Consensus about vivid magenta ink set for photography?

[digitalshiver]

The guys at B & H tell me that the 3880 will be out soon, though no one will actually say when. They say the only differences between the 3800 & 3880 will be somewhat thicker stock capability, and the vivid magenta ink set.

Do photographers care about vivid magenta? Some have told me it makes no difference. The guys at ImagePrint don't even take it seriously. They told me it's a gimmick. Someone I respect in a photo store in NYC tells me it's only relevant for printing signs. Some at B&H have suggested it gives an unrealistic hue to skin tones.

Is there a clear consensus here?

I'd like to wait till the 3880 is out and grab up a 3800 at the last minute for a discounted price, unless it turns out the vivid ink set gives me a clear advantage.

Thoughts?

Charles

[Geoff Wittig]

For what it's worth, Bill Atkinson claimed that the vivid magenta ink in the Epson x880 inkset expanded and 'rotated' the gamut in a direction that improved the rendering of blue skies in particular. This would be an issue obviously if you shoot a lot of landscapes with such elements. I don't believe that rendering of skin tones or fall color are improved as much, but they were pretty good to begin with.

I used Epson's older 7600 for some years, and at least for me color purity and rendering of blue skies was less than perfect with its first-generation Ultrachrome inkset.

[Schewe]

The guys at B & H tell me that the 3880 will be out soon, though no one will actually say when.

They are talking out of their hats...

If they DID have certain knowledge from Epson, then they would be violating their NDA by saying there will be a 3880 out soon. Epson has made no statement to the public, one way or the other.

What they "may" be saying is they "think" there will be a 3880 soon. That's a different story. But unless they define "soon" as next year some time, then again, they would be wrong. I'm not at liberty to say one thing or the other (due to NDAs) but I will sat=y that if you want the 880 inkset in a small format printer, the only one currently available is the 2880 which has the Vivid Magenta and new dither technology (only seen so far in the EPson 11880).

As for the Vivid Magenta importance, it will help any colors in the magenta section of the gamut including blues and purples as well as magentas and reds. If you don't use those color at near maximum gamut of Adobe RGB or ProPhoto RGB then you won't see any differences between K3 with and without Vivid Magenta. If you do use those colors on a typical basis and you are working in PhoPhoto RGB, then the Vivid Magenta will be an important consideration.

[titusbear]

Think there is a big difference between techno-experts (real and pseudo )and people with an creative /contemplative eye.  One worries about specs - the other tries to evoke a feeling.  Have never seen anything by the peole at ImagePrint in a museum /Art Forum /critiqued by a credible critic ?- how can they take 'seriously' something they obviously cannot understand?

For the bulk of the people buying printers - critical color is not a major issue (as opposed to scientists /medical /art).  For an artist - demanding color range /accuracy match one's mind's eye is critical. Listen to the Pete Turner video on the Epson site / listen to the Nash Editions dvd's (both of whom use Epson x880's) - and they talk about the fine color gamut of the x880's. (in fairness - the same is true with artist who speak out in support of HP /Cannon - the technology /inks suit their own personal 'eyes').

As fine as it is - it is lacking. Personally I have trouble in the areas of green /turquoise (hoping that the x900 machines - with their green and orange will help that weakness).  

Suitability is in the eye of the image creator.  Conflicts exist - how can any printer match the billion color capability of the HP monitor?  For an 'artist' - does it matter?

Whatever makes your own eye comfortable re: the art you create - that is the only obvious answer re: what is best.   Some people are happy as hell with their  4 generation old printer - others, read LL hourly for news of the next/best...    varies from eye to eye.

[Geoff Wittig]

Think there is a big difference between techno-experts (real and pseudo )and people with an creative /contemplative eye.  One worries about specs - the other tries to evoke a feeling.  Have never seen anything by the peole at ImagePrint in a museum /Art Forum /critiqued by a credible critic ?- how can they take 'seriously' something they obviously cannot understand?

For the bulk of the people buying printers - critical color is not a major issue (as opposed to scientists /medical /art).  For an artist - demanding color range /accuracy match one's mind's eye is critical. Listen to the Pete Turner video on the Epson site / listen to the Nash Editions dvd's (both of whom use Epson x880's) - and they talk about the fine color gamut of the x880's. (in fairness - the same is true with artist who speak out in support of HP /Cannon - the technology /inks suit their own personal 'eyes').

As fine as it is - it is lacking. Personally I have trouble in the areas of green /turquoise (hoping that the x900 machines - with their green and orange will help that weakness).  

Suitability is in the eye of the image creator.  Conflicts exist - how can any printer match the billion color capability of the HP monitor?  For an 'artist' - does it matter?

Whatever makes your own eye comfortable re: the art you create - that is the only obvious answer re: what is best.   Some people are happy as hell with their  4 generation old printer - others, read LL hourly for news of the next/best...    varies from eye to eye.

Exactly. Every printer/inkset has its strengths and weaknesses. The question is, can it do what you need for your own images? the HP Z3100 is just wonderful in the blue/green/turquoise/cyan quadrant of the spectrum; skies really look great, including images that didn't quite work on my Epson. Flip side, darker saturated maroon/reds are rendered better by Epsons from the 7600 onward than by the HP. You pays your money...

[digitalshiver]

Thanks for your input everyone. This is such a great site & forum. Your responses do seem to lay to rest the assertion that the 880 ink set is not a legitimate and substantial feature in some cases.  Good to know.  It sounds like holding out for a 3880 might be the thing for me.  Thanks for your comment, Jeff, and thanks again everyone.

Charles

[Ernst Dinkla]

For what it's worth, Bill Atkinson claimed that the vivid magenta ink in the Epson x880 inkset expanded and 'rotated' the gamut in a direction that improved the rendering of blue skies in particular. This would be an issue obviously if you shoot a lot of landscapes with such elements. I don't believe that rendering of skin tones or fall color are improved as much, but they were pretty good to begin with.

I used Epson's older 7600 for some years, and at least for me color purity and rendering of blue skies was less than perfect with its first-generation Ultrachrome inkset.

The interesting thing is that between the Ultrachrome and K3 the magenta shifted to a warmer one and between K3 and Vivid Magenta it goes back to a colder one. The saturation + transparency increased in both steps but in both cases a lot of the promotion phrasing had more to do with the hue angle changes than with an actual gamut increase.


Ernst Dinkla

Try: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/

[Schewe]

It sounds like holding out for a 3880 might be the thing for me.  Thanks for your comment, Jeff, and thanks again everyone.

Just so you understand that if/when a 3880 comes out, it could be a year or more. If you want to be without a printer that long, fine. But that's a long time to hold off if you could be printing next week with the 3800 (which does really fine prints BTW).

[Ernst Dinkla]

Just so you understand that if/when a 3880 comes out, it could be a year or more. If you want to be without a printer that long, fine. But that's a long time to hold off if you could be printing next week with the 3800 (which does really fine prints BTW).

When the 3800 was introduced I couldn't resist to compare it with the old 1500 that had the same 17" size and was available next to the old 3000. It wouldn't surprise me if the combo 3800 / 4880 will stay as long in the market as the 1500 / 3000 did and that was a long time. There's only the Canon iPF5100 in competition and you need a large desktop for that one.



Ernst Dinkla

Try: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/

[titusbear]

It wouldn't surprise me if the combo 3800 / 4880 will stay as long in the market as the 1500 / 3000 did and that was a long time.


I agree - the 4880 is a real workhorse - maintain it, and it should treat /serve you well for a long time.