Pages: [1] 2   Go Down

Author Topic: Reality of Large Format Printers  (Read 8994 times)

photagonist

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2
Reality of Large Format Printers
« on: February 07, 2017, 10:32:04 am »

I've owned an Epson 3880 for 7 years and produced many many wonderful prints.  Recently I've wanted to upgrade to a 24" paper due to the cost of local printers making it more affordable at home (with enough use).  I'm finding that the jump from 17" to 24" can be tricky, mostly due to the maintenance/clogging issues found in larger format printers.

From my subjective Googling I find that Epson is the clogging king whereas Canon and HP don't have nearly the issues.  I'm not sure if it's because Epson is clogging more OR if an order of magnitude more people own Epson printers.  Based on the # of posts I feel the latter has an influence.  For Epson, I see many reports of 'new $2000 printer head' every 4 years.  I really don't know what that means to be honest, is that after putting 2km of paper through it or it just getting sporadic use? 

So my question's here are (ideally) for those who have experience with all these brands. 

1) LEAST MAINTENANCE - For someone like me who prints a decent amount once a month on glossy, which printers will be the least maintenance heavy over the years?  Additionally, is this even the right way to ask this question, is it perhaps they are all equal IF I use them weekly vs. monthly?

2) 44" vs 24" - As for a follow up question, if money and space are no object, is there any reason to not get a 44" instead of 24", i.e. is a 44" printer really the same amount of maintenance as a 24" with the added ability to do 44" prints?  My instinct tells me now.

3) SWITCHING PAIN - I'm a 12+ year Epson user and love the printer/ink combos AND printing exclusively via Lightroom, will I find switching brands a hard and frustrating thing to do?

Thank you in advance for any advice/viewpoints.

Logged

Mark Lindquist

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1596
  • it’s not about the photos we take - it’s the ones we leave
    • LINDQUIST STUDIOS
Re: Reality of Large Format Printers
« Reply #1 on: February 07, 2017, 11:48:16 am »

1. Least Maintenance:  UNQUESTIONABLY the HP Z3200ps 44" printer - Proven track record.  Has micro-drop technology that keeps clogs from happening.  IT IS the most clog free, maintenance free printer available today.  You can leave this printer sitting unattended for months, and come back and it will pick right up and go.  If not, just a few tweaks and back in business.

2. 44" vs. 24"  NO BRAINER.  There is a sale going on now for 44" HP Z3200ps printers - $2.995.00 + Free Shipping

http://www.proimagingsupplies.com/Hewlett-Packard-DesignJet-Z3200ps-44in-Printer-p3420.html

3.  Learning Curve:  Not too bad - you can make your own in-house custom profiles with the embedded spectrophotometer.

OTHER:

The HP Z3200 ps  VIVERA INKS are STILL KING OF THE HILL in terms of longevity and best longest lasting neutral grays and deepest richest blacks. 

Easily changeable Printheads - you get 2 colors per printhead that are less expensive than an ink cartridge.

Yep, the HP STILL outperforms both Canon and Epson.

Cons:

Slow printing.

Software can be funky.  But once you get used to it, it is fine.

Eventually, like all other printers, the printhead carriage belt needs replacing.

BOTTOM LINE:

For the money, you can't get a better printer.  This printer was designed for the studio photographer.  It is not a production printer, it doesn't print fast, but it prints beautifully.  Once you get to know it, it is the most versatile printer available.

Compare everything, and like I said, specifically dealing with your questions:  NO BRAINER.  HP Z3200ps 44" Printer.

Logged
Mark Lindquist
http://z3200.com, http://MarkLindquistPhotography.com
Lindquist Studios.com

Mark Lindquist

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1596
  • it’s not about the photos we take - it’s the ones we leave
    • LINDQUIST STUDIOS
Re: Reality of Large Format Printers
« Reply #2 on: February 07, 2017, 11:59:53 am »

A few thoughts.  Yes, the 44" HP is exactly the same as the 24" printer except it is stretched.  Same maintenance (or lack thereof).

The printer is the lightest on the market for the size, with the best classical modernist design.  (It looks great).

The Vivera ink set is tried and true.  10 year track record.  Unquestionably the best in terms of longevity.

Canon may have a slight edge to begin with, but in the long run, the Vivera inks will outperform.

The Z3200ps performs equally well on matte and glossy.  Gloss enhancer dials bronzing WAY back.

This is a really easy printer to use.  There are some quirky aspects regarding loading sheets, but easy once you get to know it.

The embedded spectrophotometer comes stock with each printer.  The others cost a whole lot extra and are an accessory.

Price.  Price.  Price.

Logged
Mark Lindquist
http://z3200.com, http://MarkLindquistPhotography.com
Lindquist Studios.com

ericbowles

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 38
    • Bowles Images
Re: Reality of Large Format Printers
« Reply #3 on: February 07, 2017, 12:41:00 pm »

I've had an Epson 4900 for about 5 years.  Prints are generally great with any issues being related to me - not the printer.

It does a lot better with regular use.  Weekly prints are enough to keep it in great shape.  Any less is a problem around the 2-3 week mark.  The issue is not the print head - it's the pump that maintains a seal with the print head.  I had mine repaired for clogging about two years ago and the repair tech told me that they have replaced the part number for the pump twice.  Since mine was repaired with the newest pump, the problems with clogging have been reduced and always easily cleared.  My printer never clogs within a week - only when I travel or can't make any prints. 

Epson has a new line of printers starting with Surecolor P5000 just released and including the P6000, P7000, P8000, and P9000.  These printers are replacing the 4900, 7900, and 9900.  Epson indicates updated ink sets, nanocoatings on the print head to reduce clogging, and no doubt the newer pumps. 

The challenge with high resolution print heads is they do clog.  Epson techs use a Shipping and Cleaning Fluid to dissolve clogs and prevent clogging.  There is a product from American Inkjet Systems to prevent clogging.  But once you let clogs occur, they are more difficult to clear and you can create damage.  That's the nature of printing and is true for all printers.  I think the real opportunity when choosing a printer is to shop based on maintenance as well as print quality.

Like boats and airplanes, what most occasional printers need is a friend with a printer.  :) 
Logged
Eric Bowles
Nature Photography
Workshops and Instruction

Rob Reiter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 300
    • The LightRoom
Re: Reality of Large Format Printers
« Reply #4 on: February 07, 2017, 01:14:53 pm »

One knock against HP Vivera and in favor of the Canon Lucia EX inks is surface durability-scratch resistance. Worst vs. best, with Epson in the middle. And hard to see Canon reliability being much of an issue. I've used three generations of Canon printers (currently on my 4th year with the iPF8400) in a commercial printing environment. And I've spent maybe $250 total on service calls, not counting easy but infrequent replacement of the heads, which you do yourself. And in terms of  day to day usage, clogs are no more of a problem than with the HP. It's Epson head design that makes their heads more clog-prone.

For raw image quality, all three brands are good. That's not much of an issue anymore.
Logged
http://www.lightroom.com Fine art printi

MHMG

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1285
Re: Reality of Large Format Printers
« Reply #5 on: February 07, 2017, 02:38:39 pm »

One knock against HP Vivera and in favor of the Canon Lucia EX inks is surface durability-scratch resistance.

I know that Canon made a marketing issue out of "improved scratch resistance" when it introduced the Lucia EX inkset (i.e the upgrade from iPF x100 series printers to the iPF x300 series followed by the x400 series printers which also used the same Lucia EX set), but it was comparing the newer Lucia EX set to its own older Lucia set when it made those claims.  I have both a Z3200 and an iPF8300 printer in house now, have printed a significant volume of work on both printers, and I experience no practical differences in the handling of the prints.

All aqueous inkjet prints on microporous media are more delicate than traditional photographs because unlike traditional silver gelatin and color chromogenic media there is no gelatin supercoat layer to encapsulate the delicate image forming particles.  One has to be careful with each and every one of them, no matter whether Canon, or Epson, or HP, so any physical differences seem to be quite academic in nature, and highly dependent on choice of media. If one wants comparable abrasion and scratch resistance to traditional photos, one needs to frame the prints under cover glazing immediately or otherwise apply a top coat treatment like an acrylic spray.

I use mainly Moab Entrada Rag Natural 300 gsm for matte prints and Hahnemuhle Photo Rag Pearl for luster/glossy prints, and both media are equally forgiving (or unforgiving depending on how you look at it) with either the Vivera Pigment or the Lucia EX pigment ink sets with respect to scuffing and scratching. If I had to give either of my two WF printers the edge on ease of handling, I'd give it to the Z3200 due to its ability to lay down an additional clearcoat (gloss optimizer) ink on glossy/luster type media which the LUCIA EX set does not have. However, that clearcoat layer is still not robust enough to protect against careless handling of the prints.

cheers,
Mark
Logged

MHMG

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1285
Re: Reality of Large Format Printers
« Reply #6 on: February 07, 2017, 03:19:43 pm »


BOTTOM LINE:

.... This printer was designed for the studio photographer.  It is not a production printer, it doesn't print fast, but it prints beautifully.  Once you get to know it, it is the most versatile printer available.

Compare everything, and like I said, specifically dealing with your questions:  NO BRAINER.  HP Z3200ps 44" Printer.

+1

I think HP fundamentally understood that most fine art prints weren't going to be done by service bureaus, rather by dedicated individuals who print only for themselves or for a select group of clients.  HP thus designed the Z series printers specifically for the small photographic studio and/or gallery and boutique framing market where print volumes are not very high, and printing is not always done routinely on a daily basis. And the average user didn't want to become a color science technician! (hence all the automatic calibration and profiling features on the Z).  Quality, not quantity was the goal. And print permanence as well, because after all, it is a fine art printer not a poster shop printer where pricing is paramount and the customer rarely asks or cares about print longevity. And because I now own one, I can say without hesitation that HP largely succeeded. As old as the Z3200 is in the marketplace, it's still a throughly modern printer for the fine art market. As Mark L. also noted, it does have some annoying quirks, and a bit of a learning curve, but they all do. I have learned to adapt to each and every printer's "personality" that I've ever owned, and I have quite a few.

The Z's just take care of themselves really well in that low volume arena. Hp has other far more capable production printers more suited to service bureaus and larger print shops with higher production output. My sense is that Canon and Epson have gone a slightly different design route with the WF printers you will want to compare to the Z.  Canon and Epson have attempted to design their fine art WF printer offerings to straddle both studio photography requirements and higher volume service bureau output requirements as well as graphic arts proofing markets. As such, the Canon's and Epsons both need to be run more frequently, otherwise they start to eat you alive on extra ink costs needed to keep the heads performing well.

If you have the space, the 44 inch Z3200 unit is priced not much higher than the 24 inch model. That's probably because, as Mark L. said, it's essentially the same printer, albeit with a somewhat longer carriage travel. One reason I decided to bring LF printing in house is because I make many of my prints with ample margins and with identical dimensions to be used when framing. 13 and 17 inch printers just don't cut it if you want to print a decent size enlargement but also include ample margins.  By making my image area plus margins equal in dimension to the final frame, matte, and overmatte size, the image gets held nicely in alignment to the overmatte window without having to resort to any adhesives or T-hinging (which more often than not leads to eventual cocking of the artwork). Saves me considerable labor time when framing. I just drop the overmatte, the print, the matte/mount board (used for microclimate control along with a vapor barrier) and the backing board into the frame, and I"m done. No fussing with tapes and/or dry mount/cold mount adhesives.

cheers,
Mark
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com
« Last Edit: February 07, 2017, 07:10:52 pm by MHMG »
Logged

hugowolf

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1001
Re: Reality of Large Format Printers
« Reply #7 on: February 07, 2017, 10:17:59 pm »

Well, I usually wholeheartedly agree with Mark, but I have found HP prints to be much more susceptible to abrasion on fine art smooth matte papers and on gloss papers than either Canon or Epson. On lustre/semi-matte/satin/silk/etc no so much.

It has been a while since I experimented with this, and I don't have the access to all three anymore, but three years ago, those were my findings.

Brian A
Logged

kevinmcdnyc

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 35
Re: Reality of Large Format Printers
« Reply #8 on: February 07, 2017, 11:06:42 pm »

Also, we still have no ink longevity number for the new Canon inkset.
Logged

MHMG

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1285
Re: Reality of Large Format Printers
« Reply #9 on: February 08, 2017, 01:00:05 am »

Also, we still have no ink longevity number for the new Canon inkset.

I probably will not be publishing any results until much later this year because the work is still badly underfunded, but the data I have collected so far on both Epson and Canons' latest ink sets indicates HP is not in danger of losing it's #1 top seat ranking for lightfastness of its Vivera pigmented ink set.  An impressive accomplishment considering that the HP Z3200 Vivera inks (with Chromatic Red) have now been on the market nearly a decade longer than Canon and Epson's latest offerings and with color gamut and Dmax that still remain very competitive.

cheers,
Mark
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com
Logged

Mark Lindquist

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1596
  • it’s not about the photos we take - it’s the ones we leave
    • LINDQUIST STUDIOS
Re: Reality of Large Format Printers
« Reply #10 on: February 08, 2017, 08:14:54 am »

Lately I've been using large cut sheets of BC Pura Smooth Fine Art Matte paper.  I've noticed in some cases that some of the sheets have small amounts of dust, presumably from the cutting process.  If there is a spec of dust under ink, it can come off and leave a white spec, ruining the print. This is sometimes mistakenly viewed as the fault of the ink. This would happen with any ink on matte paper.  I find Vivera inks to be tough and strong as long as the print is properly handled.  A few tricks I use:  brush the paper with a soft brusg before loading, also, before loading I gently curve the sheet and tap it on a hard flat surface a few times.  Often and residual specs will drop off with 2-3 good taps.

All of the inks are good if prints are carefully handled.  One advantage with gloss/semi-gloss/pearl/luster, etc, using the HP Z3200, is that the twelth cartridge, is gloss enhacer, to deal with bronzing.  This over coating does toughen the ink on prints that it is included.  A particular feature of the Z3200ps printer is that during paper calibration, and making a custom profile, the GE can be increased.  Ink limits and gloss enhancer adjustments are easily made during the making of a profile.  Additionally, although a little tricky to get the hang of, it is possible to make seriously good profiles from 1728 patch targets generated within the printer and embedded spectrophotometer.  This is an incredible advantage for those of us that don't have equipment like an i1 II profile maker.  Profiles generated internally for the specific paper being used are amazing on the Z3200ps.

Overall, for the features, design, and engineering, for an individual photographer that doesn't print according to schedule, the Z3200ps is ideally suited.  Being lightweight, it is easily moved around, and it runs periodic self tests automatically.  It is required to be on 24/7, so that the printer can perform these periodic excercises, but it does go to sleep.  The power supply fan does run contiuously, and some find this disturbing.  It is literally a small 12 volt computer fan, and it just hums.  I don't find it to be a problem, but if the printer is in a bedroom for some reason, it could be distracting.  Also when the printer wakes up and does its self test, there are clicks and clacks then the carriage traversing left to right then reseating.  At first, it's a surprise, but you quickly get used to it.
This printer has not changed since the addition of the chromatic red several years back.  HP had a team of 300+ scientists, engineers and designers, all informed by the needs of photographers who provided feedback in initial design phases.  This elite team in Barcelona set out to make the best printer for studio photographers, adhering to the requirements of ink longevity and durability.  At the time it was released, a decade ago, it literally rocked the wide format world in its class, and raised the bar for integrated design printers.  The inks have stood the test of time, the printer has a proven track record. For these reasons, HP has wisely not meddled with the design, implementing and sticking to an "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" philosophy.  They are confident in the design and capabilities of this printer and simply leave it alone.

I like the new printers that. Canon and Epson are now manufacturing, but when a full featured printer 44" wide is available that produces prints with superior inks and longevity, albeit admittedly slower, why then, for the price would an individual photographer want anything else, other than to be lured into a false sense of security of having the "latest and greatest"?

Printing is more about how we process images and what is fed into these machines that largely determines the outcome of a great print.  They all produce excellent prints when excellent images properly processed are introduced.  Truth be told, any and all of these printers are great.  The important thing is to choose the right printer for our individual needs, eschewing the hype surrounding them.

Logged
Mark Lindquist
http://z3200.com, http://MarkLindquistPhotography.com
Lindquist Studios.com

Miles

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 143
Re: Reality of Large Format Printers
« Reply #11 on: February 08, 2017, 09:50:51 am »

I have owned all three major brands and they all produce high quality prints.  I started with Epson, but due to frequent head clogs, soon switched to an HP Z3100.  As Mark points out, the HP is a very nice printer with little maintenance required.  I am not a large volume printer, thus having a printer that can sit unattended for periods without clogging is a necessity.  Many users report that Epson has made progress in this area, but you still here reports of clogs which may be an issue if you don't keep the machine busy.

Since owning the 44" Z, I have owned two 44" Cannon printers, the ipf8300 and ipf8400.  These printers are much more robust than the HP Z printers (HP actually shakes a little while printing) but that hasn't translated into any difference in reliability or print quality as they are both extremely reliable.  If anything, the Canon printers may clog less than the HP's did, although neither was an issue as the clogs were so infrequent. 

I believe HP did away with their two pack ink bundle sales, thus the cost per ml appears to be higher than Cannon's, especially if you buy Canon's 700 ml ink cartridges.  Then again, HP's ink longevity is highly rated.  You need to decide what is important to you in this area.

Canon's new model recently introduced has some nice features.  Personally, I don't think you could go wrong with either brand.   :)
Logged

Mark Lindquist

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1596
  • it’s not about the photos we take - it’s the ones we leave
    • LINDQUIST STUDIOS
Re: Reality of Large Format Printers
« Reply #12 on: February 08, 2017, 10:43:55 am »


These printers are much more robust than the HP Z printers (HP actually shakes a little while printing) but that hasn't translated into any difference in reliability or print quality as they are both extremely reliable. 
I believe HP did away with their two pack ink bundle sales, thus the cost per ml appears to be higher than Cannon's, especially if you buy Canon's 700 ml ink cartridges.  Then again, HP's ink longevity is highly rated. 

These are interesting observations.  The HP does shake but only side to side while printing.  I was told by a design technician that it was purposely engineered that way to shake the cartridges while printing.  I've studied this a lot and I think it's brilliant.  If you watch it, there is a pattern to the "shake" that's very cool.
The printer on the stand is not flimsy in any way.  Think of it, you can put one hand on a corner of the printer and push or pull it and it goes mostly effortlessly where you want it to.  As for the loss of the 2 pack inks, yes, that sucks, but after all, the HP Z3200ps literally sips inks.  Much more mileage, and there is little to no waste with ink waste tanks.

I think the Canon 24 inch printer is impressive.  As are the larger models. 
Nothing to be sneezed at for sure.
Same with the HP Z3200ps. 
Logged
Mark Lindquist
http://z3200.com, http://MarkLindquistPhotography.com
Lindquist Studios.com

John Nollendorfs

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 623
Re: Reality of Large Format Printers
« Reply #13 on: February 08, 2017, 03:07:57 pm »

Regarding HP inks, I have found that You can use HP772 cartridges (300ml) in the Yellow, Lt Gray(used the most), Pk, MK, and Lt Cyan. You must change before to the printer finds them empty!!!!Then  you have to remove the chipped end of the cartridge and replace it with the old 120ml end of the cartridge. (all you have to do is cut the retaining label and the cap just snaps off). Of course, the doors will not close now, and you don't get a read out of how much ink you have remaining. (I just note when I replaced the cart, and occassionally remove the cart and shake to determine how much ink is left) I've found the 300ml carts can be bought for $101-$140. I found the best price at Provantage.
Logged

photagonist

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2
Re: Reality of Large Format Printers
« Reply #14 on: February 09, 2017, 10:02:51 am »

To everyone who has replied, thank you, reading this carefully I've gotten so much more than my original 3 questions asked.  The extra level of detail here has been enlightening and going to a wider format now seems more likely to happen for me.  Being able to print 'to the frame' vs putting in t-hinges, hadn't even thought about that excellent observation, thank you.  It's great to hear the experiences with durability overall, I hadn't heard commentary on all 3 brands as such.  I'm in general very careful with my prints and put them in a mat/frame quickly enough but will be more careful if I go the HP route.

For my level of printing it definitely sounds like the ranking is...

  • HP Z3200PS
  • Canon PRO-4000 or iPF8400
  • Epson P8000


MarkL - I have to admit I'm very skeptical of the above 'sale' offer on the HP Z3200PS given it's not $1000 but $2000 less than B&H's price.  I have no experience with proimagingsupplies.com, can any vouch for this them or this deal?  That puts it at less than the new Epson P8000 by $500 and makes it a no brainer to buy.  Would love feedback from anyone here who would vouch for them.

http://www.proimagingsupplies.com/Hewlett-Packard-DesignJet-Z3200ps-44in-Printer-p3420.html
Logged

Paul Roark

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 398
Re: Reality of Large Format Printers
« Reply #15 on: February 09, 2017, 10:49:05 am »

... The Vivera ink set is ...  Unquestionably the best in terms of longevity. ...

Just to put things in perspective --

As a B&W printer, I've pointed to the HP PK and grays as the most stable of the OEM printer inksets.  However, just to put things in perspective, the MIS Eboni 100% carbon (e.g., the in the R1800 inkset) has a delta-e of half that of HP on HPR at 100 MLux-Hrs.  (See Mark's http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com/light-fade-test-results/.)  Jon's Piezo 100% carbon sepia will also beat all the OEM inksets.  With the MIS "Eboni" I can also print a B&W with 100% carbon on some papers and have a delta lab B maximum increase over the paper of only 3 units.  (Carbon inks are warm, some more so than others.)  Also, when I mix my own dilutions with my generic dilution base (open source and sold premixed by MIS/www.inksupply.com), the cost of the ink is about 1% of the Epson desktop retail prices.

So, I'm not disputing any of these claims for OEM inksets, but B&W photographers, be aware that there are some  outstanding alternatives.  No other inkjet pigments can touch the longevity of carbon pigments.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

Logged

Mark Lindquist

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1596
  • it’s not about the photos we take - it’s the ones we leave
    • LINDQUIST STUDIOS
Re: Reality of Large Format Printers
« Reply #16 on: February 09, 2017, 10:57:31 am »


MarkL - I have to admit I'm very skeptical of the above 'sale' offer on the HP Z3200PS given it's not $1000 but $2000 less than B&H's price.  I have no experience with proimagingsupplies.com, can any vouch for this them or this deal?  That puts it at less than the new Epson P8000 by $500 and makes it a no brainer to buy.  Would love feedback from anyone here who would vouch for them.

http://www.proimagingsupplies.com/Hewlett-Packard-DesignJet-Z3200ps-44in-Printer-p3420.html

I absolutely can and will vouch for ProImaging's sale price.  I bought one.  It is the 4th Z Series printer we have now.
Ask for Ted - tell him Mark Lindquist from Lindquist Studios sent you.

Also, Mark McCormick Goodhart took advantage of this sale and bought a Z3200ps 44".  He says he loves it.

ProImaging made a special deal to get MANY of these printers, that's why NOBODY has this deal.  Not B+H, not Adorama, not Atlex - no one else.  It is an amazing deal.  If you are a residence, power lift gate added will cost you $90.00 extra.

It is a no-brainer.  Talk to Ted. 

-Mark
Logged
Mark Lindquist
http://z3200.com, http://MarkLindquistPhotography.com
Lindquist Studios.com

Mark Lindquist

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1596
  • it’s not about the photos we take - it’s the ones we leave
    • LINDQUIST STUDIOS
Re: Reality of Large Format Printers
« Reply #17 on: February 09, 2017, 11:01:13 am »

Just to put things in perspective --

As a B&W printer, I've pointed to the HP PK and grays as the most stable of the OEM printer inksets.  However, just to put things in perspective, the MIS Eboni 100% carbon (e.g., the in the R1800 inkset) has a delta-e of half that of HP on HPR at 100 MLux-Hrs.  (See Mark's http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com/light-fade-test-results/.)  Jon's Piezo 100% carbon sepia will also beat all the OEM inksets.  With the MIS "Eboni" I can also print a B&W with 100% carbon on some papers and have a delta lab B maximum increase over the paper of only 3 units.  (Carbon inks are warm, some more so than others.)  Also, when I mix my own dilutions with my generic dilution base (open source and sold premixed by MIS/www.inksupply.com), the cost of the ink is about 1% of the Epson desktop retail prices.

So, I'm not disputing any of these claims for OEM inksets, but B&W photographers, be aware that there are some  outstanding alternatives.  No other inkjet pigments can touch the longevity of carbon pigments.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

You've got me there Paul.  I wasn't talking about B+W, only, however. I'm mostly discussing color, but fair point.

You might be interested in knowing that someone is using a Z3100 with cone inks:

Z3100 44" Printer and Cone inks

Regards,

Mark
Logged
Mark Lindquist
http://z3200.com, http://MarkLindquistPhotography.com
Lindquist Studios.com

MHMG

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1285
Re: Reality of Large Format Printers
« Reply #18 on: February 09, 2017, 01:21:30 pm »

I absolutely can and will vouch for ProImaging's sale price.  I bought one.  It is the 4th Z Series printer we have now.
Ask for Ted - tell him Mark Lindquist from Lindquist Studios sent you.

Also, Mark McCormick Goodhart took advantage of this sale and bought a Z3200ps 44".  He says he loves it.

ProImaging made a special deal to get MANY of these printers, that's why NOBODY has this deal.  Not B+H, not Adorama, not Atlex - no one else.  It is an amazing deal.  If you are a residence, power lift gate added will cost you $90.00 extra.

It is a no-brainer.  Talk to Ted. 

-Mark

Yes, I did take advantage of this deal, and price paid plus free shipping was as advertised.  Plus ProImaging gave an additional discount on a full set of extra carts, so I took advantage of that deal as well. Very happy to have a Z3200 in my studio after a long time wishing I could acquire one.
   
There were a few minor wrinkles, but ProImaging did come through with this pricing and delivered as promised.  ProImaging appears to be working with another distributor to purchase a block of these printers all in one go from HP which is why the price is so low. That middleman requires payment up front, so it did mean ProImaging had to charge my credit card before shipping the printer to me, whereas a dealer like B&H will typically only make the charge once the unit has been shipped.  However, Ted explained why they had to run this deal this way, I trusted he'd make good, and he did. The printer arrived about three weeks later.

Fed Ex was the shipper and I gambled that I would be able to slide the printer off the Fed Ex truck and onto my pickup truck with the driver's help and without paying for lift gate service. I always transfer bigger printers like this one to my pickup truck rather than trying to have the driver take a big delivery truck up my long driveway with a pretty decent size hill.   Anyway, it turned out the Fed Ex truck had the lift gate and the driver used it with with no extra charge to make the transfer all by himself without my help :) I unboxed it right on the pickup bed, and a friend of mine helped me bring the components inside and assemble. With my older Canon iPF8300, I unboxed it essentially the same way but it took four guys to lift that beast safely. The Z3200 is indeed probably the lightest 44 inch photo printer on the market today.
« Last Edit: February 09, 2017, 01:25:27 pm by MHMG »
Logged

MHMG

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1285
Re: Reality of Large Format Printers
« Reply #19 on: February 09, 2017, 01:50:45 pm »

Just to put things in perspective --

As a B&W printer, I've pointed to the HP PK and grays as the most stable of the OEM printer inksets.  However, just to put things in perspective, the MIS Eboni 100% carbon (e.g., the in the R1800 inkset) has a delta-e of half that of HP on HPR at 100 MLux-Hrs.  (See Mark's http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com/light-fade-test-results/.)  Jon's Piezo 100% carbon sepia will also beat all the OEM inksets.  With the MIS "Eboni" I can also print a B&W with 100% carbon on some papers and have a delta lab B maximum increase over the paper of only 3 units.  (Carbon inks are warm, some more so than others.)  Also, when I mix my own dilutions with my generic dilution base (open source and sold premixed by MIS/www.inksupply.com), the cost of the ink is about 1% of the Epson desktop retail prices.

So, I'm not disputing any of these claims for OEM inksets, but B&W photographers, be aware that there are some  outstanding alternatives.  No other inkjet pigments can touch the longevity of carbon pigments.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

Paul makes excellent points about pure carbon monochrome ink sets having higher longevity than the Z3200 full color set and even comparing to the photo gray inks alone, but the Z3200 will produce fine B&W prints with light fade resistance high enough that other environmental factors such as heat, humidity, physical handling, etc. will likely be the weak link that causes noticeable changes to occur first. One's media choice becomes of paramount importance when printing with pure carbon ink sets or even with the full color set of Vivera pigments.

With more channels to work with, a dedicated B&W printer can typically outperform on smoothness and sharpness as well, but IMHO, it generally takes a real connoisseur of fine art B&W prints to easily discern the differences. Most photographers are happy with the OEM B&W output from three and four channel photo gray printers, and appreciate the ease with which the full color sets can be used to warm or cool the neutrality of the final print.  The Cone Piezography ink sets are arguably the most widely used alternative ink sets for dedicated B&W printing, but only the Cone Carbon K7 and formerly the Cone "Carbon Sepia" shades are full carbon.  Other more neutral shades (e.g. Cone "Selenium", "neutral", etc) use blends of additional color pigments to create the final shade color, and the Z3200's Vivera inks in particular (Canon and Epson to a lesser extent) will hit those desired shades with better light fade resistance than those more specialized Cone ink sets. So, if the ultimate B&W print quality and longevity is what you are after, then as Paul R. was discussing, opt for a dedicated "pure carbon" multichannel ink set only, and be sure to choose your media wisely.  Otherwise, take pride that the Z's can turn out very nice B&W print quality where light fade resistance is not likely to be the weak link in the final print stability. 

cheers,
Mark
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com
Logged
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up