24 inch Printer Advice

[bob carnie]

A client of mine is looking for a fancy new printer 24 inch , with profile making onboard would be a bonus for him. As well he may be interested to use the Cone Inks as well.
Any advice on current models, by those using them.

As well I am looking for a 24 inch unit in the fall when a couple of leases drop, I am not concerned about onboard profiling as I have the Xrite eye-one unit to make profiles.
What may be of interest to me is the ability to make digital negatives for alternative printing.
Currently I have a 60inch cannon ipf9000 and am very happy with the colour capabilites of this unit.
I use a lot of un-sized water colour paper on the machine so this is important to me.
I would like to hear about any other makes that users have and their thoughts about possible alternatives to the Cannon.

[Photomagica]

Bob,
The current Epson, Canon and HP 24" printers are all good machines. I've been using a 24" HP z3100 with excellent results. Recent driver upgrades seem to have put the early teething problems some users had to bed. I've now printed three major shows on the machine, including all the hundreds of proof images.

I've used mostly glossy/ satin type papers but recently did a large mat print B&W print and got a signing quality image on the first try. I got a machine with the Advance Profiling Solution and it really is magic. The profiles the machine makes are consistently equal to or better than manufacturers profiles, and the profiles can be tweaked if desired. The best part is the whole process is automated, a huge time saver.

The HP makes really strong B&W images with excellent ability to render subtle tonal separations. I tested the HP z3100 against the Epson 3800 and personally prefer the HP results. Given the quality of the HP B&W inks and drivers your client may want to look at this versus a 3rd party B&W solution.

I have made some digital negatives for a lith application with the HP. They did show star wheel marks - so the HP may not be the best choice for negatives. I was using a rather old type of film supplied by a client, who was happy with the negs. More current materials may give a different result, though I'd want to test an HP printer to make sure this would not be a problem if digital negs were important to me.

I've used large Epson printers quite a bit. I like them. My advice is to choose the printer with the best set of features to match needs and then work and work with the printer to really learn it. While I was already an experienced digital print maker and got good prints out of the HP right out of the box, I didn't feel that I had really mastered the printer and was getting the very best from it until I had to replace the first ink set.
Cheers,
Photomagica

[bob carnie]

Thanks for that, one of our clients have a 44HP and we mount the prints onto artcare foam, and she is using a HP current line with the densitometer. Her prints are quite nice, but she talks about a spray protection coating that is done with the HP which I found odd.
Is this an option when buying HP?? And on your 24inch??

[Daniel Stone]

Bob,

I have an IPF5100(17" model), and I love it. A friend of mine has the IPF6100(44") and loves it too. Inks are reasonably priced, but being that they only come in 130ml bottles, somewhat limiting compared to the 220ml ones from Epson. Not sure about 3rd party inks though, you might have to go to Epson for that(7900 from what I've heard is quite a nice printer).

don't you already have a 60" machine though? Seem to remember you mentioning something about it somewhere here or on APUG.

-Dan

[Photomagica]

I think the HP "spray protection coating" refers to the Gloss Enhancer. Unlike the Epson, which combines a gloss modifier with the inks themselves, the HP provides an additional cartridge that applies a very, very thin clear coat. On glossy RC papers you can actually hold an HP print under the tap with no ill effects! Some soft drink got splattered on a proof on Espon Premium Lustre and I was about to throw it out. Instead I tried gently wiping the spots off with a wet tissue. They came right off with no artifacts.

This is a standard feature on the HP z3100 and z3200 printers. While I don't use extremely glossy papers, a roll of RC high gloss came with the printer and I did a lot of proofing on it. I'd describe the result on the z3100 as the closest thing that I've seen to glossy Ilfochrome coming out of a pigment printer.

While no printer that I've seen entirely eliminates gloss differential, the current HPs and Epsons are so good they make this mostly a non issue. If you are really picky about gloss differential, different papers respond differently on the various printers, so some testing is required to find an optimum combination. I haven't spent enough time with the Canon to from an opinion about its abilities to handle gloss differentials.

[JeffKohn]

A client of mine is looking for a fancy new printer 24 inch , with profile making onboard would be a bonus for him. As well he may be interested to use the Cone Inks as well. If they want to use the Cone Inks, they'll need to stick to Epson, and the 7900 is not supported to my knowledge, so you won't be able to get onboard profiling.

Are they wanting to use the printer primarily for monochrome? Or a mix of color and monochrome? What about paper type: glossy/semi-gloss or matte (or both)?


As well I am looking for a 24 inch unit in the fall when a couple of leases drop, I am not concerned about onboard profiling as I have the Xrite eye-one unit to make profiles.
What may be of interest to me is the ability to make digital negatives for alternative printing.
Currently I have a 60inch cannon ipf9000 and am very happy with the colour capabilites of this unit.
If you like the ipf9000 you'll like the ipf6300 for a 24" model. The inks have improved in several ways, and so has the head technology.

[SergeyT]

...the HP provides an additional cartridge that applies a very, very thin clear coat...
Not really a coat under normal circumstances . It rather adds the Gloss Enhancer(GE) to the mix along with the other inks using special formula on the same heads assembly pass as the image gets printed. You can simply consider the GE being one of the 12 printer's inks.

[bob carnie]

Hi Jeff

This paticular photographer is really well known in Canada for his BW portraits so the possibiliy of Cone Inks would be a bonus .
But he is also known for his colour prints so he would need both options.
After talking to a couple of people with the Onboard densitometer I do not think this is a deal breaker, 24 inch printer current technology is probably suited for him.
I think he would also use matte and gloss for his various projects.

Personally : we are looking to purchase a 24 inch later this year. We started out with a Epson 76 and 9600 when we got into inkjet, Once we got the ipf9000 we gave away the Epsons as the upgrade was so impressive.
I am very happy with the Cannon , but I have heard a lot of good things about the current Epsons. In fact we borrowed one**epson24 inch** for a workshop project and it was a solid performer.

I have a Xrite Profile unit here so for me at least on board profiling is not an issue, I was just curious how those who use it feel about the benifits.


If they want to use the Cone Inks, they'll need to stick to Epson, and the 7900 is not supported to my knowledge, so you won't be able to get onboard profiling.

Are they wanting to use the printer primarily for monochrome? Or a mix of color and monochrome? What about paper type: glossy/semi-gloss or matte (or both)?


If you like the ipf9000 you'll like the ipf6300 for a 24" model. The inks have improved in several ways, and so has the head technology.

[bob carnie]

What exactly is this spray coating??
Is is something like the spray that Wedding Labs spray as protection on Prints.

I am really not too interested in this add on to every print we make. For example I am using a lot of uncoated watercolour paper lately, I really love the look and its almost dumbing down of colour. I am not so sure I want this spray coating on these prints.
For Gloss prints I use Lamda Fujiflex so most of our work with ink is on rougher papers.
Can the spray bar, or coating be disconnected ???


I think the HP "spray protection coating" refers to the Gloss Enhancer. Unlike the Epson, which combines a gloss modifier with the inks themselves, the HP provides an additional cartridge that applies a very, very thin clear coat. On glossy RC papers you can actually hold an HP print under the tap with no ill effects! Some soft drink got splattered on a proof on Espon Premium Lustre and I was about to throw it out. Instead I tried gently wiping the spots off with a wet tissue. They came right off with no artifacts.

This is a standard feature on the HP z3100 and z3200 printers. While I don't use extremely glossy papers, a roll of RC high gloss came with the printer and I did a lot of proofing on it. I'd describe the result on the z3100 as the closest thing that I've seen to glossy Ilfochrome coming out of a pigment printer.

While no printer that I've seen entirely eliminates gloss differential, the current HPs and Epsons are so good they make this mostly a non issue. If you are really picky about gloss differential, different papers respond differently on the various printers, so some testing is required to find an optimum combination. I haven't spent enough time with the Canon to from an opinion about its abilities to handle gloss differentials.

[bob carnie]

Yes we do have a 60 inch unit, but it really is awkward trying to make small prints on a large unit with taking paper in and out.

As well if you use a smaller roll the wear mechanisims or head travel can over time get distorted or worn unevenly and I fear that if I run a lot of small rolls there will become problems when we need good placement of ink on the left side of the printer on really large prints.

This fear may be unfounded, but it is the case with RA4 processors and any good technician would make sure that all sides of the processor got run.


Bob,

I have an IPF5100(17" model), and I love it. A friend of mine has the IPF6100(44") and loves it too. Inks are reasonably priced, but being that they only come in 130ml bottles, somewhat limiting compared to the 220ml ones from Epson. Not sure about 3rd party inks though, you might have to go to Epson for that(7900 from what I've heard is quite a nice printer).

don't you already have a 60" machine though? Seem to remember you mentioning something about it somewhere here or on APUG.

-Dan

[bob carnie]

Can you disable this spray??

Not really a coat under normal circumstances . It rather adds the Gloss Enhancer(GE) to the mix along with the other inks using special formula on the same heads assembly pass as the image gets printed. You can simply consider the GE being one of the 12 printer's inks.

[bob carnie]

Ok this thread took awhile to start but I also have a few other questions on current ink printers that may be relevant to my paticular needs.

Has anyone here, or does any one here know of a way to put paper back in the exact position to run a image or better said, masks layer that printon top of an existing image much like multiple hit platinums , or screen printing for a more simple example.

I have laid down a layer of ink ,, and then ran a image back over, much like flashing paper in the darkroom ,, some reasons would be a high contrast image(or cross process image with lots of contrast ) where you want to build up density.
But this was not done in perfect registration , rather the light ink or colour canvas was larger than the basic image.

I think the ability to build up ink with various elements of an image would be cool but the major draw back IMO would be registration, that may be solved by some pin system to start the process and then lift the paper off the pins before printing.
As well not letting the paper and ink dry and shrink , so therefor a print sequence ready to go before printing.

Any thoughts on current printers that may be able to exact register mask layers on top of existing ink laid down.

Also of all the ink printers , or inks running through these machines which unit, or inks would one consider most permanent.
I know what the manufactures will say but frankly their marketing bullshit goes in one ear and out the other.
I would like to proceed with a unit that has some type of archival properties, that have a good chance of lasting over a few hundred years in good storage and future lighting.

[Peter De Smidt]

Bob,

The best info on longevity that I know of is at: http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com/.

[bob carnie]

Thanks Peter


Bob,

The best info on longevity that I know of is at: http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com/.

[JeffKohn]

This paticular photographer is really well known in Canada for his BW portraits so the possibiliy of Cone Inks would be a bonus .
But he is also known for his colour prints so he would need both options.
After talking to a couple of people with the Onboard densitometer I do not think this is a deal breaker, 24 inch printer current technology is probably suited for him.
I think he would also use matte and gloss for his various projects.I wouldn't recommend the Epson for someone who wants to print on both gloss and matte, personally. The 7900 doesn't waste as much ink as the older models when swapping blacks, but there is still a swap process and it does waste some ink. Plus the Epsons tend to waste more ink in general on cleanings and clogs, especially if you're not a high-volume user (running the printer every day).



I am very happy with the Cannon , but I have heard a lot of good things about the current Epsons. In fact we borrowed one**epson24 inch** for a workshop project and it was a solid performer.The output from the Epsons are good, but so are the other brands. I would say the 7900 and 6300 are running neck and neck, with the HP just a bit behind (HP is due for a refresh, their model is quite a bit older than the other two).

About the "spray" on the HP's. It's a gloss optimizer, the idea being that by laying down some "clear" ink in the white areas, you ensure a uniform surface gloss over the entire print. Without it you could get what's called gloss differential, where when looking at the print at an angle you can see a difference in the gloss characteristic of the areas where ink is heavy versus areas where there is little or no ink. It's only used on glossy papers, not matte, and you can disable it in the media settings if you want. The HP needs this for high-gloss papers, though.

My experience with Canon Lucia and LuciaEx inks is that gloss differential just isn't a problem anymore, so a gloss optimizer isn't needed.

About archival ratings of the inks. From past testing, HP inks have had the best archival ratings, with Canon in 2nd place, and Epson a distant third. The 7900 and ipfx300 models have new inksets that haven't been extensively tested yet, but I don't expect the relative rankings to change. Aardenburg Imaging already has some 6300 samples beginning testing (I sent them in).

Here's a review you may find of interest: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/printers/x300.shtml

[Photomagica]

A couple of notes to add to my earlier post.

First I questioned whether the HP z series printers were the best for alternative process negatives. Apparently at least the z3200 is just fine and HP now supports the making of negatives. See this link:

http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/content_page.asp?cid=7-10053-10768

Also there has been some confusion about the HP Gloss Enhancer:

First - you can turn this on and off - so there is no need to use it with matte papers or even with glossy ones if you feel you do not need it.

Second - it is indeed a very thin over coat. In Full Sheet mode it is applied everywhere and you can sometimes see just a trace of it on the white sheet around the image. In Econo Mode - which I don't find useful - it is applied only to the non-white areas.

This is a different strategy than Epson's, where a gloss optimizer is mixed with the inks. Both strategies work well. I like HP's because it gives me a range of control not offered by Epson.

Cheers,
Photomagica

[bob carnie]

I quickly read both articles, one from Jeff and the other from photomagica. thank you both.

What I am beginning to feel is that all three units are basically at a level that my friend would be very happy with, I sense that each machine has a slight advantage/disadvantage over the others , but in a real world setting , prints hanging behind glass in a show would be difficult to tell apart by manufacture printer. ** if indeed you were luck enough to have all three or four units available to print a paticular show.**

I am interested in HP 's adventure into software for large ink negs, which for my particular setting would be useful to compare my Lambda Black White negatives to this units ink negatives.

I am a big fan of apples to apples testing and since we plan to make big negs , I would see the additional option of this software appealing.

How long would it take the other two to catch up?? months weeks?



So far no one has tackled my question about registration and multiple hit printing with a ink jet machine.
I would think there are those doing it, ** maybe not wanting to give away trade secrets**
This would be an amazing feature for a printer able to do as I think building up tones and contrast much like split printing would be a ton of fun.
And visually a improvement over a straight print pass.

[Jim Becia]

So far no one has tackled my question about registration and multiple hit printing with a ink jet machine.
I would think there are those doing it, ** maybe not wanting to give away trade secrets**
This would be an amazing feature for a printer able to do as I think building up tones and contrast much like split printing would be a ton of fun.
And visually a improvement over a straight print pass.


Bob,

I hope I remember this correctly, but I think that Craig Blacklock did a double pass printing on some b&w nude images. I am trying to remember where I read that and I think it might have been in an article in Outdoor Photographer. As I recall, he made a guide and just lined the paper up in the same spot each time. That being said, recently I sent a piece of paper through twice and the printing lined up just about perfectly and I wasn't trying to be perfectly aligned, so I imagine it can be done. (I'm using an Epson 9600.)

You might give his gallery a call and see if they can enlighten you about this. Hope this helps. Jim Becia

[Photomagica]

Bob,
Your assessment of it being impossible to tell which printer is which from prints under glass coincides with my view. I have shown my HP images in group shows with product from a variety of Epson printers and a Fuji Frontier. What shows up much more is the skill and preferences of the photographer/printer operator.

Were I buying another printer today I'd look at archival rating on the kinds of papers I want to use and usability for what I want to do. This last factor, as you note is best determined in apples to apples testing. For example, unless I had used the HP z3100 in the same studio as an Epson, I probably would not have fully appreciated HP's built in profiler.

The archival rating is of serious concern to both art buyers and gallery owners. I have had frequent questions about this and I've decided my response will be, "I use the most permanent papers and ink combinations available based upon scientific conservation testing". This commits me to keep up with developments in the field and to upgrade my printer from time to time to maintain the integrity of this statement.

About multiple hit printing, I have not done this. However it should be possible, as our current inkjet printers are derived from large format plotters that could competently move an architectural drawing back and forth. I think some testing would be needed with the various printers to see which, if any, have the built in ability to move a sheet back to the beginning without reloading or alternatively reload the sheet with pixel precision. If this feature is lacking perhaps a printer manufacturer could be persuaded to provide it in software, or alternatively a provider of 3rd party driver software like Qimage. Jim Becia's note on this, which I just saw as I was writing this is encouraging.
Cheers,
Photomagica

[bob carnie]

Thank you both for the responses

If the second pass is not critical due to lets say an spread second colour hit then I am sure that just lining up would be sufficient.
(lets say) If the second pass is to enhance sharp black detail as a skelatin black then sharp register would be of importance.

The fact that these printers are also designed for large format plotting, it makes total sense to have the paper just go back to a starting point rather than reloading the paper onto register pins.

Maybe this is a current feature that the main three who are not printers may think not relevant to our needs, and therefore not part of the package.
Thinking from their perspective, one should be able to lay down tone from a file without further enhancement, but I feel the ability to hit in detail, colour or contrast would improve dramatically the look of inkjet images.

I know that when I was laying down light skin tone colour it helped in the upper highlight areas of portraits and allowed me to concentrate a little bit more with the middle regions of the file.