Thinking about new printer for low humidity environment - No glass framing

[One Frame at a Time]

Hi, I've had a good experience with a 3880 for several years on the east coast where humidity was not a big concern.  This printer would sit dormant in my basement for 6 months and never gave me any problems when I got back to it.  I would add an ounce of water to the Ink sponge, place it on the basement floor and cover it.  6 months later it would take 1 cleaning cycle and all was in order. 

I am in a similar situation - except right now the humidity is our house is 10% and we are at 7000 feet above sea level.  Considering another Epson or a Canon Pro 1000,  or possibly a 24 inch model since the Pro 1000 will not do Pano's.  I have read some positive things about the Canon print heads vs the Epson Piezo heads, that make me think canon may be a better choice here?

Another thing about our new location is that I would prefer to frame without glass. Does the gloss optimizer help protect the print? The Canon Pro-1 apparently has a switch in the print dialog that will put the coating on the entire print. Can the new Canon 1000 and or the 24 inch versions be set to apply a coating of this to the entire print too?

Thanks for any help on this,

Paul

[Mark D Segal]

The Canon Pro-1000 is the first of this new line with all the most recent technological advances. The wider format printers in this series are not yet manufactured and there is no ETA.

The gloss optimizer (actually called Chroma Optimizer) covers the entire page by default. I don't know whether it has a protective function, but that isn't what it was designed for. It is intended to reduce gloss differential and bronzing, and help bring out the appearance of richer gamut and black in gloss and semi-gloss media.

[kers]

The Canon Pro-1000 is the first of this new line with all the most recent technological advances. The wider format printers in this series are not yet manufactured and there is no ETA.

The gloss optimizer (actually called Chroma Optimizer) covers the entire page by default. I don't know whether it has a protective function, but that isn't what it was designed for. It is intended to reduce gloss differential and bronzing, and help bring out the appearance of richer gamut and black in gloss and semi-gloss media.

i still like my 8? year old printer ( z3100 ) with gloss optimizer...   it works as day one and has about the best archival inks on can wish for...
Too bad Hp has lost its bearings.

[GrahamBy]

Is the technology of the prograf-1000 dramatically different to that of the ipf6400 ?

[One Frame at a Time]

Is the technology of the prograf-1000 dramatically different to that of the ipf6400 ?

The inks are supposed to be somewhat improved but all the new printers seem to be incremental improvements on their predecessors.
From what I can glean, the new inks have silicone oil added to them which makes me think they will have less tendency to dry out?
My big issue is wanting a printer that can be stored for months at a time and thrive in a low humidity environment.

[Mark D Segal]

My big issue is wanting a printer that can be stored for months at a time and thrive in a low humidity environment.

There won't be clarity on how the new models withstand lack of use and low humidity over those kind of time periods until a large enough body of users accumulate a good four to six months of operational (or non-operational) experience to an extent that others would know what to expect.

[One Frame at a Time]

Thanks Mark.  I've read enough about the new Canon printer to jump in with both feet (despite the 25% extra $ vs Epson) and be a test dummy - if it wasn't for the fact that it's hamstrung
out of the box by being incapable of printing on paper beyond 24 inches in length.  Who makes these decisions anyway.....dumb!

[Mark D Segal]

Thanks Mark.  I've read enough about the new Canon printer to jump in with both feet (despite the 25% extra $ vs Epson) and be a test dummy - if it wasn't for the fact that it's hamstrung
out of the box by being incapable of printing on paper beyond 24 inches in length.  Who makes these decisions anyway.....dumb!

Well, simply because you don't know the factors underlying their design decisions, that doesn't make them dumb. Just maybe they have reasons that make sense to them if not to you; the market place will be the judge of all that; there is real competition now :-)

[One Frame at a Time]

Well, simply because you don't know the factors underlying their design decisions, that doesn't make them dumb. Just maybe they have reasons that make sense to them if not to you; the market place will be the judge of all that; there is real competition now :-)

I guess it depends on the definition of dumb.  I cannot imagine that I am alone in thinking the restriction on printing on cut roll paper or even 17x25 paper is a tremendous drawback. 
Unless this printer is virtually uncloggable (and doesn't blow through print heads), or has some hidden attribute that no one has mentioned in a review, then its doomed to failure in the market place.
 If a company allows design considerations to overshadow critical features offered by their competitors - that dooms them to failure.  Design should be tailored to what customers want and expect. 
Not the other way round.  If epsons last few A2 printers were incapable of doing larger than 17x22 maybe it would be (somewhat) understandable for canon to omit this capability.  But thats not the case.

Maybe I am missing something.  Is there some feature that justifies the price gap that hasn't been mentioned in the reviews appearing to date?

[Mark D Segal]

I guess it depends on the definition of dumb.  I cannot imagine that I am alone in thinking the restriction on printing on cut roll paper or even 17x25 paper is a tremendous drawback. 
Unless this printer is virtually uncloggable (and doesn't blow through print heads), or has some hidden attribute that no one has mentioned in a review, then its doomed to failure in the market place.
 If a company allows design considerations to overshadow critical features offered by their competitors - that dooms them to failure.  Design should be tailored to what customers want and expect. 
Not the other way round.  If epsons last few A2 printers were incapable of doing larger than 17x22 maybe it would be (somewhat) understandable for canon to omit this capability.  But thats not the case.

Maybe I am missing something.  Is there some feature that justifies the price gap that hasn't been mentioned in the reviews appearing to date?

You're the one who thinks their decision on maximum paper size is "dumb", so it's whatever you had in mind; but the way a normal reader like me would interpret that expression in this context is kind of synonymous with "poor" or "uninformed" decision-making, and if that's what you meant, I can tell you what they decided was not uninformed; nobody operating at this level of commercial and technical exposure does such things on whimsy. Once a company has assembled as much factual and estimated information that they can bring to bear on an issue, there is an element of judgment on how to interpret it and what to do about it. They did their homework on this matter and we have what we have. As I said, the market place will be the ultimate arbiter and it will be very interesting to see the outcome, if we ever will. But don't count Canon out on this one. This printer is very, very good and huge numbers of people do not need rolls or bigger image size than Canon has catered for in a 17" desktop edition.

Don't be guided by current price differentials. Those can change literally over night. If I were a potential customer for a new printer I would focus on the intrinsic qualities and features of the contenders; then decide what feature differences are (a) determinative and (b)worth what prices differences, at whatever the price difference may be at the time.

[One Frame at a Time]

Once again, thanks Mark.  One of the things I love about this forum is you get to interact with people that are not just hobbyists like me - but actually are involved in creating the products and programs we all use. 
From some of your wording I get the impression that you have some kind of involvement with Canon printers?  I think thats great, not making any kind of accusation.

If the 3880 wasn't the most trouble free printer from Epson (based on my experience and others), I would not even consider the p800. 
But due to the 3880s great reputation (I know its no guarantee for the P800) the P800 is in the running and has a big edge (my view) because its not hamstrung on print size.
That said, if there was a 24 inch model that has a solid reputation for not clogging after prolonged dis-use, that would have my attention too.  So far I have not read anything
about a 24 inch model being as reliable as the 3880?

Is there some attribute that makes the canon printer the better (or equal) of the new Epson that has much more flexibility in print size?  I really want to start printing again - soon.

[Mark D Segal]

Once again, thanks Mark.  One of the things I love about this forum is you get to interact with people that are not just hobbyists like me - but actually are involved in creating the products and programs we all use. 
From some of your wording I get the impression that you have some kind of involvement with Canon printers?  I think thats great, not making any kind of accusation.

If the 3880 wasn't the most trouble free printer from Epson (based on my experience and others), I would not even consider the p800. 
But due to the 3880s great reputation (I know its no guarantee for the P800) the P800 is in the running and has a big edge (my view) because its not hamstrung on print size.
That said, if there was a 24 inch model that has a solid reputation for not clogging after prolonged dis-use, that would have my attention too.  So far I have not read anything
about a 24 inch model being as reliable as the 3880?

Is there some attribute that makes the canon printer the better (or equal) of the new Epson that has much more flexibility in print size?  I really want to start printing again - soon.

My only involvement is that as a reviewer publishing my research findings on this website, I make a point of talking with manufacturers' representatives in order to learn things about the equipment that are useful for research and reviewing purposes. This helps gain insight into whatever they are prepared to share, which varies depending on the firm and the question. If print size is a "determinative factor" for you and you need larger than what the Canon Pro-1000 offers, then this may not be the printer for you. Both the P800 and the Pro-1000 make excellent prints. Stay tuned for more insight as mentioned here: Forthcoming

[One Frame at a Time]

Thank You, Thank You!   I just read your review on the P800.  Looking forward to the upcoming articles. 

For now, I'm a fuji shooter,  At 16 mp and some cropping Im usually limited to A2 sizes without a ton of up rezzing. 
I may get a sony ff sometime down the road, and I'll certainly get the next Fuji XT2 or whatever they call it. 
24 inch would be a nice way to keep up with the Higher count sensors coming down the road. 

Can you tell me if the P800 has a "Power Clean" function in the software.  Just read about them weakening that feature on some earlier printers to try and keep
3rd party inks at bay (not my game as there is already way too much stuff to keep track of, without throwing that in the mix).

[Mark D Segal]

The P800 has "Print Head Cleaning" and "Heavy Head Cleaning". I could not find a reference in the manual to when one would use the Heavy Head Cleaning function.

[One Frame at a Time]

Maybe you use the Heavy Head Cleaning after a night of heavy drinking....

Thanks for the reply! 
I am leaning towards giving the epson a shot.  Storing it in one of those Vacuum bags they sell for clothing when left unused for a prolonged period.
The fact that its only 40 pounds seems a plus.

[chez]

You're the one who thinks their decision on maximum paper size is "dumb", so it's whatever you had in mind; but the way a normal reader like me would interpret that expression in this context is kind of synonymous with "poor" or "uninformed" decision-making, and if that's what you meant, I can tell you what they decided was not uninformed; nobody operating at this level of commercial and technical exposure does such things on whimsy. Once a company has assembled as much factual and estimated information that they can bring to bear on an issue, there is an element of judgment on how to interpret it and what to do about it. They did their homework on this matter and we have what we have. As I said, the market place will be the ultimate arbiter and it will be very interesting to see the outcome, if we ever will. But don't count Canon out on this one. This printer is very, very good and huge numbers of people do not need rolls or bigger image size than Canon has catered for in a 17" desktop edition.

Don't be guided by current price differentials. Those can change literally over night. If I were a potential customer for a new printer I would focus on the intrinsic qualities and features of the contenders; then decide what feature differences are (a) determinative and (b)worth what prices differences, at whatever the price difference may be at the time.

I'd love to hear your view on why Canon decided not to allow a full 16x24 print to be made from their new flagship 17" printer. Exactly what benefit to their customer base this restriction achieves. Personally it just boggles my mind.

[dseelig]

MY HP Z 3200 works great in a low humidity and ahs very lovg life prints. Love it Epsons are terrible in low humidity my 3880 died in 2 1/2 years all epson did was tell me what do I expect I am not liking my canon pixma pro 1 much a pain to deal with

[Mark D Segal]

I'd love to hear your view on why Canon decided not to allow a full 16x24 print to be made from their new flagship 17" printer. Exactly what benefit to their customer base this restriction achieves. Personally it just boggles my mind.

Who makes 16*24 inch sheet inkjet paper? 17*22 is the most common maximum sheet size available from the main providers.

[Martin Ranger]

Is there some attribute that makes the canon printer the better (or equal) of the new Epson that has much more flexibility in print size?  I really want to start printing again - soon.

Yes. The fact that you don't have to "switch" inks when going from matte to glossy paper and vice versa.

[One Frame at a Time]

Who makes 16*24 inch sheet inkjet paper? 17*22 is the most common maximum sheet size available from the main providers.

There are some papers available in 17 x 25 sheets.