Epson 1400 with UT 14 inkset
2009-12-04 by Tom Fielder
I've been printing with the Epson 1400 and MIS UT 14 inkset for a little over a year. The non-OEM carbon pigment inks are capable of producing stunning B &W prints; however, in my experience, there are pros and cons of using the approach when compared with the Epson inks. Like any fine-art, there's a learning curve. The following reflects my experience. PROS: 1. Stunning B & W prints from the carbon pigment inks. 2. Readily available inks. My experience is with the UT 14 ink from InkSupply <http://www.inksupply.com/> http://www.inksupply.com/; however, Piezography ink from Cone Editions <http://www.piezography.com/> http://www.piezography.com/ produces an excellent line of ink and I understand that there may be other sources including SuperJetUSA <http://www.superjetusa.com/shop/> http://www.superjetusa.com/shop/. Additionally, " The new Carbon-6 inkset is open-source and user-mixable." (Paul Roark) More recently, I've observed that Paul has been experimenting with HP Z3100 PK pigment inks. His website is very informative on the subject. [I should also mention that Paul is an excellent photographer and that prints of his work are very reasonably priced. I have enjoyed acquiring a couple of his prints.] 3. Carbon pigment printing is best for image stability and longevity. According to Paul Roark, " When 100% carbon pigments are printed on a cotton substrate (paper) the resulting black and white print may be the most archival image possible with today's technology." 4. Epson printers are readily available for the 3rd party ink approach. I use the highly recommended Epson 1400 because it has a tiny 1.5 picoliter drop size that allows printing relatively smooth prints while only using concentrated inks. The 1400 list for $299 but is often available from Staples or Epson's Clearance Center for about $199. 5. The OEM inks are inexpensive especially with refillable inkcarts or a continuous ink system. The CIS siphon's ink with small tubes connected directly to the printer. 6. Better DMAX - According to reports in the user groups, the carbon approach is capable of producing a very high DMAX compared to standard manufacturer's inks. CONS 1. The carbon inks settle. The printer itself will agitate the ink carts during printing; however, the printer should not be allowed to set for any substantial period of time. Even then, the inks may settle and clog the print head thereby requiring a cleaning of the heads. The supply bottles of ink also need to be agitated prior to re-filling the carts. The continuous ink approach (CIS) may be even worse. The tiny tubes from the ink bottles to the printer may clog easily in the light. I've noticed recommendations to cover the tubes to the printer with a box or dark cloth. 2. Refilling carts can be a messy operation. Be prepared to wear rubber gloves or end up with ink-stained hands. The refillable MIS carts has a little (one might say minute) rubber stopper that must be removed to fill the carts using a syringe. I have not used carts by Inkjetcarts ; however, they have a lift off tab that appears to be more stable. See: <http://www.inkjetcarts.us/> http://www.inkjetcarts.us/ 3. Paper jams - According to Epson, the maximum thickness of paper for the 1400 is 11.8 mils. By comparison, the 4800 is designed for 31 mils. Many of the fine-art papers are thicker than 11.8 mils. While its possible to possible to use thicker paper, I found it frustrating to hand-feed the printer. The problem is exacerbated by coated papers. The paper's coating rubs off on the rubber rollers when the printer tries to grab the thicker paper thereby making the roller too slick to grab anything. I found that by tricking the printer into running a print that I could clean the rollers with a cotton cloth and Windex to fix the problem. 4. Limited support - The OEM/3rd party approach has a couple of strong Yahoo user groups; however, there's limited manufacturer's support available for the work. Paul Roark's site has profiles available for a couple of paper types and generic recommendations for "matte" or "pearl" papers; however, the paper suppliers do not have profiles available for the OEM inks. The consensus seems to be to make one's own paper profile and use the QTR-Quadtone RIP to make profiles; however, that was more brain-damage than I wanted to get into at the time. 5. Limited availability of paper - Because of the thickness issue and the lack of pre-made profiles for the OEM inks, the paper selection is limited. I settled on Moab's Lasal Matte 235 and Ilford's Galerie Smooth Pearl papers - both of which worked very well without jamming in the printer. CONCLUSION: My personal choice has been to switch to the Epson 4880 and use Epson's inks. For me, it is more important to spend time shooting and enjoying the craft that "tinkering" with the alternative approach. Nevertheless, I am cleaning the clogged printheads from the 1400; buying fresh ink; and I'll likely resume some work with the 3rd party inks. However, I now have the standby 4880 loaded with Epson inks available to step in if I have a problem with the alternative approach using carbon inks. I'm sure that some will disagree with my notes and I'm anxious for other thoughts on the subject. The above is just one man's experience. Did I mention the "stunning" B &W prints? Tom [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]