Picoliters

[Lenny Eiger]

Been searching the web for an hour... so I'll just ask.

Do any of you know where I can get a comparison of the picoliter sizes of all the Pro Epson printers?
Epson's web site tabs don't work and I can't get the specs from there... thought some of you might know...

Thanks,

Lenny

[sanking]

I don't know where you can see comparisons. But as to actual size, for the large carriage printers (24" and wider) it varies from 8 picoliter size for the 7000 generation, to 4 picoliters for the 7600/9600, to 3.5 picoliters for the 78007880/7900 generation printers. Also 3.5 picoliters for the 17" wide 3800/3880.

Also varies with smaller (13" wide) printers from 1.5 picoliter size for the (R1800, R2000) to 2.0 picoliters for the (R3000).

Does picoliter size matter? In my opinion, it matters some. On very smooth papers the printers with smaller picoliter sizes give prints with slightly more visible sharpness, if the image and file preparation itself allows.

Sandy

[Oren Grad]

Sandy has it in a nutshell, but if you need to look up specific models, the specifications tab in the B&H listing for each Epson printer includes the ink droplet size spec.

[Lenny Eiger]

I don't know where you can see comparisons. But as to actual size, for the large carriage printers (24" and wider) it varies from 8 picoliter size for the 7000 generation, to 4 picoliters for the 7600/9600, to 3.5 picoliters for the 78007880/7900 generation printers. Also 3.5 picoliters for the 17" wide 3800/3880.

Also varies with smaller (13" wide) printers from 1.5 picoliter size for the (R1800, R2000) to 2.0 picoliters for the (R3000).

Does picoliter size matter? In my opinion, it matters some. On very smooth papers the printers with smaller picoliter sizes give prints with slightly more visible sharpness, if the image and file preparation itself allows.

Sandy

Sandy and Oren,
Thanks for responding.

Oren, couldn't get the Specs tab on Epson's site to work on my browser... the link to B&H was perfect.

I am pretty sure that the size doesn't matter too much when printing, especially on absorbent rag papers, which is what I use... However, I am looking at making digital negatives, and my Roland's just don't cut it on the droplet size. They are 1440 x 1440, exquisite machines, but every piece of equipment is good for one purpose, maybe not another...

I would imagine that the droplet sizes do matter in terms of doing digital negs. I'm probably going to be looking at either a 7900 or 9900 so that I can work with a new inkset form Cone we are designing... The 9900 is at 3.5 - do you think this will work fine with QTR for digital negs? Or should I look for something smaller?

Also, isn't the 9900 getting a bit old, is there another printer coming in soon?

Thanks,

Lenny

[Andrew O'Neill]

My 4000 is 3.5 picolitres. I only use the printer for inkjet negatives and I'm quite happy with them... I've never seen negs from a printer that produces smaller droplets to make comparisons, though.

[8x10 user]

Does picoliter size matter? In my opinion, it matters some. On very smooth papers the printers with smaller picoliter sizes give prints with slightly more visible sharpness, if the image and file preparation itself allows.

Sandy

So many years ago I was interested in purchasing a large inkjet printer. I contacted a number of printer companies for samples and sales information. One printer that I looked at was the colorspan displaymaker (an early 12 color printer). The samples that I received were no where near as nice as the ones from Epson, HP, and Canon. I asked the salesman about the droplet size. He told me that a smaller droplet was a very important factor to the quality of their machines. I asked him what the smallest droplet size was and he replied 20 picoliters. I mentioned that other companies were advertising droplets as small as 3.5 picoliters. He got pissed and replied "who would buy a Fine Art printer from a copier company". A couple years later Colorspan was bought up by HP.

[8x10 user]

I also received very good samples from Roland. It sounds like Roland printers are very well built and would last a long time. Epsons seem like they can produce good quality but they might not be as reliable and are perhaps designed with planned obsolescence in mind. I believe Roland uses Epson print heads so I would wonder if they could upgrade your machine with the newest printheads, 2880 DPI output, and smaller droplet sizes?

[Lenny Eiger]

I also received very good samples from Roland. It sounds like Roland printers are very well built and would last a long time. Epsons seem like they can produce good quality but they might not be as reliable and are perhaps designed with planned obsolescence in mind. I believe Roland uses Epson print heads so I would wonder if they could upgrade your machine with the newest printheads, 2880 DPI output, and smaller droplet sizes?

Epson's look like a piece of junk next to a Roland, its true. Roland's are built to last, they are made of metal. All the parts are easily serviceable. They give you a video on how t maintain it. Changing out a damper is 5 seconds. Same with he windshield wipers... One even has access to the heads directly for cleaning. They can print 20 footer's all day long for years.

On the other hand, Epson controls everything. They won't give the codes to the RIP makers so that they can use the machines if they don't follow the rules. the rules include NOT letting people with Roland's use the 12 ink channels individually, certainly not going forward. That was the magic of this platform, and why it was so good for fine art. I am running one print environment with 11 inks... It's very nice...

However, Epson doesn't like it when people use non-Epson inks and/or paper. As I have said many times, their printers are great. Cheaply made, made to break, but they print very well. As a company, they stink.

Well, in fact, they don't make anything, the ink is from Cicada, the printers are probably made by Mutoh, the heads are made by Seiko. All they do is a little design and some marketing. Roland, Mutoh, Mimaki and Epson are in a kuritsu, a word that supposedly means "consortium". I think I would call it "mafia".

I would love to do what you suggest, but they would never allow it...

Lenny

[Jim Andrada]

Hi Lenny

It's "Keiretsu" (系列) = "affiliate(d)" as in "affiliated company" (Keiretsukaisha/系列会社). Maybe "Cartel" would be closer than "Mafia". There's usually a financial company/bank at the core of the group.

[sanking]

The newer Epson printers 3.5 picoliter printers may print faster and have better color than older 3.5 picoliter machines, but for making digital negatives with QTR they have no other advantage. I personally use a 7800 for large digital negatives and a R3000 for small digital negatives. If the two printers are set up with the same ink set one QTR profile gives almost identical results with both printers.

The large printers certainly offer advantages in that ink costs are much less when you buy it in 220 ml containers than in 30 ml cartridges ( or in larger bottles when you use a third party ink like Cone). Also, the smaller Epson printers that use the small priced wheels to guide media can cause what is known as pizza wheel marks on OHP materia.

That said, in a side-by-side comparison the 1.5 - 2.0 picoliter printers are capable of slightly sharper prints with carbon transfer when using hard surface papers, but on large matte papers that I hand size there is no advantage with the smaller picoliter printers.

Bear in mind that when you create a QTR profile for digital negatives you need to be as efficient as posible in choosing inks that block enough UV light to have some impact in exposure, but you should also avoid inks that block so much ink that they can not balance with the others. The goals are somewhat reversed from making a set for regular printing.

Sandy