 



         


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]