What about the HP Z2100? Epson Killer?

[Gordon Moat]

Archival as a marketing aspect is an interesting approach. While in the world of art there have been some practices with oil on canvas that could ensure greater longevity, there has rarely been a situation of marketing one's oil painting practices and choices based upon archival aspects. However, inkjet companies would like to promote their equipment as perceptibly better, and one way to do that is to claim some archival aspect.

This has led to Wilhelm Imaging being the largest paid testing facility. It might be interesting to know that no solvent ink, nor UV cured ink based systems have been tested there. Just to give an example, using a flatbed solvent ink based printer to print an image onto hard material (metal, glass, Lucite, et al) can create a print that could be placed outside for three to five years, hosed or wiped off whenever needed, and in full exposure to daily sun and weather, and exhibit minimal changes (3 to 5 years being the normal warranty for places that do this sort of work). So if one of my images was printed using that solvent ink method onto a stable metal, then displayed under more controlled conditions in someone's house, I would expect it and the image on it, to be around for longer than I will be alive. Interestingly enough, because Wilhelm Imaging (nor any other company) has not tested this, there is no claim of an archival nature.

The other critical aspect against Wilhelm Imaging tests has been that they have restated early tests, or changed their ratings. This affects the confidence level of their accelerated tests. Interestingly, both Fuji and Kodak claim different results than Wilhelm Imaging for their colour materials. This is basically pick your poison: if you have confidence in Wilhelm Imaging, then read their tests on your favorite printer and paper combination.

If you offer a warranty or reprint guarantee on your images, then perhaps more detailed information might be important to give to those who purchase your images. I think any artist needs to be careful of the implications in claiming archival aspects of their works. It is largely a marketing term, though it may imply a warranty.

Just a side note on this. Optical Brightening Agents. The most common is flourescence , which has no known stabilizer. It fades to yellow as it ages. Paper companies will rarely ever indicate that they use this substance, yet it is very very common.

Ciao!

Gordon Moat
A G Studio

[Ted Harris]

Both Canon and HP pigment inks have archivability that rivals that of Epson's. I have not yet tested the HP (expecting my z3100 to arrive any day now) but reports from others that do volume professional work for high end clients (e.g. museums) indicate that they have had no pizza wheel problems. I know there have been reoprts on the internet but haven;t heard anything from real users who I know. Bruce, have you actually owned one of these and are the comments on the service from personal experience? My experience with tech support on the B9180 has been first rate.

Regarding the Canon printers (including the 17" 5000 which you left out), yup the menus are somewhat maddening until you understaned how to use them. Once you understand them, and they are somewhat counterintuitive, you can use non Canon papers with ease and with grea results. I have been using Red River, Moab, Epson and Hahnemuhle papers in the Canon printer with great success.

Regarding both the Canon and HP printers while they are technicall "first generation" that leaves a false impression since both companies have been manufacturing much larger ink jet printers for commercial printing for many years.

Right now, if I had to pick a wide format printer it would be one of the Canons hands down largely because of their export plugin which process in 16bits and sends images to the printer in a (I forget which 12 or 10 bit mode). I will be running the HP z3100 head-to-head with the new Canon 6100 sometime in the next few weeks. Stay tuned.

[Bruce Watson]

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).

That was fast! Here's Epson UK's announcements of the new Epson printer lineup.

[Charles]

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.

I found my customers asking for larger and larger prints for their homes (lots of trophy homes in this area with huge wall spaces). My customer support experience with HP and my HP130 was so awful I was not going to buy another HP under any circumstances.

I knew the issues with Epson with respect to head clogging, changing blacks, wastage, etc. That left Canon and having had good support over the years with Canon cameras and some of their general office products I decided to take a gamble with the IPF8000. I have no regrets. The documentation issue is true but whenever I've had a question I've found the Canon technical support able to assist me quickly.

When I first assembled my machine the print head vertical height was slightly out of spec and it nicked some types of paper. Rather than try and talk me through the calibration process Canon flew a tech from CA to adjust it onsite. The machine comes with one year onsite warranty. The tech fixed the problem in 45 minutes and was gone. Six months later the machine has been flawless with not one issue and zero head clogs.

I don't use Canon media. In fact, I use Epson papers and canvas from Breathing Color (which now has profiles for the 8000). The results are spectacular and consistent. I'm sorry if this sounds like an advertisement for Canon but I could not be happier.

An additional note: I basically shoot and print color but occasionally stray into the B&W field. In the past I was never able to achieve what I would consider gallery quality B&W from my HP or prior Epsons. The Canon delivers spot on B&W and prints in a 12 bit mode rather than 8 bit as other machines. Gradations are outstanding.

[Ted Harris]

I just installed my z3100 evaluation unit and ran off a couple of prints. So far so good, a very impressive machine. OTOH, if you only need 17" wide printing you can get a fantastic deal on a Canon iPF 5000 right now. Their are a couple of dealer sselling thme off in anticipation of the arrival of the 5100. And there are selling them off at $899 including the roll unit. This is at least 400 less than they were selling for a week ago and is a super buy. If I didn't have a 6100 on the way I'd snap one up.

[Doug Keyes]

My experience with the epson 9800, 7800, 7600, etc. has been good but I bought the z3100 in Feb. because I print mostly gloss and satin. I have always been disappointed with the gloss differential on the Epson and the few Canon prints I have done.

The z3100 was a bit of a headache the first months with HP updating firmware and drivers every couple of weeks. Now they have their act together with great documentation for each update. Profiling is very easy/straighforward. I have the APS profiling option (with 1000+patches) and it is an improvement (albeit minor for some images) over the provided software. My two interactions with tech support were great and I have found that HP is monitoring the Luminous Landscape discussion. So when people complain, HP is listening. I have been on LL most every day since I bought the printer in Feb. and the negative chatter has all but left the board there. A few people have complained about pizza wheel marks on the print or reds on matte/art papers but even that hasn't been mentioned in the last month or so. The new drivers and firmware updates have improved much of the issues. I haven't had any issues with image quality. My color satin prints are the closest thing I've done on an inkjet to a c-print. The b&w is the most neutral black I have seen out of an inkjet printer (but I'm not much of a b&w printer these days). The printer uses one or two blacks depending on paper setting and two greys.

I do mostly color gloss and satin prints so can't really comment about color on matte/art papers from a personal standpoint.

Pros-
gloss optimizer is the best thing since sliced bread for color gloss/satin prints. Eliminates gloss differential about 98% of the time (out of 50 completly different images, I've had one image with slight gloss differential when viewed from an extreme angle). Epson did it about 50% of the time on the exact same images. B&W is also very good. (good = all the usuals, gradations, detail in highlights/shadows, etc.) Prints faster than the epson. Paper is easy to load. Has web monitoring. Makes great profiles with the push of a few buttons. Inks don't clog. Heads are replaceable and inexpensive ($60). Ink is reasonably priced.

Cons-
Some have complained about gamut on uncoated/matte/art papers. In humid environments, some have experienced "pizza wheel" marks on prints. Mixed reviews on tech support. Few minor bugs with third party apps like Q-image but no more than any other printer.

One note on trying to quantify/read into complaints on any item on sites like these is that most comments are from people solving problems. When something works, very few bother to comment. The amount of different individuals having bad problems or that are unhappy with quality on the z3100 (that have bothered to write on LL or here) is very small. Surprisingly small for such a new, technically sophisticated product. HP obviously isn't new to this. Many people that are unhappy with this printer print soley on matte papers and this seems to be the z3100 weakest area for some colors (and strength for other colors). If you want your matte prints to match your current Canon or Epson prints they won't. Same goes for gloss prints albiet much less of a difference for most types of printing.

- Doug

[Ken Allen]

I run the Espon x8xx series printers and the Canon IPF9000. Since there is more information on the Epsons I won't add info there, but there seems to be less people with the Canon so here's a few more thoughts on pros and cons:

Canon (iPF9000) Pros: The extra color gamut may not be that much greater comapred to Epson Ultrachrome K3, and it will rarely make a difference, but when it does it's striking. When I get an image that I think will make a difference I try on both printers. So far a few times the Canon has really done great.
The 12 inks do seem to reduce that ever diminishing problem of metamerism.
The pro I bought the printer for: 60".

Cons: Poor software, and firmware. Often we get messages from the machine and it seems that there is a case of poor translation. What we would suppose the message means is not what it reaaly means. And often the menu's, instructions, or messages are vague.
My ink costs are way up over the smaller epsons, and the ink maintenance tank fills up quickly... that's where all my ink is going. Maybe this is a function of the larger format or the 12 inks, but it's concerning.
Moire! I am get bands on some prints where the images originated from drum scans, and they have a barely detectable scan pattern to them. This is NOT the clogged or miss-aligned head banding problem. It appears to be related to the dot patern. Print the same image on an Epson and there is no sign. Print a born digital or an Imacon scan and no sign of the problem either.
Other miscellaneous freaky things the printer does that make me and Canon tech support scratch their head.

[Don Kellogg]

In an effort to bring my personal decision making up to date on this thread, I have purchased and installed the Z3100 24" printer. So far I have been quite pleased with the set up and the the output. I do think that one needs to have reliable retailer technical support which I do. One of the things that I don't like is that to profile sheet stock of printer paper you have to tape three sheets together presently to make a 24" wide profiling target paper. Of course you can use the canned profiles but that negates the advantage of having the built in spectrophotometeer. It is my understanding that this will be remedied in the next firmware update which I have heard is due out in a couple of weeks. Another issue is that it is recommended that you keep the printer on (like a refrigerator) at all times. Periodically it fires up and goes through internal gyrations which can be unnerving if you, as I do, have it in a spare guest bedroom and your guest would wonder what was going on when the thing wakes up in the middle of the night.

Incidently, I have communicated with Charlie Cramer who also has purchased a Z3100also. His perference is for the coated papers because he feels that you can get better blacks with coated stock. He indicated a personal preference for the HP Premium satin finish paper which he felt resembled the matte surface Fuji Crystal Archive paper.

[Chris Strobel]

The only problem I see with these printers is for us B&W printers the lack of 3rd party support such as Jon Cones's pigments which I have started to use and love in my 4800.