Printer purchase advice

[Ron Marshall]

I would greatly appreciate advice on which printer to purchase. I am considering the Epson 1800 and 4000.

I wasn't planning on buying one this soon, but the current $300 rebate on the 4000 may be too good a deal to pass up. They are both great printers, but 16x20 would be nice, and with the rebate the 4000 is a great deal, since from what I have read it is in a different league than the 1800.

I am leaning toward the 4000 but there are two issues that I am considering. Firstly, how much better is the color gamut of the 1800 inkset compared to that of the 4000? Secondly, since I will also do lots of b/w will one be better than the other at b/w (using the Quadtone RIP)?

[Mike Chini]

You're much better off with the 4000 for B&W. There are numerous RIP options and 3rd party papers, inksets and general advice since the printer has been around a while. It will probably be a while before the r1800 will have any solid RIP support.

I think color gamut is really irrelevant (IMO) since I've seen results from the 2200, the Canon printers and others that are almost lifelike in appearance. So I recommend the 4000 but it is noisy and large so make sure you can handle a big printer like this. I've also heard that it clogs without steady use but I have no knowledge of this. The 2200 should be an option for you as well although it is not as well-built as the 4000 but it is really a top notch pro printer and an industry standard (for good reasons).

[Will Strain]

The best thing the 1800 has going for it is if you print glossy...

the overcoat (on the 800 and 1800) really does a nice job of minimizing the gloss differential... that and it's price point is very attractive.

The gamut is slightly different between the printers - but not as significant as the ability to use 3rd party rips with the 4000 (or even the 2200). I've had a hard time getting really good b&w prints from the 800...so I imagine the 1800 is the same.

One thing to consider, is if you have a budget for the 4000 - getting an 1800 for color and glossy, and getting a second printer to customize for b&w...

just a thought.

[Jay Lnch]

$300 rebate.... you know what that means. A super 4000 is just about to be released.

[Andre Noble]

You're much better with an enlarger for black and white.

[Paul Butzi]

One thing to consider is that the 1800 uses little ink cartridges.

The 4000 can use the great big 110ml ink cartridges used by the 7600 and 9600.

The difference in cost for the ink is substantial. It's quite possible the difference in printer price could be made up in cost savings just in ink purchases, if you print even a reasonable number of prints per month.

-Paul

[Robb Reed]

Ron,

I just recently (before the rebate -- curses!) purchased a 4000. It is still very early of course, but I have been pleasantly surprised by the quality of the B&W prints I've produced (from scanned 6X7 and 4X5 negs), especially the larger ones. If you should decide to get one I'd be interested to remain current on your progress with the beast (it is big!). I will do the same with my own sojourn into the digital world. I'm a novice, after many years in the darkroom. For example, I still don't know what the acronym RIP refers to.

Anyway, good luck with your decision and then with your printer, whichever you choose.

RR, in San Diego

[Rich Morgan]

Not sure if the rebate on the 4000 implies an update is coming. The 4000 has only been in the market for a year. I don't think Epson has ever updated a pro printer that quickly. Looking at their line, I expect the 2200, 7600 and 9600 to be replaced next, not the 4000. The 2200, 7600 and 9600 printers have been on the market for about 3 years and are due for replacement. The 4000 rebate may reflect a competitive response to the HP 130, which appears to be selling at least reasonably well. It offers 24" wide printing with dye inks they claim will last at least 82 years under glass, all for $1300. The printer doesn't handle paper well, but it's image quality is superb.

[Matt Wensing]

I've been mentally debating R1800/2200/4000 for several weeks now and the only conclusion I have been able to reach is that the 4000 does not logically make sense for me, given that I don't foresee a high demand for 16x20's in my near future (and certainly not present day). That said, outsourcing to a pro in the area with a 4000/RIP is $50 a pop.

I am almost ready to pull the trigger on getting the R1800, but the lack of RIP support was my most recent concern. According to Vincent Oliver of Photo-i, that may not be an issue (read his extensive R1800 review (http://www.photo-i.co.uk/Reviews/interactive/Epson%20R1800/page_7.htm" target="_blank)), as he was pleased with the black & white results.

Moreover, by the same review, specifications (droplet size), and common sense (the 2200 is after all 3 years old), the technology in the R1800 is superior to the 2200--look at the review for side-by-side print comparisons and tell me which you think is better (at best, they seem on par).

The real answer for me is probably going to be the replacement for the 2200, which the R1800 is supposedly not. However, the only reason why the R1800 is technically *not* the replacement for the 2200 is that the R1800 is not a 'professional' printer. I assume that means work load? But I am only printing a couple dozen prints a year, so maybe that means nothing to me.

I will be interested to know what you decide. Good luck!

[Al Seyle]

RIP=Raster Image Processor software. Converts image data into a pixel image. Getting "ripped" is something else entirely!

[Ron Marshall]

Many thanks to everyone for the prompt and thoughtful responses. Lots of useful information for me to ponder. I recently noticed the rebate on the 4000, but hadn't yet done any research on printers.

My only printing experience is traditional b/w, and that was 25 years ago, so I have lots of work to do.

Tomorrow I will have a close look at 1800 and 4000 print samples at the local Calumet. The HP 130 also seems to be worth a look, especially for its blacks, after reading the Digital Outback review.

Matt the 1800 does sound good. Have you considered the HP130. I hadn't, since I wasn't aware that the dye longevity issues had been solved. I seems to be a viable option. But I will have to check on ink prices. What Paul has said is probably the key issue here over the life of the printer, since the output of any of these printers would probably satisfy me.

Robb, I'll keep you informed of my progress if I get the 4000 and I would also appreciate any tips you might pass on.

[Ellis Vener]

Read what you will between these lines but if I were in the market for a new printer, I would take a few weeks to research different printers. There has been a lot of work going in creating new & much more archival inksets & papers with better performance and color by at least one major manufacturer.

[Shilesh Jani]

Hey Ron,

I have a lot of experience using inkjet printers. I have used a 1270, a couple of 1280s, a 2200, and the 4000. Over time my personal interest has evolved to b/w, so I can speak with a fair amount of experience. Currently I use a 1280 with cutom quadtone inks I designed (modified) from commericially available, and the 4000 using the Epson color inks.

The 4000 is identical to the 2200 for all purposes, except the 4000 has both matte and glossy blacks installed at the same time, and of course the 4000 can print up to 17" wide.

From my experience, if your primary interest is printing color on RC papers, then the 2200 and 4000 will show bronzing, which is only an issue when viewing prints at an angle. It annoys the heck out of me. But, coating with acrylic solves that very well. For color RC prints, you could use Canon (but fades fast) without bronzing. The new HP does a good job with fade resistance, but only with swellable polymer papers, which are NOT waterproof. And they do show some bronzing.

If you want to print color on 100% art papers, the Epson 2200 and 4000 are the only choice really.

As far as b/w is concerned, after having developed my own method, I can tell you quite confidently that 2200 or 4000 using a $50 share-ware RIP (QTR) works extremely well. You can use 100% cotton papers (DMax ~1.65) or RC papers (DMax ~2.1), and coat the RC papers to remove bronzing (DMax goes up to ~2.4). These prints can be cool, selenium, warm, sepia, or a number of combinations thereof. With HP models that use the gray inks you can get good prints straight away, but again you are restricted to swellable polymer papers, which are NOT waterproof. I find them fairly easy to smudge. And you cannot use 100% cotton papers.

The new R1800 is probably not a good choice if you plan on doing b/w. Because it does not have the light black ink (2200 and 4000 have), it is EXTREMELY difficult (perhaps impossible) to get neutral, metamerism-free b/w with full-on color inks.

In summary: There is no perfect solution. But an educated decision cab be made, along with accepting a few compromises.

Good luck.

[Shilesh Jani]

PS:

Send me an e-mail if you want me to mail you example prints.

Shilesh

[Ron Marshall]

Thank-you Shilesh, for your excellent summary. It has really brought me up to speed.

Is HP what you are alluding to Ellis? Thank-you, you're right I need to do more research. I won't let the rebate deadline constrain me, but hopefully I can decide in time.

I just read that an 18" version of the Hp130 will be available in June for about $1000.

But, as Shilesh has kindly mentioned, the inherent paper restrictions and possibility of smudging make it less appealing to me is spite of its competitive price.

[Matt Wensing]

I was told by something of a professional (Michael Gordon (http://www.mgordonphotography.com" target="_blank)) that the HP130 while excellent for glossy color is not a good choice for matte b&w. Others have said the same.

I will have to do more research on the 1800 lacking a light black ink. I was unaware of this difference between it and the 2200.

If money were no option I would go with the 4000 and feel confident about the b/w quality. I would still have difficulty getting the 2200 however, seeing as it seems so ripe for replacement in Epson's product line.

Of course, money is an issue, so the 1800 continues to hold my interest. I didn't know I could get sample prints at Calumet. We have one nearby. I'll have to check it out.

[Shilesh Jani]

Matt,

About the 2200, I would not be worried too much about it being "ripe for replacement". My logic goes that if it works for you today, surely it will work for you when the new printer is announced. What I can say about the 2200 and 4000 is that they are really a sound option if b/w printing is important. If not, the R1800 is a good choice for color on RC papers.

Using the R1800 as an example, you would think it was an improvement over ALL shortcomings of the 2200. Well as we now know it is not. In fact, the 1800 is better than 2200 in exactly one aspect, i.e., color printing on RC papers because of the gloss optimizer. OTOH, it is appears worse than the 2200 in b/w printing and printing color on matte papers. Now if color RC was your only preference, woohoo, it is perfect, right?

So, who is to say that the replacement of the 2200 will be better in all issues? We don't know what "customer needs" research Epson relies on. If they read forums, the ideal printer would be:

Faster than 2200
Have gloss and matte black ink at the same time (like the 4000)
Have gloss optimizer
Have ~1.5 pL drop size
Have high gamut color inks, and
Have 3 shades of gray inks

That is an 11 ink printer. Boy I hope they come out with it in the 17 inch carriage size. I would gladly pay $2000 for it.

Until then...........I am plugging away with what I have, quite happily.

[neil poulsen]

If you purchase the 4000, be wary about getting the RIP, one of the options versus the rebate. The RIP that ships with the printer doesn't support invoking 3rd party profiles. It only supports the Epson profiles. Unbelievable. That's not a RIP, it's more like a RIP-Off!

I just got a 4000, and I'm investigating using the rebate to get a different RIP. It might still be a ColorBurst RIP, just not the one that they ship with the printer.

[JohnnyV]

Here's another review of the R1800 - go 2/3rds down the page:

http://www.inkjetart.com/r1800/

Shilesh Jani nailed it in his posts! No need to add to it.

There's a very good chance the Epson 4000 will be replaced this summer.

[Kirk Gittings]

The 4000 is a great piece of equipment. I am a very picky printer and all my color commercial work and much the B&W and color for my upcoming retrospective show is being printed on the 4000. It is very versatile and professional. I bought mine before the rebate but it was a deal at the original price.

[Kirk Gittings]

Also I have been very happy with the ImagePrint rip. If you do both color and b&w it makes swithcing back and forth a seamless dream. Their profiles, I find far superior to Atkinson profiles that Epson supplies.