Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
egibaud

Which Epson printer for M8 pictures?

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

David,

 

Thanks for the links and for the information. I might just send some test prints on to you. Are you saying you use the Durst for all your loose print work and then cut the roll to sizes? Is there a maximum size?

 

You don't have a noritsu hiding there, by chance?

 

What papers do you use on the Theta (and sorry for all the questions, just trying to get a sense of things)...

 

Thanks again for the link!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another vote for the B9180. I also have an Epson R1800, which I cannot wait to bin. It is unreliable, the roll feed goes wrong all the time, it drinks ink and UK Epson service is hopeless. If a print head blocks, you have to take it to a service centre for an expensive repair. The B9180, you can replace the print heads yourself. HP service, certainly here in France, is superb.

 

Wilson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you are only going to make a few prints, go with the Epson 3800. If you expect heavier use, then wait for the 4880.

 

I use a pair of 9800s. One has photo black and runs about 100 square feet of canvas every day. The other uses matte black and runs about 60 square feet of watercolor paper every day. Before these bad boys, I ran 9600s. Before that I had a 9000 and a 3000. Before that, I had an Iris and several Encads.

 

Epsons rock. I love them. Because my living depends on really good printers, I would never consider a HP. A Canon ahhh... maybe. But I've already placed my order for an 11880.

 

Yo might consider an Epson 7880. The M8 makes nice 20x30s.

 

My 2 cents

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jamie,

 

We use the Durst for 14x20 and up. For 12x18 and smaller we use Noritsu 3411s. For paper, we run Kodak Professional Endura Supra E (lustre), F (glossy), and Metallic surfaces. As a rule, we don't cut any prints, and just use the correct roll paper width (we have 5, 6, 8, 10, 11, 12, and 20 in every surface). Yes, that is a lot of paper magazines and a lot of paper testing.

 

Be happy to run samples, or send you some of my pictures.

 

David

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sorry for the confusion. The Gicleé is an inkjet print done on a large format Epson on fine art paper or cotton canvas. The $20 20x30 is a laser print on photographic paper, developed in chemistry (aka C Print/AgX/wet print). The reason the inkjet print costs more is that it takes one of our technicians considerably longer to produce one of these prints. We also do custom Photoshop to tweak the colors in specific tones in order to produce the best possible print. We may make four or five 8x10 test prints before we run out the 16x20. So we have a 50% waste factor to deal with as well.

 

The photographic print is made on a Durst Theta 51, which prints at 3"/second using red, green, and blue lasers. So in the time it takes to make one print on the Epson, we can make 100-200 on the Durst. So even though the Durst costs about 30 times as much it is also way more productive with far less waste and requires much, much less in terms of labor.

 

Hope that helps. Also, sorry for sad state of our website. We are in dire need of an update.

 

David

 

 

Sooo. . .which is "better?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am in the middle of a wonderful printing workshop being conducted by Charlie Cramer. He brought some samples of large (up to 40x50) prints done on the new Epson 11880 printer. I am going to assume that the smaller versions of the 880 series will have the same look and feel, just smaller size. The new 880 series uses what they call vivid magenta ink.

 

Bottom line is these are the best looking inkjet prints I have personally seen. If folks are seriously looking at getting a new, large format, printer, I would sure wait until these new Epsons are on the market. I believe release is targeted for shipments for Christmas

 

Woody

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I am in the middle of a wonderful printing workshop being conducted by Charlie Cramer. He brought some samples of large (up to 40x50) prints done on the new Epson 11880 printer. I am going to assume that the smaller versions of the 880 series will have the same look and feel, just smaller size. The new 880 series uses what they call vivid magenta ink.

 

Bottom line is these are the best looking inkjet prints I have personally seen. If folks are seriously looking at getting a new, large format, printer, I would sure wait until these new Epsons are on the market. I believe release is targeted for shipments for Christmas

 

Woody

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
.....

As far as archivability goes, this is a touchy subject. Photographic paper has a proven lifespan of 75-100 years. For-profit testers like Henry Wilhem rate inkjet at 200+ years.

 

You may want to check out not-for profit sources like the Image Permanence Institute at the Rochester Institute of Technology (IPI at RIT) for more unbiased testing. Wilhem receives $2,500 per paper/ink/printer combo he tests. For a new line of printers/inks, he may receive $750,000 for testing Epson's latest range of printers. So the results can be used in marketing materials, the testing time is extremely short. Common sense would dictate that if you basically have two (Epson and HP) customers that pay for your services, you may be interested in showing them in the best light. This paves the way for future mutually beneficial business. I'm not saying that he lies for them, but he can vary his testing methodology to be most beneficial to their product.

 

In a conversation with one of the IPI researches, he explaied that Wilhem only does accelerated visible light and UV testing, without getting into gaseous testing. Apparently, beyond a certain concentration of detrimental gases, you can't accelerate the tests. This means that testing would take months instead of weeks. In their tests, photographic paper is almost unnafected by atmospheric gases. Inkjet, on the other hand, is extremely sensitive to gases like ozone, CO2, and polutants......

 

David

 

You are correct, the longevity figures are based only upon exposure to light. UV light, handling, and molecular deterioration are the primary causes of paper deterioration. Of these the harm caused by deteriorative molecules is by far the greatest worry, and in the case of a white paper, the damage is often not visible (no color change). Because there are so many sources of these molecules (from the artifact itself, from wooden shelves and other adjacent materials, pollutants, both internal and external, and so on), much of the efforts in preventative conservation are concentrated here.

 

Some basic info can be found here,

http://www.conservationresources.com/Main/S%20CATALOG/TechnicalInfo.htm

 

While some pollutants will react directly with the emulsion or an image, typically what happens to paper (and all paper is vulnerable) is the pollutants react with moisture to form acids, and these attack the paper structure (see the link above).

 

A short article which provides more information is here,

http://palimpsest.stanford.edu/waac/wn/wn18/wn18-1/wn18-106.html

 

this image shows pollutant damage to a color (type C) print,

 

 

and this image is of two negatives subjected to pollutants -

the text with the image reads,

 

 

 

Two identical 35mm negatives were tested. One was covered with MicroChamber paper, the other with a high quality, alkaline-buffered alpha cellulose paper. Together, they were exposed to an atmosphere containing 2000 ppm oxidizing gas (H2O2) and 330 ppm acid gas (NO2) for 18 hours at 50°C, 80% RH. The negative covered by the archival paper, which was twice as thick as the MicroChamber paper, was severely damaged. The yellow color is characteristic of oxidative gas damage, while the visible pattern of crystalline deposits on the base side of the negative appears to be the result of the NO2, or the interaction of the NO2 with the H2O2.

 

These people make a museum board called Artcare, which addresses the issue of pollutants,

http://www.nielsen-bainbridge.com/bainbridge/NB-ACCaseSupreme.html

 

I always use their board and UV inhibiting glass when I have a print framed. If you use a good archival paper, and pigment inks, and keep the light and pollutants away from it, the print should last a very long time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have never really been clear on what a Gicleé is other than a high quality inkjet print

 

It's just an inkjet print. It's a word that's used to make people think they're getting something exotic - heck, it's a foreign word isn't it? It's perhaps a way of allowing stupid people happily pay more than they ought to for an inkjet print.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah Steve--right to the point! And completely correct!

 

However, the use of giclee is one way of distinguishing the $80 inkjet printer and associated printing and media from a 4800, 7800 or 9800 and fine art media, and the care that goes into printing.

 

Yes, they're both inkjet processes. But no, I don't know anyone claiming giclee printing from a bargain-basement Epson or HP

 

After all, you wouldn't expect to eat "cow" at a steakhouse, now, would you?

Though many's the time I've "eaten crow." LOL!!! Sorry... way OT!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have both the HP B9180 and the Canon IPF5000. Both printers are excellent and are work horses. I've had a couple of issues with the Canon and their customer service is excellent. They sent a technician to my house the next day from Nashville 2 hours away! I use the HP for 13X19 and below and the Canon for larger prints. If you calibrate, the colors for both are smack on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought I would chime in:

 

We use HP 3100z / Canon 9000 / Epsons new 11880 / Epson 9800's at Adamson Editions

At this time all are state of the art in inkjet printing with very very slight differences in image quality, noticeable only with extreme critical inspection to thise that would know what to look for.

We are blessed to be at a time when we are spoiled for choice in superb quality equipment and I find the real deciding factor is scanning, original image quality and operator experience.

Henry Wilhelms tests do include gasseous testing , one thing to note is that Kodaks tests for there papers are spurious at best.

Kodak are the only ones in the industry to have there own test parameters that are skewed to favourable results for there products.

If one uses Kodaks testing procedures an Epson print on photo lustre has a longevity of 1200 years ! - or looking at it another way using Wilhelms test methods on Kodak papers the Kodak's longevity is 16 years not the 100 they come up with.

As for the word Giclee, Jack Duganne then at Nash editions and myself had a conversation in 1994 about what to call these new Iris prints (no one wanted to know about inkjet prints) I asked Jack what the word to spray in french was and he thought it was Giclee, which is to spurt,spray and ejaculate ! So a term was born.

Luckily Giclee was adopted by the mass market of low end prints, most reputable studios stuck to there guns and named the prints for what they were, Iris prints,inkjet prints,archival pigment prints.etc

 

So now we have a clear divide of product lines.

 

What printer makes the best M8 prints - really any of the above in the right hands!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Walt

I would go with David on this question--all are exellent printers and differences in printing will have much more to do with the original, the quality of system calibration (from monitor through printer/ink/paper) and operator skill and taste. The one limitation here is that the HP 9180 is a two-black printer and certainly not the first choice for BW. The others are three black or four black systems (the 3100 uses MK and PK together for an MK print, making four blacks).

 

Walt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I purchased a 3800 not long ago, and my first results are very promising; it's really fun to work with the different profiles provided by the paper-makers (Hahnemuehle, Epson, Moab and Crane), and I am quite pleased with the fact that, in case you use the PS "Print with preview" and turn colour management to "off" in the 3800's driver window, the process offers "WYSIWYG"; you have to take care, though, to use the paper company's information about which kind of matching Epson paper to choose in the driver window; I convert the RAWs of my M8 with C1, apply subtle corrections and sharpen (USM) with PS; I changed from matte to glossy a couple of times, and this is very easy with the 3800 and does not cost a fortune in ink

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
For those people using Epson printers and papers I would highly recommend trying out Bill Atkinsons profiles. No one has done more research and spent more time to provide these tools to all of us at no charge. Bill Atkinson Nature Photography

 

Woody Spedden

 

Woody--unless Bill has updated them recently I wouldn't be recommending them anymore.

 

At one point thy were de riguer on the Epsons because the included profiles were just so bad. Heck, I even used Bill's 9600 profiles on my 2200 and there was a decisive improvement.

 

But the newest Epson profiles for their K3 inks are excellent (and I still do my own, but out of the box the Epson ones are really good).

 

In fact, rather than buy anyone's generic profiles, it would pay folks here to get custom ones done (or move to a RIP).

 

But again, with the newest print drivers and profiles, you don't really need to do that anymore.

 

@ David A--thanks for the longevity information and advice about where the term giclee came from. Now we know who to blame

(just kidding!)

Interesting you think it's become a "low-market" term; I don't think that's universal though...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I thought I would chime in:

 

As for the word Giclee, Jack Duganne then at Nash editions and myself had a conversation in 1994 about what to call these new Iris prints (no one wanted to know about inkjet prints) I asked Jack what the word to spray in french was and he thought it was Giclee, which is to spurt,spray and ejaculate ! So a term was born.

Luckily Giclee was adopted by the mass market of low end prints, most reputable studios stuck to there guns and named the prints for what they were, Iris prints,inkjet prints,archival pigment prints.etc

 

 

 

The urban legand has it that Jack was also the man who thought up "Please don't squeeze the Charmin". Whatever the case, thanks guys. Shooting paintings and printing giclees is a wonderful way to make a living. (Compared to film seps and bump plates on an old berg.)

 

Tom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

David A--thanks for the longevity information and advice about where the term giclee came from. Now we know who to blame

(just kidding!)

Interesting you think it's become a "low-market" term; I don't think that's universal though...

 

When I say Giclee is a "Low- end market" it is in fact a universal understanding in the fine art marketplace. By low - end I mean price wise and critical acclaim.

Understand that the Fine art marketplace is rigidly structured and quite snobish in what is accepted. I am talking about the top 10% of the market in general, however, it is this top tier that is shown in Museums and high end galleries as well as showing up in auction houses.

If one looks at the past three years auctions of Fine art photography at Major auction houses ie. Christies, Phillips,Sotheby's you will see many digital prints for sale. None are classified as Giclee prints, rather they are classified as what they are ie. Lambda, Iris,Pigment. The same holds true of museum collections, when a digital image passes into the collection the process is attributed in the same manner.

Giclee the term has stuck but at the low-end of the market, that is not to say that this low end does not generate huge volumes of work for sale.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
{Snipped}If one looks at the past three years auctions of Fine art photography at Major auction houses ie. Christies, Phillips,Sotheby's you will see many digital prints for sale. None are classified as Giclee prints, rather they are classified as what they are ie. Lambda, Iris,Pigment. The same holds true of museum collections, when a digital image passes into the collection the process is attributed in the same manner.

Giclee the term has stuck but at the low-end of the market, that is not to say that this low end does not generate huge volumes of work for sale.

 

David--thanks! It's interesting to see how the truly high-end market appropriates the media term itself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Giclee the term has stuck but at the low-end of the market, that is not to say that this low end does not generate huge volumes of work for sale.

 

In my experience, artists and galleries sell giclees at about 10% of the price of the original painting. This puts these reproductions at the $50 to $1,500 price range. Yes, that is low end. But if an original sells for $10,000 (average good working artist) and a good giclee of that painting brings $1,000 in an edition of say 250, the giclee prints are worth $250,000. Less expenses the net is probably closer to $75,000 for the artist.

 

I deal with about 200 artists and galleries with about 30 or so seriously running editions. The biggest sells around 100 giclees per month and the second biggest sells around 30. Most sell about a dozen, or so, every month adding thousands of dollars to their annual income. Not bad for "low end" prints.

 

In the time it took to type this, a photographer came in and ordered two 36x54 canvas gallery wrap giclees from her 5D files. She also ordered a few 11x14 ultrachromes - my term for Epson prints on the Epson premium paper stocks or on Cranes Museo Silver Rag or Hahnemuhle FineArt Pearl. I call the same prints giclees only when they are pulled on watercolor paper (and only because this is what my customers call them).

 

If I called giclees "archival pigment prints" - which they are - it would only confuse my customers. They (painters) sell originals, giclees, laser prints and cards. Change a name and they get flustered. Photographers, on the other hand, are so much more informed. Most want to know the printer used, the print resolution, the paper stock and how they expect the print to look. They would be happy to use the term "archival pigment print" to separate themselves from painters.

 

Just my 2 cents.

 

Tom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...