Update me on printers and Inks

I know this isn't the Digital forum, but so many of us are at least
scanning negs that this is still relevant. (at least I think it is,
so...)

Right now I print, minimally, with an old Epson Stylus 400.
It does an ok job. But doing more digitally it does need upgraded.

I'll be printing no more than 11 wide (11x14, or slightly smaller with
the borders, as needed) so I don't need a really big printer.

#1 So the first issue ...
Which brand is best, esp. wrt
(a) color accuracy
(b) ink durability.

#2 And for a specific comparison, the Epson 1200 & 1270 are going
pretty reasonably these days. Are their inks on par with the newer
inks?

#3 Does paper make a difference in terms of durability/color accuracy?

#4 Which if any of the refill or 3rd-party inks might bring a printer
to current quality (durabiliy/color)?

#5 Is there really that much difference wrt color accuracy between the
pro and consumer printers, or is it all in the inks? (relates
somewhat to #4)

#6 Personally, I've always enjoyed my Epsons. But what are you pros
and serious amateurs using? For smaller prints I'm hearing good
things here in Ohio regarding some of the basic Canon models.
Comparisions, anyone?
Any online results comparisions that you can point me to?

TIA,

Collin

"Collin Brendemuehl" wrote in message
m...

Canons come up well with colour accuracy and cost of genuine consumables.
their 8 ink systems are fantastic.
CAnons biggest weakness is the low fade resistance.

I have actually heard of one firm selling a fixative spray but couldn't tell
you its effectiveness. Common sense storing and display under glass and
the prints are adequate. Canon haven't stopped anyone in the third party
industry and haven't introduced any technology to hamper you.

Epson are good when they work. They are using single ink systems now. The
5 in one carts such as the 1290 1290s and others are expensive. i've also
heard so many head clogging horror stories and expereinced enough myself to
be put off for life.

The low end canons are unimpressive too. However once you pay over $100 and
into single ink tank territory all the manufacturers seem to shine. Colour
calibration out the box is better on canon machines and are the simplest to
use. If you have the skill and patience epson can yield a better result.

Last years i series seem to do better than this years pixma in terms of
build quality and colour accuracy. I only print at home in a hurry or doing
large individual prints. 6x4 and the like i give to the lab now.

"Collin Brendemuehl" wrote in message
m...

Canons come up well with colour accuracy and cost of genuine consumables.
their 8 ink systems are fantastic.
CAnons biggest weakness is the low fade resistance.

I have actually heard of one firm selling a fixative spray but couldn't tell
you its effectiveness. Common sense storing and display under glass and
the prints are adequate. Canon haven't stopped anyone in the third party
industry and haven't introduced any technology to hamper you.

Epson are good when they work. They are using single ink systems now. The
5 in one carts such as the 1290 1290s and others are expensive. i've also
heard so many head clogging horror stories and expereinced enough myself to
be put off for life.

The low end canons are unimpressive too. However once you pay over $100 and
into single ink tank territory all the manufacturers seem to shine. Colour
calibration out the box is better on canon machines and are the simplest to
use. If you have the skill and patience epson can yield a better result.

Last years i series seem to do better than this years pixma in terms of
build quality and colour accuracy. I only print at home in a hurry or doing
large individual prints. 6x4 and the like i give to the lab now.

"Collin Brendemuehl" wrote in message
m...
I know this isn't the Digital forum, but so many of us are at least
scanning negs that this is still relevant. (at least I think it is,
so...)

Right now I print, minimally, with an old Epson Stylus 400.
It does an ok job. But doing more digitally it does need upgraded.

I'll be printing no more than 11 wide (11x14, or slightly smaller with
the borders, as needed) so I don't need a really big printer.

#1 So the first issue ...
Which brand is best, esp. wrt
(a) color accuracy
(b) ink durability.

#2 And for a specific comparison, the Epson 1200 & 1270 are going
pretty reasonably these days. Are their inks on par with the newer
inks?

#3 Does paper make a difference in terms of durability/color accuracy?

#4 Which if any of the refill or 3rd-party inks might bring a printer
to current quality (durabiliy/color)?

#5 Is there really that much difference wrt color accuracy between the
pro and consumer printers, or is it all in the inks? (relates
somewhat to #4)

#6 Personally, I've always enjoyed my Epsons. But what are you pros
and serious amateurs using? For smaller prints I'm hearing good
things here in Ohio regarding some of the basic Canon models.
Comparisions, anyone?
Any online results comparisions that you can point me to?

TIA,

Collin

Although I don't personally own one, I have met two pro's who use the Epson
2200, and the quality of their prints is excellent.....It does cost around
$600, but I would seriously consider dredging up the money for one if I did
much printing......

"Collin Brendemuehl" wrote in message
m...
I know this isn't the Digital forum, but so many of us are at least
scanning negs that this is still relevant. (at least I think it is,
so...)

Right now I print, minimally, with an old Epson Stylus 400.
It does an ok job. But doing more digitally it does need upgraded.

I'll be printing no more than 11 wide (11x14, or slightly smaller with
the borders, as needed) so I don't need a really big printer.

#1 So the first issue ...
Which brand is best, esp. wrt
(a) color accuracy
(b) ink durability.

#2 And for a specific comparison, the Epson 1200 & 1270 are going
pretty reasonably these days. Are their inks on par with the newer
inks?

#3 Does paper make a difference in terms of durability/color accuracy?

#4 Which if any of the refill or 3rd-party inks might bring a printer
to current quality (durabiliy/color)?

#5 Is there really that much difference wrt color accuracy between the
pro and consumer printers, or is it all in the inks? (relates
somewhat to #4)

#6 Personally, I've always enjoyed my Epsons. But what are you pros
and serious amateurs using? For smaller prints I'm hearing good
things here in Ohio regarding some of the basic Canon models.
Comparisions, anyone?
Any online results comparisions that you can point me to?

TIA,

Collin

Although I don't personally own one, I have met two pro's who use the Epson
2200, and the quality of their prints is excellent.....It does cost around
$600, but I would seriously consider dredging up the money for one if I did
much printing......

Collin Brendemuehl wrote:

Any online results comparisions that you can point me to?

TIA,

Collin

Try comp.periphs.printers too.


--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI gallery]: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- [SI rulz]: http://www.aliasimages.com/si/rulz.html
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.

Epson are good when they work. . . . i've also
heard so many head clogging horror stories and expereinced enough myself
to
be put off for life.

I've used the Espon 1160, 1280, and 2200 printers over a span of about four
years, 90% for black and white printing, 10% for color. I've used MIS inks
for b&w and Epson for color. I've very rarely had ink clogs and when I have
they've been easily fixed by running a cleaning cycle. Clogging problems are
often due to the operator rather than the equipment. The printers need to be
turned off when not being used, a couple drops of Windex should be
periodically placed on the ink pad, and if cartridges are used a nozzle
check should be done each time the cartridges are replaced and the cleaning
cycle run if the nozzle check indicates a need for cleaning. This is
"routine maintenance" of the kind required with most things mechanical. When
it isn't done the printers can develop clogging problems, when it is done
they don't, at least not in my experience.

I've been partial to Epson printers mostly because of my good experiences
with them but also because they seem to be the one company that has
consistently supported the high end "serious photographer" market fby
consistently upgrading their existing products and bringing out new ones.
Canon, HP, et al seem to take an occasional stab at that market and then
sort of sit back and do nothing for a while. That's just my highly
unscientific impression, I could be wrong. But if you go to groups dedicated
to high end photographic printing such as the Yahoo digital black and white
printing group I think you'll find that 90% or more of the pearticipants are
using Epson equipment partly for that reason.

Epson are good when they work. They are using single ink systems now.
The
5 in one carts such as the 1290 1290s and others are expensive.

I don't know about the "when they work" statement, mine have never broken.
With respect to cartridge expense, no question that the OEM or even third
party filled cartridges are expensive. For that reason most people who do
any volume of digital printing and are serious about it either have a
continuous flow system or they refill the cartridges. Either will
dramatically reduce your ink cartridges. OEM cartridges are a good way to go
when you're first setting up because they eliminate a variable. Once you're
set up you'll want to switch to a continuous flow system or refill your
cartridges rather than buying new ones if you do any volume at all.


"Mr Jessop" wrote in message
. uk...

"Collin Brendemuehl" wrote in message
m...

Canons come up well with colour accuracy and cost of genuine consumables.
their 8 ink systems are fantastic.
CAnons biggest weakness is the low fade resistance.

I have actually heard of one firm selling a fixative spray but couldn't
tell
you its effectiveness. Common sense storing and display under glass and
the prints are adequate. Canon haven't stopped anyone in the third party
industry and haven't introduced any technology to hamper you.

Epson are good when they work. They are using single ink systems now.
The
5 in one carts such as the 1290 1290s and others are expensive. i've also
heard so many head clogging horror stories and expereinced enough myself
to
be put off for life.

The low end canons are unimpressive too. However once you pay over $100
and
into single ink tank territory all the manufacturers seem to shine.
Colour
calibration out the box is better on canon machines and are the simplest
to
use. If you have the skill and patience epson can yield a better result.

Last years i series seem to do better than this years pixma in terms of
build quality and colour accuracy. I only print at home in a hurry or
doing
large individual prints. 6x4 and the like i give to the lab now.

I think the defacto standard in printers is Epson, although others are
making a dent in Epson's domination. Then the question becomes which
printer and which inks. Also, which ink you choose depends on if you
want to print on glossy, lustre, or matt papers. A good place to start
is at:

www.inksupply.com

It'll take some study to figure out all the options on inks, papers,
and printers, but it's worth it. In particular, I would look at the
MIS GP Archival Inkset for the Epson 1280. A similar setup would be
the 7600 Archival Inkset for the Epson 2200. I believe the two will
give similar looking prints since they're using very similar inks (but
I haven't compared the two). Also you might guess that I recommend
_not_ using Epson's inks, and I don't think it's worth the extra money
for the 2200. There might be some arguement for the 2200 based on
color gamut, but I haven't looked into that.

Again, a key decision is glossy vs. matt

Jay Wenner

On 19 Nov 2004 05:30:17 -0800, (Sly D. Skeez)
wrote:

I think the defacto standard in printers is Epson, although others are
making a dent in Epson's domination. Then the question becomes which
printer and which inks. Also, which ink you choose depends on if you
want to print on glossy, lustre, or matt papers. A good place to start
is at:


Canon: thermal heads, easily replaceable but
can't use pigment inks. Much faster than Epson,
even (or especially) in photo quality modes.

HP: The Designjet series (eg. Designjet 30)
are worth considering. Again -- user replaceable
heads, and built more like the Epson Pro models
(eg., large stationary ink carts instead of
itty bitty carts that ride with the head.)

Epson: As you say, the de facto standard for
photography and fine arts. Excellent print
quality, but not necessarily the most reliable.

In truth, the print quality of all three brands
is very very close and very very good -- when the
machines are new and/or working to spec.

Don't expect any of these machines to last for
more than a couple years' hard printing.

With the Epson, you are particularly hosed
when ink nozzles clog. Then it's Windex time.


rafe b.
http://www.terrapinphoto.com

http://www.InkRepublic.com is holding Year-End sale. Everything is 20%
off plus Free shipping to all over the world.

Their bulk ink system is spongeless which means it wont void your
warranty.

They do have great solution for R200, R300, RX500, RX600, R800, 1280,
2200, C86 ... etc individual cartridge printer.

Take a look:
http://www.inkrepublic.com/Installation.asp
http://www.inkrepublic.com/
http://www.inkrepublic.com/VideoClips.asp
http://www.inkrepublic.com/Testimonials.asp