Digital BW, The Print

First time poster looking to buy first printer, having given up on setting up a traditional darkroom. I've been reading back posts for the last several weeks and kind of decided that the 1400 with some variation of Eboni 6 would give me the look that I'm after. (Also being enticed by the 3800 but don't really need the size.)

But I'm wondering if the 1400 still makes any sense as a new purchase, given the uncertainty of Eboni inks continuing. Might it be time to just go with the latest technology (3800) instead?

Cost of printer not really an issue, but I'm sure ink costs will be annoying.

Thanks for your thoughts.

"seablister" <seablister@...> wrote:
>
> ...kind of decided that the 1400 with some variation of 
> Eboni 6 would give me the look that I'm after. ...
> 
> But I'm wondering if the 1400 still makes any sense ...
> given the uncertainty of Eboni inks continuing. 

> Might it be time to just go with the latest technology 
> (3800) instead?
> 

The 1400 is the platform I recommend these days for 13" dedicated B&W.  I use it and find it the best value.  The 1.5 picoliter droplet allows things that the older technologies (including the 3800) cannot do.

I know of no serious threat that Eboni will not be available.  The ink is also sold by competitors under different names and is produced by a much larger company that will almost certainly be in business for some time regardless of what MIS does.  (I assume MIS will also be a viable source for the foreseeable future.)  

Additionally, there are a number of different workflows and inksets that run on the 1400.  So, it's a well supported platform.

I have several workflows noted on my main B&W Info page at 
http://www.paulroark.com/BW-Info/ and Jon Cone also supports the printer, I believe.

Note I'm not being critical of the 3800.  I'm sure it's a fine machine if one wants color and B&W with the OEM approach or QTR.  

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

On 28/03/09 10:26 AM, "pr_roark" <pr_roark@...> wrote:
> 
> The 1400 is the platform I recommend these days for 13" dedicated B&W.  I use
> it and find it the best value.  The 1.5 picoliter droplet allows things that
> the older technologies (including the 3800) cannot do.

Paul, what are your thoughts on the 1900? Do the same comments apply?

Terry.

Hello,

I have a 1400 and a 3800 and they both work great. If you don't need the
size of the 3800 the 1400 is excellent. I have been trying a variety of MIS
inks using refillable cartridges and am now using the C6 formula from Paul
Roark. You can't beat it for under $200. The only problem I have had is when
using glossy paper I have had some minor tire markings on the print but for
matte it is not an issue. As for the 3800 there are some CIS available and I
am using one without issue but I still have not seen refillable cartridges
for this printer. Being able to use other inks is an advantage. Hope this
helps.

Gary Wagner 

From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
seablister
Sent: Saturday, March 28, 2009 5:53 AM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Digital BW] First printer: Does Epson 1400 still make sense?

 

First time poster looking to buy first printer, having given up on setting
up a traditional darkroom. I've been reading back posts for the last several
weeks and kind of decided that the 1400 with some variation of Eboni 6 would
give me the look that I'm after. (Also being enticed by the 3800 but don't
really need the size.)

But I'm wondering if the 1400 still makes any sense as a new purchase, given
the uncertainty of Eboni inks continuing. Might it be time to just go with
the latest technology (3800) instead?

Cost of printer not really an issue, but I'm sure ink costs will be
annoying.

Thanks for your thoughts.





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

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Gary Wagner" <gcwagner@...> wrote:
>

> You can't beat it for under $200. The only problem I have had is     > when using glossy paper I have had some minor tire markings on the   > print but for matte it is not an issue. 

This has been my experience with the Epson 1400 as well. I now print only on matte paper.

Cheers,
Andre

Terry Ritz <t.ritz@...> wrote:
>


> Paul, what are your thoughts on the 1900? Do the same comments apply?

I've never used a 1900.  So I can't really say much about it.  I suspect with QTR the 1800 3-MK workflow will be fine, but, again, I have not tested it.

I, frankly, find hextone printers to be easier to deal with when the Epson driver is used.  Hopefully the 1900 does not band the way my 1800 does, but, again, I'm not in a position to know.  The 1400 just seems like a real bargain for what I do.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

"Gary Wagner" <gcwagner@...> wrote:
>
>... The only problem I have had is when
> using glossy paper I have had some minor tire markings 
> on the print ...

That's interesting.  So far, I have not seen these with the NC2 (see http://www.paulroark.com/BW-Info/1400-NC2.pdf) setup and HP inks I'm using with it now.  I don't do a lot of glossy work, but the brochures I print have some heavy black areas that I would think would show them.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

I recently bought my second 1400 for UT14 inkset.  I'm very pleased with this printer on all counts and especially like the way 300+ weight papers have loaded without a problem.

I haven't seen any tire marks on glossy either.  But I would also think that this is very variable with inkset, paper type etc.  With the claria inset, for example, you can use swellable papers. But overall I find these papers problematic.

Granger

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "pr_roark" <pr_roark@...> wrote:

>
> "Gary Wagner" <gcwagner@> wrote:
> >
> >... The only problem I have had is when
> > using glossy paper I have had some minor tire markings 
> > on the print ...
> 
> That's interesting.  So far, I have not seen these with the NC2 (see http://www.paulroark.com/BW-Info/1400-NC2.pdf) setup and HP inks I'm using with it now.  I don't do a lot of glossy work, but the brochures I print have some heavy black areas that I would think would show them.
> 
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com
>

Thank you all for your responses. That's exactly what I was hoping to hear.

get some Epson cleaning sheets to run through when it doesn't want to grab paper any more...
Tyler

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@...m, "seablister" <seablister@...> wrote:

>
> Thank you all for your responses. That's exactly what I was hoping to hear.
>