What about the HP Z2100? Epson Killer?

[Don Kellogg]

I find myself in the market for a new printer. I make a lot of large prints and have been looking at the variuos Epson iterations. It was interesting therefore to visit one of the high end retailers in our area (Jim at Bear Imaging in Palo Alto) who was enthusiastic about the new Z series HP printers. He indicated that HP has come on this a vengeance into the fine art printer market with the departure of Carly at HP. As a matter of fact he indicated that they are no longer stocking Epson printers in their store and they are a special order item for them. The fact that the Z2100 has a built in Gretag MacBeth spectrophotometer on board seems like a real advantage if you are using multiple papers. How valuable do you think this is if you are primarily using only one paper? I have also noted that HP is fairly aggressively priced especially with the $500.00 and media discount that they are currently offering. Does anyone have any personal experience with this generation of large format printers? I am aware of the review on Luminous Landscape and the thread in this forum about the HP B9180 but would like other opinions on the large carriage printers. Be Calm.

[PViapiano]

You mean the Z3100, right?

Well, on the Luminous Landscape printing forum, there seems to be a lot of threads every day devoted to this printer, but there also seems to be a lot of complaints.

I've never been a fan of HP, but I haven't seen this latest batch of printers for myself.

[Ron Marshall]

You mean the Z3100, right?

Well, on the Luminous Landscape printing forum, there seems to be a lot of threads every day devoted to this printer, but there also seems to be a lot of complaints.

I've never been a fan of HP, but I haven't seen this latest batch of printers for myself.

The 2100 is an 8 ink printer, the 3100 12 ink.

[Gordon Moat]

Seriously the print quality will be so close that operating cost might become your largest basis of comparison. Just on a simple way of looking at this, a 12 ink printer will cost more per print than an 8 ink printer. Every business comparison and independent test I have seen usually has the Epson printers at the greater expense per square foot of output. However, the costs are close, so if you don't print that much, there might be less difference. One bigger issue on the Epson printers is wasting ink after the printer sits idle, which could actually increase your per print expenses more.

I have more experience with the HP DesignJet 90 and 130 with the spectrophotometer, and then only when running those through a RIP. If you want to run the non-RIP interface, then I don't know if it will be that much of a difference to using an external spectrophotometer (X-rite, etc.) with an Epson.

Technically, every change in temperature and humidity will alter your prints. Even going from one set of ink cartridges to another could alter your prints slightly. So a spectrophotometer can help you stay closer print per print as ambient conditions change, or as you buy another batch of paper, or another set of cartridges. Just because you only buy one paper does not mean each packet is exactly the same.

If you go with Epson, you have an internet full of people discussing their problems, work-arounds, and fixes. There is far less information on HP printers.

Ciao!

Gordon Moat
A G Studio

[Brian Ellis]

"As a matter of fact he indicated that they are no longer stocking Epson printers in their store and they are a special order item for them."

Just curious - did he explain his rationale for this business decision? Not stocking the most popular line of photographic printers in the world doesn't seem like a very good idea for a retailer who wants to stay in business. Kind of like an automobile dealer discontinuing Toyotas to concentrate on Plymouths.

But as to the use of the profiling capability - I'd say it's of no practical importance if you use only one or two papers. The canned profiles from the manufacturers have become very good in my experience (with Epson, Hahnemuhle, and Moab papers) or for $50 you can have a custom profile made for you.

I was kind of intrigued by the new HP printers when they were first announced but the price for the model with the built-in spectrophotometers put me off a little. But more importantly to me, I've seen too many companies decide to get into some sort of high-end product with a lot of fanfare and then get out of it a year or two later when there's been yet another change in the executive suite. Epson has been at this for a long long time. Maybe HP is really in it for good and if so that's great for all of us but I plan to wait a few years before giving serious consideration to their higher-end printers.

[Howard Slavitt]

If you're only using one paper, or two (like me), then the built in profiling of the HP printers offers no advantage, IMHO. While it's true that there may be some changes in color with different batches of ink and different humidity, how precise do you really need to be (perfection is unobtainable)? How often do you plan on profiling the paper and ink? The built in HP profiling is less precise than you can get using separate profiling devices -- the best profiles are probably made using Bill Atkinson's 4,000 patch charts, which the HP can't use (I think it can at most use 1,000 patch charts). Also, how long, and how much time, will it take you to become a profile building expert? You can get the best profiles possible for $100 each from Andrew Rodney, or you can get less expensive very good profiles from several other places that will still likely be as good as or better than what you can make with the HP built in profiling device. Even if you have profiles made twice a year (which is plenty, in my experience), you'll end up with better profiles at less cost than learning how to do it yourself. . . The Epson 3800 is a great machine. If you're concerned about cost, then you should look at it along with anything else you're considering.

[Brian Ellis]

I just happened to notice in another forum that there's a sale now going on for a ColorVision Print Fix Pro spectro - $295, by far the lowest price I remember seeing for a sprectro that has a very good repuation. An Epson 3800 for $1100 and this spectro for $295 should be a killer combination if you're interested in learning to make your own profiles.

http://www.calibration-direct.com/pr...MCrpqL0ro0CFQu
ColorVision Print Fix Pro

[Bruce Watson]

The "big three" of Epson, HP, and Canon all have their quirks. With the right papers and profiles any of them can make a print that will knock your socks off. That said they all have their quirks. My read on the market, and I'm hardly an expert, I've just been watching it for years (my Epson 7600 is four years old now), is this:

Epson (x8xx printers) Pros: Current printers are a 4th generation product that works quite well. Epson has decent phone support and a well established if expensive network of on-site service. There's a wealth of information on the web and many experienced people on various Internet groups to give additional support. They work. Right out of the box.

Cons: Has the matte/gloss black ink problem (you can only load one at a time, and switching is a royal PITA, and expensive). They are slow compared to HP and Canon, Epson biases their driver and media selections toward their own branded papers making it somewhat more problematic to use 3rd party papers, but you can profile 3rd party substrates fairly straightforwardly. They really don't want you using 3rd party inks -- they come out with a new cartridge and chip design every time they bring a new printer to market. Expensive service.

Canon (iPF9000, 8000) Pros: Fastest of the group. Built like they mean it. User replaceable heads. Ink stirrers to avoid ink settling. Full monitoring of nozzles while printing and active clog handling while printing. Both matte and gloss black inks loaded at the same time for easy switching.

Cons: First generation wide format printer. Their driver and media selections are nearly draconian in their efforts to keep you from using other than Canon media. Very difficult to find the right settings to use with 3rd party substrates and thus very difficult to profile correctly. Horrible documentation. Draconian warranty on print heads, inks. The 12 ink system doesn't seem to give much if any gamut advantage compared to the Epson's eight channel printers.

HP (z3100 printers) Pros: Built in spectrophotometer that builds good solid profiles (nearly) automatically. Real-time nozzle monitoring similar to Canon. 12 inks, but a different configuration from Canon; includes a gloss optimizer. Outstanding prints on gloss papers. Excellent B&W printing from standard inkset, especially on glossy papers. Both matte and gloss black inks loaded at the same time.

Cons: First generation printer. Iffy warranty service, iffy customer service, and a paper handling system that uses friction feed and pizza wheels instead of a vacuum belt transport. The irony is that HP optimized for gloss media, and their transport can leave marks on gloss media. Performance on matte papers not up to glossy paper standards, but driver updates are improving the situation.

I'm sure I've left stuff out and please anyone who wants to chime in please make additions/corrections as needed. I'm by no means an expert, but I've been watching from the sidelines like many others.

To be sure, watch for the upcoming announcements (next 4-6 weeks) of Epson's new printer lineup, which will include a new 64" wide printer and replacements for the x8xx series (a fifth generation of wide format printers).

[Gordon Moat]

Just to add to Bruce Watsons excellent post, the HP 5500 DesignJet and HP 130 DesignJet. Both are dye ink printers, though if you are a fan of Wilhelm Imaging tests the results are comparible to similar sized Epson printers.

An interesting conversation I had with a local HP engineer (one of the HP wide printing centers is in San Diego county) indicated to me that market decisions drove them towards pigment ink printers. There seems to be a lingering bias against dye ink printers, based upon lower specification earlier models of many years ago, which did perform quite poorly. When that conversation occurred, I was also under the impression that HP will continue to produce both dye ink and pigment ink printers. They also have some very large, very expensive, and very heavy printers that use other types of ink (solvent, UV cured, etc.).

I encourage anyone looking at these wide printers to look into the operating costs. Look beyond the purchase price in comparisons. Check into how quickly a printer can be repaired, or if they offer a same-day or next-day replacement (sometimes extra cost at purchase, or only for the first year).

Finally, try to learn how to run a RIP, and forget about profiles. Your ink savings over the long run can make up the cost of the RIP software in many cases. Profiles are a kludge, despite that they work well for some people. Anyway, just my opinion.

Ciao!

Gordon Moat
A G Studio

[adrian tyler]

what about the archivability of the hp inks? the epson k3 inks seem to have a market acceptance? important for selling prints perhaps...