Canon Pro-2000 setup report

[Dan Wells]

I just set up a Canon pro-2000 (replacing an Epson 7900 that died of a blown yellow channel- if anyone wants a 9-channel 7900 for Piezography or other alternative inks in the Boston area, PM me!).

Kudos to Canon for a remarkably easy printer to set up! It's big and heavy, and takes two very strong people to lift up the printer and get it on the stand (but that's true of anything 24" wide). The rest of the setup and initialization is very well documented and largely automated. I've installed quite a few LFPs over the years, and this is one of the easiest. For more detail, Keith Cooper's excellent setup article at Northlight Images has a ton of pictures

With any stand-mounted printer, the first step is to build the stand, and this is an easy one. You really can't put it together wrong, and it bolts together with four Allen bolts turned with an included Allen key. After building the main part of the stand (the print catcher comes later), you turn to the printer assembly manual and drop the printer itself on the stand - the locator pins are very good, and the printer attaches to the stand with six bolts.

The print catcher is next, and it is much easier to set up (and harder to break) than the Epson equivalent.  The pieces are quite a bit sturdier and the front arms can move to a wide range of positions while the back can attach in front of or behind the printer, allowing a conventional basket catcher, a ramp or a flat surface...

The next step is ink installation (12 160 ml cartridges - keyed so they're hard to get in the wrong slots), then a drop-in printhead installation. After installing the ink and printhead, the printer asks for the included paper for initial alignment. The alignment is automated - no deciding which of several patterns offset by a fraction of a mm is correct. There are two quirks in this process. First, the printer will ask for the first sheet of alignment paper almost as soon as the printhead is in, then sit and gargle ink for nearly an hour before it prints the alignment pattern. This is documented on the setup sheet, but I've never seen any other printer do it in this order - usually, they prime the lines and head, then ask for the alignment paper. The second quirk is that Canon supplies sheet paper for alignment - this is a roll printer! Fortunately, it's pretty easy to load sheets on this thing - I have cerebral palsy, and I did it one-handed easily enough without ever getting a sheet askew. The alignment process takes five sheets of paper, so tell it "yes" when it asks if you want to keep printing.

After it aligns itself, it asks how you want to connect it. Mine's on wired Ethernet, which it found on its own. Annoyingly, my Mac's in the shop, so I can't tell if it's really on the network, other than that it says it is. Apple, give me my computer back!

The final step in setting the printer up is to perform a color calibration. This is a linearization of the printer so all Pro-2000s (and the wider models)will behave similarly, NOT an ICC calibration. It's easily found in the maintenance menu on the touch screen, and it takes one more sheet of the included paper - the printer prints, then reads a series of color patches and it's done. Canon has done this for years, and it's a help with using paper manufacturer profiles. As long as you've linearized your printer, and the paper manufacturer has linearized theirs, they should be very close. Epson's factory linearizations are pretty good, but there's no way to keep up with any drift as the printer ages. The other advantage to Canon's process is that all the 12-ink models (Pro-2000, Pro-4000 and Pro-6000) should all be the same. If you own a Pro-2000 and occasionally want to make a 44-inch (or even a 60-inch!) print, all you need is a print shop with the larger printer (ideally with the same paper and profile, but a similar paper will do if both have correct ICC profiles).

All in all, one of the easiest big printers I've set up and I can't wait to actually print when my Mac comes home- see my accompanying post for more thoughts about the state of the big printer market in general...

Dan

[Ryan Mack]

Congrats on the new printer! The two areas I’ve struggled with on the new canon are loading rolls of paper when the paper has detached from the core and the two-step process to load new media types into the printer and then the driver. Ping me if you need help with either.

[Mark D Segal]

The paper detaching from the core is a bug that occurred with at least one particular paper. The solution for this is to re-attach the paper to its cardboard tune using strong, sticky tape. It's the only way the paper will feed, otherwise the mechanism spins the tube, but the paper does nothing.

[Ryan Mack]

Here’s also another work around... in the printer setting you can change the spool mode to “release” so the printer doesn’t try to use the core for rewinding and instead asks you to rewind by hand. But that triggers a bug where the printer never accepts he way you loaded it and asks you to try again on loop. But you can break out of the loop by power cycling the printer. When it comes back on it happily loss he paper correctly.

[Dan Wells]

What paper came unstuck from its tube? I wonder why this would affect the Canon more than Epsons or other printers? I would think that any printer faced with an unstuck roll would struggle, and I'd wonder whether this is an issue with a particular batch of paper... Or is the Canon's paper path somehow involved here (it's an improved version of the iPF 8000 series path that feeds from below the printer, while most other printers feed from some combination of behind and above)? I could see the curved paper path interacting with already lousy tape jobs on the paper manufacturer's part... Is this specific to or more common with the second roll feed (which I didn't get on mine)? Scott Martin had specific issues feeding heavy papers from the second feed - is this occasionally tearing the tape off the trailing end of rolls?

Relatedly, how do you re-tape a roll? Do you have to unroll it all the way, or can you loosen it somehow and get a finger in to the trailing end?

Dan

[Dan Wells]

Also, a question for Mark in particular (since you mentioned in your review that the Pro-2000 has a different ink lay down strategy than the Pro-1000, and the two profiles aren't compatible). Do you know if Pro-2000 and Pro-4000 profiles are compatible? All the paper manufacturers seem to think they are (except Canson, who lists the two printers separately, although they might reach the same file when downloaded). If the 2000 and the 4000 are compatible, it stands to reason that the brand new Pro-6000 might be as well... Of course the 8 ink S models are nothing like the 12 ink printers, and the manufacturers recognize that.
 The paper manufacturers also see the Pro-1000 as a separate beast, which is borne out by Mark's research. I would always assume that a 17" sheet fed printer would differ from the larger roll machines - trying to use Epson 3880 and 7880/9880 profiles interchangeably was always a "well, almost" despite the same inkset and related heads. On the other hand, 24" and 44" versions of the same Epson generation and inkset have always been fairly interchangeable (I've never tried 24" and 44" versions of the same Canon generation - until this generation, they've always been different mechanical designs, although I don't know if that would matter much if the inks, heads and algorithms were identical).
I've also never tried to interchange profiles between a "big" roll fed Epson 17" printer and an equivalent 24" or 44" model - say, 4900 with 7900/9900 or P5000 with P7000/P9000 - that should be closer than 3880 to 7880 or Canon Pro-1000 with Pro-2000 or larger, because the big 17" models are more closely mechanically related to the wide format machines. Canon hasn't made a roll fed 17" since the old iPF 5100 (which WAS interchangeable with the 6100).
My best guess would be that the new Canons with their shared design (apart from the Pro-1000) would be even a little more interchangeable than 24" and 44" Epsons, because the Canons have that internal color calibration function that should help.

[Ryan Mack]

2000 and 4000 are identical except for the extra parts added to make it wider and the longer belts and tubes so profiles should be interchangeable. I would wager the 6000 is basically the 4000 with another middle segment added. The other difference between those and the 1000 is the baseline linearization step. I imagine there may be a difference between the factory linearization on the 1000 and the result of the automatic density check, but that’s just a guess on my part.

The paper I noticed feed issues with was a 15’ sample roll of Hahnemuhle Photo Gloss Baryta 320. It was never attached to the core to begin with. I’m not sure if the Canon is different than other makes but it does seem to care a lot about the tension on the roll unless you disable that, and then you hit the bug where the printer is never happy with how you load the paper until you power cycle.

[Dan Wells]

Thanks! My computer should be back from the shop Friday morning, and I'll be making real prints instead of just color charts...

[Mark D Segal]

Also, a question for Mark in particular (since you mentioned in your review that the Pro-2000 has a different ink lay down strategy than the Pro-1000, and the two profiles aren't compatible). Do you know if Pro-2000 and Pro-4000 profiles are compatible?

2000/4000 should be the same. The reason for the difference from the 1000 is that the printing speed was increased for the 2000/4000 relative to the 1000 and that called forth some changes of ink laydown that merited bespoke profiles.

On your question about which paper detached from the roll: for sure it was the Canon Premium Fine Art Smooth. I think that has now been rectified. It could happen to any paper I suppose, so best to make sure it is attached. I think loosening the material around the core a bit so you have just enough space to check and reattach if necessary is the best approach.

[Abdo]

(except Canson, who lists the two printers separately, although they might reach the same file when downloaded).

Both Canson and other canned profiles are crap. The Canson profiles for 2000 and 4000 are exactly the same.
I have two PRO 4000's, and for each I have profile for all my roles.
I work with 15 types of papers today.
Canson profiles were generated on MAC, where it is not possible to turn off color management .. all wrong.
I did all the profiles in Windows and then I made the reading with ISIS 2 because it is a very precise equipment.
I am or unique in Brazil that has this type of equipment and I worry about the quality.
Surely my impressions are very different from others, I have no doubt.

My site (Portuguese) printer : www.ragprint.com
Site ICC Color : (Portuguese) : www.iccolor.com.br

Sorry my English .

[deanwork]

You are saying that you can't create icc profiles with current  X-Rite i1 pro software on a Mac?

You make them all on Windows only and use them on your macs?

What does X-Rite literature say about this - don't use our software on Apple platforms ?

John

Both Canson and other canned profiles are crap. The Canson profiles for 2000 and 4000 are exactly the same.
I have two PRO 4000's, and for each I have profile for all my roles.
I work with 15 types of papers today.
Canson profiles were generated on MAC, where it is not possible to turn off color management .. all wrong.
I did all the profiles in Windows and then I made the reading with ISIS 2 because it is a very precise equipment.
I am or unique in Brazil that has this type of equipment and I worry about the quality.
Surely my impressions are very different from others, I have no doubt.

My site (Portuguese) printer : www.ragprint.com
Site ICC Color : (Portuguese) : www.iccolor.com.br

Sorry my English .

[Abdo]

You are saying that you can't create icc profiles with current  X-Rite i1 pro software on a Mac?

You make them all on Windows only and use them on your macs?

What does X-Rite literature say about this - don't use our software on Apple platforms ?

John

Hello..

This subject is complex, unfortunately Apple for years does not allow the complete shutdown of the color management system.

To have this turned off only in Windows.

To print my targets, I do it in Windows and I can read it on MAC or Windows, using ISIS 2.

ICC profiles, once generated, for a particular printer, it does not matter if you use it on Mac or Windows.

And today I have absolute certainty of what I am doing, and my clients simply love my impressions.

They are absolutely faithful to what you see on the monitor and paper. I am simply delighted with the impressions these new Canon are capable of making.

Thanks

Abdo

[chipc4]

Canon Pro 2000 printing question: I just started printing on my new printer and noticed something strange. I printed an  8 x10image of a yellow boat floating in green water and the colors were spot on. However, when I print it , say 13 x 19 , a quarter thru the printing process the water turns blue and the yellow turns magenta? Anyone have any suggestions/ advice?
Thanks
Chip

[Mark D Segal]

You are saying that you can't create icc profiles with current  X-Rite i1 pro software on a Mac?

You make them all on Windows only and use them on your macs?

What does X-Rite literature say about this - don't use our software on Apple platforms ?

John

I explored this issue quite thoroughly in my review of the Canon Pro-2000, this website - have a look.

And "X-Rite literature" in this context is an oxymoron.