Printer Advice Required

[nick.edwards1]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I am looking to replace my Epson 2100 printer with an Epson R3000.

I print both black & white and colour on sizes up to A3+.

I am particularly interested in obtaining the best possible black and white prints whilst still retaining the option to print colour.

 

Is there any advantage in retaining my 2100 for use with a black and white ink set (eg Piezography K7) or does the R3000 with the ABW make this redundant?

I have read previous posts on this topic but these are generally old and technology seems to have moved on.

 

I need to decide before purchase as I would be trading in my 2100 for the R3000 - taking advantage of an Epson upgrade offer.

 

Your comments would be appreciated.

 

Best regards,

 

Nick.

[Jeff S]

Perhaps you should talk with the folks at Cone and talk through your options. They have various ink sets, so maybe you can get them to generate prints for you (from your files) showing the possibilities. I don't know if they have a printer with straight Epson inks for comparison, but at least you could compare results to those from your 2100.

 

As far as the new printer, I personally would opt for the 3880, but that's because I value the bigger ink cartridges and the 17 inch capability. Plus I'm more than happy with my current 3800.

 

I have a friend who has a dedicated printer for Cone inks, and a 4900 Epson using standard inks. His results are good either way, but some pics really sing with the additional gradations of tone. The Cone system isn't exactly plug and play. You need to be willing to deal with all the quirks to attain the maximum benefits.

 

I think, however, that a lot comes down to the user and whether the tools are mastered to achieve great results. This seems cliche, but I think is true. There are so many variables in the whole print chain...from camera to processing software to papers and profiles, and including the myriad possibilities for settings along the way. And then of course the most important piece...the judgment from the photographer as to when/how to apply the tools. Some folks figure out how to create stunning prints with minimal tools, while others struggle with even the best. Same as in the darkroom days. My prints are much better now than they were a couple of years ago, even though not much has changed equipment-wise (updates to LR have helped).

 

There are deals on Epson printers frequently. I wouldn't let this deal be the deciding factor. Another deal will be around the corner. If you care about small incremental differences, which is what you may find, and are willing to put in the work to get there, then it doesn't make sense to hurry on a decision based on a fleeting rebate deal IMO.

 

Jeff

[nick.edwards1]

Hello Jeff,

 

Thanks for your comments - these are most helpful.

 

The deal on the Epson is not time limited so this is not forcing me to rush into things.

 

I had given serious consideration to the 3880, but the R3000 seemed better to match my needs in as much that I do not need the 17” capability and the lower ink costs balance out a bit by the fact that I would have to pay almost £600 more for the 3880 than the R3000 as the Epson deal is not available on the 3880. I do know in the end though that the 3880 would work out cheaper so you have set me thinking again.

 

The driver for me is the fact that I tend to do most of my printing in winter and I am frustrated that my 2100 doesn’t seem to give me good enough black and white prints, so I would like to change it sooner rather than later.

 

I have tried different manufacturers papers with matching profiles in both gloss and matt.

I take your point that it may be me needing to sort out the variables but I am trying, and yes maybe my judgment will never be good enough.

 

Your comments about your friend’s experience with Cone inks are very interesting - I would have expected ‘plug & play’ - so the fact that more variables would be introduced with another printer set up makes me lean towards working with with a single printer to keep things simple.

 

It seems I just need to decide if it is a 3880 or R3000 - your comments about how satisfied you are with your 3800 may just swing my decision to the 3880.

 

I will now go away and sleep on it.

 

Thanks again.

 

Best regards,

 

Nick.

[Jeff S]

Nick, I think you're smart to shy away, for now, from Cone and spend time perfecting your technique without all the distractions and variables associated with using non-standard inks. (Using gloss papers and Cone inks, for instance, requires a two step print process, the second involving use of a gloss optimizer. Cone was initially geared just to matte papers.)

 

As you can imagine, Epson is also doing things all the time to make it harder to use outside inks in their printers; after all, inks are where they make their profit, not so much the printer. Kind of like razors and razor blades; companies discount the former to get you to buy the latter.

 

Toward this end, Epson is sure to have deals on their 3880, especially when they have another printer in mind. The good news is that each generation of printers is better than existing one. Epson inks have gotten very good and have closed the gap somewhat with Cone. But, 7 shades of grey will always be better than 3, if you spend the time and effort.

 

I don't think you'll go wrong with either the R3000 or the 3880. I just happen to like the 3800 series, and I haven't seen results from the R3000. I do suggest, however, that no matter which you choose, try to get custom profiles for your papers. I particularly like Hahnemuhle Photo Rag Baryta and Photo Rag Pearl, the former having a whiter base with deeper blacks.

 

Here is an old FAQ on the 3800, but might still be useful to give you some ideas on various settings, etc. Best to experiment and don't take his recommendations as gospel (I don't use ABW mode, for instance), but it's a good start.

 

Jeff

[janki]

Hi Nick

 

I have an Epson R3000 printer. Unfortunately I have not had time to try it so much in black and white. But for printing of color photos it is absolute superior.

The photography-magazine that I read mostly, have also chosen this printer as for the moment, best in the world, for sizes up to A3.

Actually I find R3000 quite economical in use as well.

 

I do not think anyone will regret buying this printer.:)

[sanyasi]

I am a big fan of Epson printers; I use the Epson 4880, which is a tank and more than I think you are looking for. I would not rule out Canon. Today they announced a new Canon printer that looks pretty interesting. It prints A3+. It has twelve ink cartridges, which may mean that you can switch between matte and glossy, but that wasn't clear to me. Worth a look.

 

The Pixma Pro-1 Gets Official

[spylaw4]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I used to use the Canon Pro 9000 and found it excellent especially for B&W. I see no reason why the new Pro-1 should not be as good.

However, I moved to Epson and got a 3800 mainly because I wanted to do A2 size printing. With the right profiles and workflow this is a really really good printer. The cartridges are quite costly, but they hold a lot of ink. The printer is large and heavy, but it is still (just) desktop - large desk needed! Results are marvellous.

[ahl]

Hi NIck,

I have a pal who is totally commited to B&W printing and he swears by the Epson 2100.

He uses the Epson inks but has commisioned specific profiles for each paper he uses.

I must say his results are spectacular but he does make several test prints.

So maybe if your printer is still working correctly the better solution might be to get the best out of your existing set-up. Whatever you learn about B&W printing with the 2100 will stand you in good stead when you finally replace it.

My results are very average and would remain so whatever printer I was using: knowledge is all.

Good luck, Alan

[nick.edwards1]

Hello Jeff,

 

I have always used the paper manufacturers matching profiles with my printer. I have only ever used Epson, Hahnemuhle and Ilford papers. I am currently using Ilford Baryta manufactured by Hahnemuhle.

 

What I have never yet done is have a custom profile made. I think it is time for me to have a go at this - I do have a friend who has the equipment.

 

Do you use a RIP?

 

Thanks again,

 

Best regards,

 

Nick.

[Jeff S]

Nick, I also use a friend's equipment to create my profiles (saved me about $1200-$1500). It makes a difference. (He's the same guy who has the Cone set-up, which by the way would require a RIP.) The profiles get better with increasing number of 'passes' to read the colors.

 

I don't currently use a RIP for b/w, but that's the next logical step (QTR - cheap, or IP - expensive). I'm not in a big hurry, though, since results have been superb even without one for now.

 

Jeff

[nick.edwards1]

Hello Janki,

 

Thanks for your comments - Your experience with the R3000 is most encouraging - did you upgrade or was this your first Epson?

 

Best regards,

 

Nick

[nick.edwards1]

Thanks sanyasi for your comments on Canon.

 

I have used Epson for over 10 years and would be reluctant to change brand as they have given me excellent service - I tend to be a bit of a 'stick in the mud' in that respect.

 

The 4880 is way in excess of my needs as you have concluded.

 

Best regards,

 

Nick.

[nick.edwards1]

Hello Brian,

 

It seems that the 3800 and 3880 are very highly regarded by their owners. I keep being tempted but it is the initial outlay that puts me off and the lack of need of A2. Also I get the impression that won't be long before the technology of the new print head of the R3000 it is in the 3880 replacement - maybe then they will be discounting the 3880.

 

Best regards,

 

Nick.

[nick.edwards1]

Hello Alan,

 

Your comments are spot on - I am sure knowledge is the key - I keep trying with my 2100, but after a couple of hours printing this evening I still seem to get a slight magenta cast where one should not be. Have re-calibrated my monitor and am using reasonable viewing lighting, so I think the only route now with my 2100 are custom profiles, unless the magenta goes overnight - which it does tend to do as the prints dry out. If that fails then a new printer for sure.

 

Last night I was looking at some Cibachrome prints from 5 x 4 transparencies - They were stunning - That for me set the bar very high. The person showing the prints has now purchased an Epson 3880 as the Cibachrome processor has recently closed for good.

 

Best regards,

 

Nick.

[Jeff S]

I keep trying with my 2100, but after a couple of hours printing this evening I still seem to get a slight magenta cast where one should not be.

 

Dumb question, but have you turned off color management (printer setting) in your software (LR or whatever)?

 

Jeff

[nick.edwards1]

Hi Jeff,

 

Smart answer (I hope) YES .

 

Best regards,

 

Nick

[chrism]

I've worn out an SPR2400 (used Cone replacement colour inks and their piezography ink set - eventually I realised it wasn't worth the effort) and given up on an HP B9180 and now have an R3000. It works very nicely, painlessly, and wirelessly. I'm happy.

 

Chris

Ooh! Post #666 - do I get to do something devilish?

[janki]

Hello Janki,

 

Thanks for your comments - Your experience with the R3000 is most encouraging - did you upgrade or was this your first Epson?

 

Best regards,

 

Nick

 

Hi again Nick!

 

When it comes to photography, I see myself as a so-called enthusiast.

I probably have at least two or tree little too expensive hobbies.

So it took a while getting phased out my old A4-R800 (corresponding to A3-R1900) Epson printer.

Since I use my little home office also for some job-related work, it has become necessary for me to be able to print posters in A3.

When R3000 was launched in April this year, I felt that this printer was made just for my purposes.

My old R800 printer ceased to operate this summer, so it was just to get the new R3000 in house.

But since I prefer to use the long bright Nordic summer days to other pursuits than "darkroom work", I have not had much time to really test it.

 

Here is my experience so far:

 

- It is consumed some ink to fill the machinery the first time. After that, it feels like it producing sheet after sheet without running out of ink.

- There is very little, or no need at all to clean the nozzle head. Thus saves a lot of ink.

- R3000 is first and foremost a photo printer, which is also perfectly suited to print posters and regular text pages.

- Photos on glossy and satin photo paper are completely without annoying color cast. Epson Ultra Chrome K3 Vivid Magenta ink gives absolutely perfect images.

- R3000 has a wide gamut and are suitable to print the finest details even on small photos.

- I think it must be used very accurate tests to see whether black and white photos from this printer is visibly poorer than from the even more specialized black and white printers.

--------------

Otherwise, it is interesting to see that Canon's new Pixma Pro contains a total of 12 cartridges, including as much as 5 pieces grayscale cartridges.

 

Regards!

[Borbarad]

If the R3000 fits your needs just go for it. The R2880 was a slightly trickier choice but basically the R3000 now has all the same features as the R3880 (which I have and its an awesome printer). You will definitely not regret buying that one (apart from bigger is better )

 

B

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[250swb]

Previously I used two Canon 9000 A3 printers, one set up specifically for monochrome using bulk Lyson inks, and one for everyday colour.

 

The R3000 makes both redundant. Not only are the monochrome prints very much better, but the colour ones as well. I agree with all of janki's points about it and how it runs. The only thing I would highlight is that as a photo printer it doesn't readily default to general printing without you making sure the settings are correct. And although there is an 'economy' mode for when it swaps Photo Black and Matt Black inks, it does seem to want to do this for any little printing job unless you keep on top of what settings you have. I find for a quick simple letter its easier to let it think its a photo print and put up with the few seconds extra printing time. It is built like a tank but sits on the desk or worktop very easily despite its size as it all closes up to keep dust out. A fine machine.

 

Steve