Hi, Neil -
Thanks for taking the time to reply; it's appreciated.
The length of white edge on the left is going to be relative to the long dimension as skew checking measures in multiple locations.
What is interesting is, I have this problem even if I turn skew checking off.
The Z doesn't handle thick paper well or at least over .8 mm. Epson do well with 1.5mm or more.
As I well know... The Epson drivers also allow me to enter how thick the paper is, which is nice.
I know closer tolerances = better prints. But with a limit of 0.8mm, I may not be able to get Hawk Mountain Nighthawk paper through it, at ~0.9mm. (I prefer thicker papers, as I collage on top of my prints later, and want a paper that can stand up to adding adhesives on top. My main paper is Hawk Mountain Kestrel, which is around 0.6mm without anything on top...once I add white tape, or chine colle papers, the Z starts complaining.)
The HP 9180 pushes through 1.5mm no problem, I've printed on wood recently at least 2.5mm thick or more.
I am jealous!!! I see the spec is just 1.5mm; I am surprised it let you put 2.5mm through. It seems to be less fussy than the Z3100, which stops on ~1mm surfaces. (I just went over and read your review - thanks for being so thorough. Now if I could just print out a calibration chart on the 9180, and have the Z3100 scan it to make a profile...)
I just spent some quality time with some digital calipers and one of my collages on Hawk Mountain Kestrel, and typical base+paste+collage thicknesses range from 0.75-1.0, peaking at 1.23mm. Fine for our Epsons, not for the HP Z. (I'm in the process of measuring the rest of my Hawk Mountain swatch book, and will do wet-buckling tests on the thinner papers. Wish me luck...)
There is still work to do on the drivers in paper handling that could come from users demands. Your issue is a common request that should be taken more seriously. I know I've been doing hundreds of tests on multiple prints, and at least reloading paper characteristics should be noted in documentation , not left up to discovery.
In general, there are a lot of things HP does right with the Z, so I don't want it to appear that I am bashing HP. And I've had a lot of unpleasant episodes with Epson printers (esp. in the area of head clogging). But I was surprised that the HP drivers lack so many nice little features the Epson drives have, such as setting ink load, paper thickness, and how firmly the paper is held down (vacuum suction on the Epson 4000 etc.). We are researching a book on combining digital and traditional art techniques, and these limitations make me quite cautious about suggesting the Z to others.
thanks again -