Digital BW, The Print

[Posted this, but never received a copy back,
	 so am re-sending to the list.  Sorry if this
	 actually is a duplicate post. -- Arthur]

I've been printing all my black and white on a pair of Epson 3000's 
(one at home, another at work), using MIS UT-FS ink and an old 
Piezography driver.  Print quality is excellent, but speed is slow 
slow, and paper handling is a problem on heavier papers.

So, I'm getting ready to ditch one or both of these, and move to one 
of the K3 printers.  That means Epson R2400, 3800, 4800, etc.

My old Epson R800 bit the dust, and so I also need a printer that I 
can take with me to dance festivals or workshops, where I may be in 
residence for one to three weeks.  My print needs there are less 
demanding (mostly color work prints or contacts), but the ability to 
carry the printer is important.  With that constraint, I'd not get a 
4800 or larger.

So, I'm left to decide between the R2400 and 3800.  The ability of 
the 3800 to print 17" x 22" sheets (actually 17 x 25) is nice but not 
important.  I'm not sure that I'd ever use the narrow roll paper that 
the R2400 accepts.  From all the reviews I've read, print quality is 
comparable.

With this analysis, the biggest difference for me would be 80 ml ink 
carts in the 3800 vs 15 ml in the R2400 -- and a consequent reduction 
in ink costs.  Since I may print as many as 700 8-1/2" x 11" work 
prints on one on-site project, ink cost can add up.  In theory, it 
seems simple -- carts for the 3800 hold about five times as much ink, 
but cost only three or four times as much.  I'd assume that the 
difference is greater, because much ink is wasted in the smaller carts.

However, I'm mindfull of the adage:  "In theory, theory and practice 
are the same.  In practice, they are not."  Does my theory hold up?

Have any of you had experience with both of these printers ... or 
with either one ... that would lead you to offer any advice?  Any 
other differences that I've not mentioned that should be considered?

(At least initially, I'll use it with regular Epson inks, since I'll 
need to print lots of color as well as some black and white.)

===>	Are you interested in an Epson 3000?  Contact me.
	I'm in the Portland, Maine, area, and would prefer
	not to ship ... but anything is possible.   <===

Thanks all,

Arthur Fink

	A r t h u r  .  F i n k  .  P h o t o g r a p h y
	-------------------------------------------------
	Ten New Island Avenue         . land 207.766.5722
	Peaks Island, Maine 04108     . cell 207.615.5722
	www.arthurfinkphoto.com  . af@...

	More dance images  www.f64gallery.com/arthur.html
                    www.arthurfinkphoto.com/BatesShow2007

I just upgraded from a 2100 to the 2400, and so far I have mixed
feelings. 

- Paper handling is worse than the 2100 - Much worse. It frequently
misfeeds the paper and spits them out again. What's worse is that once
this has happened marks are left on the paper and they're no longer
usable for porfolio prints as the marks can be seen through the
printed image. 

The front or back feed should solve this, but print quality really
suffers when I load the paper from the front and I haven't been able
to get a decent print this way yet. I'm out of ink until my CIS
arrives, so I haven't been able to test this further - I'm pretty sure
I'm just doing something wrong and that there is a way to do this and
get decent print quality.

- Ink load on matte papers is very high. It doesn't take many prints
to use up a cartridge. I really wouldn't want to use this printer
without a CIS. Cartridges here in Norway are around $20-$25 each,
maybe this is less an issue for you with the lower US prices.

- I've had serious microbanding problems. But it seems to vary from
paper to paper. The 2400 does not have any way to do a horizontal
alignment, but will vary the paper thickness depending on the paper
type chosen in the driver which seems to have an effect on banding.
Again, I haven't been able to test this further as I'm out of ink and
waiting for my CIS.

I might have been regretting my purchase if I actually paid full price
for this printer, but since it was given to me for free I'm not
complaining. I'm hopeful that I will be able to solve these issues.

On the positive side I'm very happy with the BW print quality with ABW
which is as good as or better than my best UT7 prints on the 2100. The
2400 is also much faster than the 2100. You no longer have to wait
ages for a print tro finish. 

Now if only I could leave a stack of papers in the printer and trust
it to feed properly I would have been able to print larger batches of
prints very quickly.

> Have any of you had experience with both of these printers ... or 
> with either one ... that would lead you to offer any advice?  Any 
> other differences that I've not mentioned that should be considered?
> 
> (At least initially, I'll use it with regular Epson inks, since I'll 
> need to print lots of color as well as some black and white.)

-I recently purchased a 3800 to replace a 2200. The 3800 is able to
sit on an L shaped desk top, no problems and have achieved excellent
results in the B&W mode, as well as color.check this site out for some
good information:
http://people.csail.mit.edu/ericchan/dp/Epson3800/index.html 




-- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Arthur Fink
<af@...> wrote:

>
> 	[Posted this, but never received a copy back,
> 	 so am re-sending to the list.  Sorry if this
> 	 actually is a duplicate post. -- Arthur]
> 
> I've been printing all my black and white on a pair of Epson 3000's 
> (one at home, another at work), using MIS UT-FS ink and an old 
> Piezography driver.  Print quality is excellent, but speed is slow 
> slow, and paper handling is a problem on heavier papers.
> 
> So, I'm getting ready to ditch one or both of these, and move to one 
> of the K3 printers.  That means Epson R2400, 3800, 4800, etc.
> 
> My old Epson R800 bit the dust, and so I also need a printer that I 
> can take with me to dance festivals or workshops, where I may be in 
> residence for one to three weeks.  My print needs there are less 
> demanding (mostly color work prints or contacts), but the ability to 
> carry the printer is important.  With that constraint, I'd not get a 
> 4800 or larger.
> 
> So, I'm left to decide between the R2400 and 3800.  The ability of 
> the 3800 to print 17" x 22" sheets (actually 17 x 25) is nice but not 
> important.  I'm not sure that I'd ever use the narrow roll paper that 
> the R2400 accepts.  From all the reviews I've read, print quality is 
> comparable.
> 
> With this analysis, the biggest difference for me would be 80 ml ink 
> carts in the 3800 vs 15 ml in the R2400 -- and a consequent reduction 
> in ink costs.  Since I may print as many as 700 8-1/2" x 11" work 
> prints on one on-site project, ink cost can add up.  In theory, it 
> seems simple -- carts for the 3800 hold about five times as much ink, 
> but cost only three or four times as much.  I'd assume that the 
> difference is greater, because much ink is wasted in the smaller carts.
> 
> However, I'm mindfull of the adage:  "In theory, theory and practice 
> are the same.  In practice, they are not."  Does my theory hold up?
> 
> Have any of you had experience with both of these printers ... or 
> with either one ... that would lead you to offer any advice?  Any 
> other differences that I've not mentioned that should be considered?
> 
> (At least initially, I'll use it with regular Epson inks, since I'll 
> need to print lots of color as well as some black and white.)
> 
> ===>	Are you interested in an Epson 3000?  Contact me.
> 	I'm in the Portland, Maine, area, and would prefer
> 	not to ship ... but anything is possible.   <===
> 
> Thanks all,
> 
> Arthur Fink
> 
> 	A r t h u r  .  F i n k  .  P h o t o g r a p h y
> 	-------------------------------------------------
> 	Ten New Island Avenue         . land 207.766.5722
> 	Peaks Island, Maine 04108     . cell 207.615.5722
> 	www.arthurfinkphoto.com  . af@...
> 
> 	More dance images  www.f64gallery.com/arthur.html
>                     www.arthurfinkphoto.com/BatesShow2007
>