P800 Report

[cortlander]

That feature alone would be worth the upgrade price

I knew you guys would love this!

I was just astonished that it is not there in the documentation.

[Mark D Segal]

I knew you guys would love this!

I was just astonished that it is not there in the documentation.

At the bottom of page 112 of the manual it says:

Note: The ink type may change depending on the size and type of paper you select. To avoid
changing black ink more often than necessary, set the printer to the type of black ink you usually
use.

On page 138 it says:

Your product switches the black ink type automatically, depending on the type of media you load.
Because this process consumes some ink, so you should avoid switching black ink more often than
necessary and select a default black ink type for the type of media you print on most often.

Hence if you have manually created a mismatch, it's not allowing it.

[cortlander]

At the bottom of page 112 of the manual it says:

Note: The ink type may change depending on the size and type of paper you select. To avoid
changing black ink more often than necessary, set the printer to the type of black ink you usually
use.

On page 138 it says:

Your product switches the black ink type automatically, depending on the type of media you load.
Because this process consumes some ink, so you should avoid switching black ink more often than
necessary and select a default black ink type for the type of media you print on most often.

Hence if you have manually created a mismatch, it's not allowing it.

Yes, I get that, and they did a good job in explaining the default behavior. But they do not document how this can be over-ridden. Seems like a great feature that was missing in 3880 and has been added in the P800. If I accidentally made a choice that would waste some ink, the option to confirm that is nice.

[hugowolf]

Yes, I get that, and they did a good job in explaining the default behavior. But they do not document how this can be over-ridden. Seems like a great feature that was missing in 3880 and has been added in the P800. If I accidentally made a choice that would waste some ink, the option to confirm that is nice.

It was, and still is, there on Epson wider format roll feed printers of a similar age: a dialog that asks whether you want to proceed with the MK/PK switch.

I think the bigger question is why continue with the hated PK/MK switching at all? On demand PK and MK would really make a big difference to many people switching from Epson to Canon.

Brian A

[Mark D Segal]

,,,,,,,,,,

I think the bigger question is why continue with the hated PK/MK switching at all? On demand PK and MK would really make a big difference to many people switching from Epson to Canon.

Brian A

Brian, I really wonder about this. There was a time a decade or so ago when this ink switch was a much bigger deal (time and ink consumption) than it is today. These days the round-trip is about 4 ml and the time it takes is very little. So how "hated" it should be, objectively speaking, is dubious, and all the more so when volume printers can schedule production to manage the amount of round-tripping efficiently. Were it me (and I agree I'm not everybody), that one feature alone would motivate me to use Canon rather than Epson printers. We can be sure that Epson knows exactly what their competitors are doing in this area but have made a conscious decision to stick with the switching. I'm guessing now, but I suspect the trade-off would be a larger mechanism affecting the overall size and design of the printer itself. The P800 would be competing with the IPF 5100, which is a special order item from B&H, costing 1700 dollars, weighing 108 pounds and also much larger machine.

[hugowolf]

I think the main reason the Canon ipf5100 is so much larger is the dual head system, and like the 4900, vacuum feed. Two heads are bigger than one, and you need room at the sides to park them.

Brian A

[Mark D Segal]

I think the main reason the Canon ipf5100 is so much larger is the dual head system, and like the 4900, vacuum feed. Two heads are bigger than one, and you need room at the sides to park them.

Brian A

Makes sense.

[Nora_nor]

I happened to surf on alibaba.com and they have images of what epson print heads look like.
The 3800 printheads have 8 connections  and nozzles for ink, so there is no room for a 9th, the matte ink.

Same with head for 4900, there is no place for an extra matte black ink....

By the way, direct-to garment (dtg) printers use modified pigment ink printers, amongst them the epson 3800. That is a good sign re. clogging. (and alibaba has new printheads if the dtg printer´s printhead does not work anymore, printing t-shirts must be rough on printheads)

What will the dtg printers do now when the production of epson 3800 has stopped?

I guess the SC P800 is of the same concept as the 3800 and might be clog resistant  by design. ...I hope (not talking about the garment printers)

[Landscapes]

Brian, I really wonder about this. There was a time a decade or so ago when this ink switch was a much bigger deal (time and ink consumption) than it is today. These days the round-trip is about 4 ml and the time it takes is very little. So how "hated" it should be, objectively speaking, is dubious, and all the more so when volume printers can schedule production to manage the amount of round-tripping efficiently. Were it me (and I agree I'm not everybody), that one feature alone would motivate me to use Canon rather than Epson printers. We can be sure that Epson knows exactly what their competitors are doing in this area but have made a conscious decision to stick with the switching. I'm guessing now, but I suspect the trade-off would be a larger mechanism affecting the overall size and design of the printer itself. The P800 would be competing with the IPF 5100, which is a special order item from B&H, costing 1700 dollars, weighing 108 pounds and also much larger machine.

I think Epson has really dropped the ball on not having this feature since after the Epson 4000 from what I can remember where they added the extra black and hence lost the ability to have dual channels for both PK and MK ink.  I think to waste 4mL of ink is actually too much.  That is good enough for 4 or so 8x10 prints, or one 16x20.  Why should think ink go down the waste tank, and hence make you even have to replace the waste tank sooner.  First you pay to buy the ink, then you have to pay more to dispose of it since it isn't going on paper.

Perhaps the bigger issue from what I read though is the ink switching actually perhaps introduces air into the system thereby making the ink switching be a source of some of the clogging.  I have no experience since I don't own any Epson printers, but logically this makes sense.

I actually see no reason why anyone would buy an Epson printer these days over the Canon except maybe for the straight paper feed path.  It is true that if you want a 17 inch model, the Canon offer is too old and I wouldn't consider a 5100 at this point, but for 24" and over, the Canon should really be your only choice, which is of course just my opinion.

[Mark D Segal]

........... actually perhaps introduces air ................  I have no experience since I don't own any Epson printers, but logically this makes sense.

"Actually" connotes a more definitive position than "perhaps", so "perhaps" you don't really know - even whether "logically this makes sense". And BTW, it's not a matter of logic; it depends on how the machine was designed. Not so say that silly things can't happen, but it would boggle the mind to think that Epson's engineers designed a process to introduce air where there should be none - even if in error - and persisted with that error over the past ten years of accumulated user experience all over the world. Just think about it.

[Alan Goldhammer]

I think Epson has really dropped the ball on not having this feature since after the Epson 4000 from what I can remember where they added the extra black and hence lost the ability to have dual channels for both PK and MK ink.  I think to waste 4mL of ink is actually too much.  That is good enough for 4 or so 8x10 prints, or one 16x20.  Why should think ink go down the waste tank, and hence make you even have to replace the waste tank sooner.  First you pay to buy the ink, then you have to pay more to dispose of it since it isn't going on paper.

Perhaps the bigger issue from what I read though is the ink switching actually perhaps introduces air into the system thereby making the ink switching be a source of some of the clogging.  I have no experience since I don't own any Epson printers, but logically this makes sense.

I actually see no reason why anyone would buy an Epson printer these days over the Canon except maybe for the straight paper feed path.  It is true that if you want a 17 inch model, the Canon offer is too old and I wouldn't consider a 5100 at this point, but for 24" and over, the Canon should really be your only choice, which is of course just my opinion.

Horse doo doo, to be polite.  I have had a 3880 for four+ years now and I finally had to replace the maintenance tank two weeks ago.  I regularly print with both PK and MK inks and the amount of wasted ink is really only a minor irritant in my mind.  I don't need to print any bigger than 17 inches wide and Epson are the only game in town in that regard.  The gamut size is fine and I've not had any complaints about the color in prints that I've sold.  My printer has never had a clogged nozzle and I've gone as long as three months between printing.

I guess I might be interested in a p800 particularly becuase of it's monochrome performance but as it looks like my 3880 will never break down I have a rather long wait.

[jrsforums]

Black ink changes.....this is purely a guess....however, I suspect there is a good reason to switch the blacks.

For example, if I do a lot of printing with papers using PK ink and little matte printing using MK, the MK line and nozzles will get little to no use for and extended period of time.  When I want to use MK, I would expect the nozzles would surely be dried out and clogged solid. 

[Mark D Segal]

Black ink changes.....this is purely a guess....however, I suspect there is a good reason to switch the blacks.

For example, if I do a lot of printing with papers using PK ink and little matte printing using MK, the MK line and nozzles will get little to no use for and extended period of time.  When I want to use MK, I would expect the nozzles would surely be dried out and clogged solid. 

The problem could more likely be expired ink from not using one of them (my case - I haven't printed a sheet of matte in my 4900 since I bought it in 2011). I believe (not 100% sure) MK and PK share the same lines and nozzles, hence the switching, so they are always wet with one or the other. Another concern could be residual ink of the wrong type after switching, but I haven't seen a history of complaints about this.

[jrsforums]

The problem could more likely be expired ink from not using one of them (my case - I haven't printed a sheet of matte in my 4900 since I bought it in 2011). I believe (not 100% sure) MK and PK share the same lines and nozzles, hence the switching, so they are always wet with one or the other. Another concern could be residual ink of the wrong type after switching, but I haven't seen a history of complaints about this.

Sorry....I was talk about the reason that Epson design it this way.  Not an acute problem which I was having.

[Jager]

Indeed, it remains a bit of a mystery why Epson has retained the PK/MK switchover design in their latest generation printers.  Surely they know that's kind of kludgy.  And they can't not know that their competitors have moved beyond such arcane machinations.

But I suspect they also know something else.  My guess is that they fully appreciate the design strengths of their older generation.  They know the 3880 has, for instance, been very reliable, even as some of their other models have been less so.  And they explicitly determined to retain that beneficent design, rather than cast off into uncharted waters.

Much as I'm irritated by the PK/MK switchover, I'd far rather have that in a stone reliable printer, than have the switchover 'fixed,' but at the cost of a episodically problematic printer.

Back to the P800... after a week of pretty heavy use, using different papers, with both PK and MK, with both color and black and white, my first impressions have firmed into more durable conclusions.  This is, for the most part, an excellent printer.  Image quality is outstanding.  ABW output is at a very high level - enough so that a serious B&W printmaker who, nevertheless, did not wish to utilize a 3rd-party RIP or dedicated black-ink inkset, would likely be very pleased with their OEM results from the P800.

IMO, the only real weakness of the printer - alas, not a trivial one - is the necessity to use the front paper feed for virtually all the papers a serious printmaker would ever consider.  Unless your printer stand is fairly high, using that front feed will require you to get down on your knees.  And it takes a good 12-15 seconds for the printer to pick up the loaded sheet (and you have to wait for it to finish, because you have to then return the center tray to its retracted position).  For a machine used sparingly, it wouldn't be an issue.  For a several-hour print session, it's a pain in the ass.

[Mark D Segal]

Whether you have to get down on your knees to feed the paper depends on the height of the printer relative to your sitting position.

[cortlander]

IMO, the only real weakness of the printer - alas, not a trivial one - is the necessity to use the front paper feed for virtually all the papers a serious printmaker would ever consider.  Unless your printer stand is fairly high, using that front feed will require you to get down on your knees. 

Works well for me - I do not even have to get up from my chair to load the paper!

[Jeff Magidson]

IMO, the only real weakness of the printer - alas, not a trivial one - is the necessity to use the front paper feed for virtually all the papers a serious printmaker would ever consider.  Unless your printer stand is fairly high, using that front feed will require you to get down on your knees.  And it takes a good 12-15 seconds for the printer to pick up the loaded sheet (and you have to wait for it to finish, because you have to then return the center tray to its retracted position).  For a machine used sparingly, it wouldn't be an issue.  For a several-hour print session, it's a pain in the ass.

RATS! This is a problem for me.. I do a lot of printing on my 3880 on thick/fine art paper loading through the rear feed. Although I have not tried a P800, it sounds a lot more cumbersome. I guess I will hang on to my 3880 for as long as possible.

[Mark D Segal]

RATS! This is a problem for me.. I do a lot of printing on my 3880 on thick/fine art paper loading through the rear feed. Although I have not tried a P800, it sounds a lot more cumbersome. I guess I will hang on to my 3880 for as long as possible.

It isn't cumbersome.

[jrsforums]

RATS! This is a problem for me.. I do a lot of printing on my 3880 on thick/fine art paper loading through the rear feed. Although I have not tried a P800, it sounds a lot more cumbersome. I guess I will hang on to my 3880 for as long as possible.

I'd hang on to the 3880.....at least until rebates show up for the p800....which will happen. 😀