Topic: 9880 vs 9900 (Read 13581 times)

Sfleming · « **on:** March 09, 2009, 04:15:17 pm »

I'm finally about to buy the printer I've wanted for two years.

I have space, access and weight restrictions on my choice. I had not known until recently that they had beefed up the 9900 by 120 lbs. I have been on hiatus for over a year due to disgust with my printer/gallery. I'm ready to start up again, have moved ( now in Sandpoint, ID) and will be doing my own printing. I hated relinquishing that control before so much I didn't even want to sell any more. I did sell several of my large (apx 4.5 x 3.5 ) gallery wraps on canvas in central Texas before I dropped out.

Anyway, I was ecstatic with the prints I got out of the 9800. I understand that the 9880 has an improved print head. I guess the 9900 can do even better but it seems it's real advantages would appeal to a true commercial house rather than a one man show like me, ie bigger tanks, heavier duty construction. The bigger tanks would be a detractor for me actually as I'd rather not buy my ink 1 year's worth at a time. Or more.

So, given I was happy with the 9800, I should be ok with the 9880, yes? No?

AND can anyone other than the most highly informed and critical viewer see any real dif in the printer's final product?

Thanks for your help.

52days · « **Reply #1 on:** March 09, 2009, 05:01:54 pm »

I use both 9800 and 9900. I print fine art exhibition prints and have extremely picky customers.
If you have any calibration hardware/software and a rip and don't need the large tanks of ink and much faster printing speed I'd go with the 9880. I'd also go with the 9880 if you need to profile papers that don't have a profile for the 9900.

If you don't have the equipment, time or knowledge to calibrate the 9880 properly, I'd go with the 9900. The stock profiles work well with epson's internal LUT and epson's papers. It prints a lot faster, switching between matte and photo black is a lot cheaper and faster, paper changes are easier and it's better build.

Geoff Wittig · « **Reply #2 on:** March 09, 2009, 05:09:13 pm »

Quote from: Sfleming

I'm finally about to buy the printer I've wanted for two years.

I have space, access and weight restrictions on my choice. I had not known until recently that they had beefed up the 9900 by 120 lbs. I have been on hiatus for over a year due to disgust with my printer/gallery. I'm ready to start up again, have moved ( now in Sandpoint, ID) and will be doing my own printing. I hated relinquishing that control before so much I didn't even want to sell any more. I did sell several of my large (apx 4.5 x 3.5 ) gallery wraps on canvas in central Texas before I dropped out.

Anyway, I was ecstatic with the prints I got out of the 9800. I understand that the 9880 has an improved print head. I guess the 9900 can do even better but it seems it's real advantages would appeal to a true commercial house rather than a one man show like me, ie bigger tanks, heavier duty construction. The bigger tanks would be a detractor for me actually as I'd rather not buy my ink 1 year's worth at a time. Or more.

So, given I was happy with the 9800, I should be ok with the 9880, yes? No?

AND can anyone other than the most highly informed and critical viewer see any real dif in the printer's final product?

Thanks for your help.

Just my two cents worth-
The biggest functional difference between the 9880 and 9900 as far as I can tell would be having both matte and photo black inks loaded simultaneously. The heavier build quality would matter only if you're running a high-volume commercial print shop. Compared to your older 9800 the 9880 would extend the available color gamut a bit in the magenta/blue direction, and the 9900 a bit further yet in the greens and reds, but in my humble opinion we're talking about rapidly diminishing returns.

So I think it depends on how you use the printer. If you settle on one 'flavor' of printing surface, i.e. matte black ink on cotton rag paper and matte canvas, or photo black ink on luster/baryta paper and gloss canvas, then the 9880 will work great for you. If like me you choose different surfaces for various images, the Epson Achilles heel of time consuming and wasteful ink swapping will drive you crazy. Then the 9900 would be a more attractive alternative to buying two printers!

Wayne Fox · « **Reply #3 on:** March 09, 2009, 06:50:08 pm »

Some advantages of the 7900

-Much less ink when swapping from Mk/PK which was mentioned by Geoff ... probably the biggest consideration.
-Substantially faster print speed - 40% or more (not to mention the almost instant cutting).
-Terrific roll paper loading and feed system.
-Quieter operation.
-The auto nozzle detect,( now that mine is working) is a good feature.
-May have better resale value

Some other possible advantages ...

-Lower ink costs (only if you use the 700ml cartridges) ... currently ink for 9880 is about 0.38/ml, vs 0.31 for the 700ml 79/990 cartridges. Interestingly enough the 350ml cartridges for the 79/9900 calculates out to 0.38 as well ... sort of surprising. (This is inkjetart.com pricing as of today). For those not printing a lot of volume it is doubtful you would realize any savings here.
-Improved gamut ... while most images won't see any change, there will be some that might have some slight improvements. I'm guessing it would be very difficult to see even side by side nearly all of the time.
-Better head technology. I can see some improvements in some images in detail and gradations when comparing my 3800 prints to my 11880 and 7900 prints that use this new head - I assume the accuracy of the head allows better screening technology.
-Less ink consumed for clearing clogs. I base this on my experience with my 11880 which is better than the 9880 we are running in our plant. (the 9880 it isn't that bad however). Rarely do I need to clear nozzles on the 11880 and when I do I almost always can clear just one set of colors, not the entire head.

Worth the $1k? If basing it on pure quality of images side by side alone, probably not. Lots of other things to like about this printer however.

Sfleming · « **Reply #4 on:** March 09, 2009, 07:55:09 pm »

Thanks much for your help gentlemen. Truly.

Being a Johnny-one-note when it comes to media I won't be switching blacks so it looks like the 9880 will fit my needs. I will be having a consultant get me set up and calibrated.

gerrit · « **Reply #5 on:** March 10, 2009, 10:30:59 am »

Quote from: Sfleming

Thanks much for your help gentlemen. Truly.

Being a Johnny-one-note when it comes to media I won't be switching blacks so it looks like the 9880 will fit my needs. I will be having a consultant get me set up and calibrated.

And here is another point: If you do not do the calibration yourself the consultant will have to come back from time to tie to recalibrate and/or reprofile your printer. Depending on surrounding conditions this can be a pain to endure. Not to mention if you have picky customers and reprints will fail to have equal colors this will cost you additionally.

As we tested virtually all Epson printers in the last years I can say that though the 9880 is as good as can be in his time, the 9900 exceeds in color reproduction and stability as well as gamut, speed and handling. And it does so considerably. We have have two 7900 and one 9900 for testing and the printers could interchange profiles with a variation of dE<1. Also it does have a distinct better b/w printing quality.

The other thing is the optional Spectroproofer that can manage inline calibration, profiling and proofing if you want to. If you do not have any measurement equipment this can be a very good choice to keep variations and consulting costs low.

As the 9880 is a really good printer that is capable of nearly all tasks the next generation of Epsons is indeed a huge improvemnet.

neil snape · « **Reply #6 on:** March 10, 2009, 11:45:06 am »

I suppose each market and each user has different needs.
For me the 7900+9900 have the ideal roll feed system, higher production in mind throughout (cutter etc), and the extensions in the gamut are great when you need it.
I prefer the idea of a one printer does all, and does it as an absolute authority, so the next Epson to have IMO is hands down the x900 series.

Sfleming · « **Reply #7 on:** March 10, 2009, 03:09:53 pm »

More thanks. It really helps. As to the consultant he will be walking me through everything. I will be purchasing an Eizo monitor and all necessary calibration equipment. I plan to spend up to a week with the consultant and its a completely hands on situation. I'm not just paying someone to do this for me. I'm hiring a tutor.

digitaldog · « **Reply #8 on:** March 10, 2009, 03:20:45 pm »

9880 vs 9900

The inks are different.
The heads are different (and you can clean two rows only)
The dither, print engine is different.
The way paper is loaded is different.
The cutter is different.
The control panel is different.

I'm sure I'm forgetting more details.

Anthony Howell · « **Reply #9 on:** March 11, 2009, 12:02:30 pm »

I purchased a 9900 as opposed to the 9880 last week. The considerations that made the difference for me were:

Wilhelm posted archivability the same for K3 & HDR inks.

When considering the additional cost of heavy paper spindle(s) and stand - the price of the 9880 approached the 9900.

I have experienced "very very slight" magenta hue shift with my 4800 & 7600 print editions on occasion. Seems the yellow is slightly clogged and not showing up in the automatic print tests, only with an ink purge does the problem rectify itself. I am hoping the new 9900 print head's auto check will prevent this in the future.

Unfortunately I can't tell you more because I have not received the 9900 yet.

Talk to Chris at Spectraflow, I was able to get 2 free 44" rolls of Ultrasmooth Fine Art paper thrown in with a very competitive price.

hope this helps,
Anthony

framah · « **Reply #10 on:** March 11, 2009, 12:58:10 pm »

Plus, Epson has a $500 rebate on the 9900 as well as the 9880 good till 3/31/09.

I just bought the 9900 thru Shades of Paper in NJ for $5550 with free shipping. That price might not be on this week tho.

With the rebate, my final price will be $5050 plus a $75 lift gate charge for the delivery truck. Couldn't get around that.

I figured it was time to upgrade from the 9600 I still use every week with no problems.

For $30 more, I can get 2 guys from the homeless shelter to move it for me.

I say go for the 9900.

Chris Gilroy · « **Reply #11 on:** March 13, 2009, 05:35:20 pm »

The 9900 is a great buy, but I do agree that it will be overkill to someone who is only using Photo or Matte Black and rarely makes prints. It's really geared for production and would be of the most value* to someone cranking out 50 prints a day.

scott morrish · « **Reply #12 on:** March 13, 2009, 08:01:45 pm »

Hi,

I was planning to buy the 9900, but i am not sure which rips offer the most comprehensive control over the spectrophotometer and the two new inks.

I currently use a 9800 with a third party rip (colorburst), but although colourburst do support the 9900, they do not seem to be sure if they will be able to control the spectrophotometer or not?
Additionally, although they allow users to control all eight inks on the older 9800's etc, they do not make this possible for the 9900. There is also disparity between Mac and Windows versions of the rips.

If anyone already using the 9900 could tell me how they control the spectrophotometer, how well it performs, and also whether they can use the 9900 as a true 6 colour device, i would be very grateful. (FWIW, my idea of control, when offered CMYK+O&G is to be able to choose how and when to make use of each of those inks. For all the benefits of icc profiles, none of them are optimised for everything).

Thanks,
Scott

pindman · « **Reply #13 on:** March 13, 2009, 08:13:48 pm »

I bought the 9900 from Chris at Spectraflow last month. The canned Epson profiles are right on. I use mostly Harman FB Al papers, and Spectraflow did a custom profile that is also great, so no need for consultants to come in to calibrate. This printer is fast, and changing from sheet to roll paper is quick and easy. The 9900 is fantastic!

And I can't say too much about the service from Chris and Julian at Spectraflow. Absolutely fantastic is an understatement!

Paul

digitaldog · « **Reply #14 on:** March 14, 2009, 12:05:43 am »

Unless you're making certified proofs, where you need to prove deltaE variations to your clients (which are pretty small), you don't really need the Spectrophotometer. That is, if your goal is to build ICC profile for 3rd party papers, or really nail your own custom profiles, there are Spectrophotometer and software based solutions that cost less, do more.

The on board Spectrophotometer wasn't provided as an option for most users. For those that need to certify numerically, the data for proofing, this is a useful option. Try the canned profiles first. The vast majority of users will be well served with these profiles for Epson papers.

scott morrish · « **Reply #15 on:** March 14, 2009, 05:03:54 am »

Quote from: digitaldog

Unless you're making certified proofs, where you need to prove deltaE variations to your clients (which are pretty small), you don't really need the Spectrophotometer. That is, if your goal is to build ICC profile for 3rd party papers, or really nail your own custom profiles, there are Spectrophotometer and software based solutions that cost less, do more.

The on board Spectrophotometer wasn't provided as an option for most users. For those that need to certify numerically, the data for proofing, this is a useful option. Try the canned profiles first. The vast majority of users will be well served with these profiles for Epson papers.

As it happens i have two very different workflows. For one I want to certify (contract) proofs, and for the other I want to use the inks in non-standard ways (different ink-weights, different grey builds etc). I already have an EyeOne Pro, and use it for these purposes vie Colourbursts profiling software (spectral vision), but it is a manual process, time consuming, and doesn't work with the 9900's built in spectrophotometer! If certification could be automated via a rip, time could be saved.

I realise that the spectrophotometer is not aimed at most users (hence it is optional). But what about those who want to make better use of the colours available?
Even Epson re-sellers do not seem to know about this. They are excited that there is a spectophotometer... but do not know what it can do, or how to use it!
Is there documrntation of exactly what can be done with the spectrophotometer, and how?
Is any one actually using it yet?
And if so... via which rip?

Scott

Mussi_Spectraflow · « **Reply #16 on:** March 16, 2009, 03:08:16 pm »

Scott,

The spectro' comes bundled with some basic Epson supplied software that does allow for the verification of jobs. While the process works, it's not really designed to work in-line with a quick paced proofing workflow. The software set will also allow you to measure and save CGATS files from profiling patches, sort of duplicating the functionality of ColorPort. If you have 3rd party profiling software you can use that measurement file to build your profile.

The SpectroProofer really makes sense when it is supported by a RIP. My experience with EFI V4 and the Spectroproofer has been pretty good. The device can be used to linearize, profile, optimize, and verify proofing jobs. Each workflow can alos be setup to verify against a different standard with its own tolerances (eg, Swop2006_G5, Fogra44) If your actually selling your proofs as "verified, Contract proofs" then you are one of those users who will benefit from this device. If your interested in getting one, you want to be careful deciding whether or not to get the UV or no-Uv cut version, as they are two different part numbers. I had a rather lukewarm reaction to the SP in my review of the X900 because of the price and general usefulness it offered to the "Standard" user, but for what your doing it should be a good fit if you want automated proof certification.

scott morrish · « **Reply #17 on:** March 18, 2009, 07:36:33 pm »

Quote from: Mussi_Spectraflow

Scott,

The spectro' comes bundled with some basic Epson supplied software that does allow for the verification of jobs. While the process works, it's not really designed to work in-line with a quick paced proofing workflow. The software set will also allow you to measure and save CGATS files from profiling patches, sort of duplicating the functionality of ColorPort. If you have 3rd party profiling software you can use that measurement file to build your profile.

The SpectroProofer really makes sense when it is supported by a RIP. My experience with EFI V4 and the Spectroproofer has been pretty good. The device can be used to linearize, profile, optimize, and verify proofing jobs. Each workflow can alos be setup to verify against a different standard with its own tolerances (eg, Swop2006_G5, Fogra44) If your actually selling your proofs as "verified, Contract proofs" then you are one of those users who will benefit from this device. If your interested in getting one, you want to be careful deciding whether or not to get the UV or no-Uv cut version, as they are two different part numbers. I had a rather lukewarm reaction to the SP in my review of the X900 because of the price and general usefulness it offered to the "Standard" user, but for what your doing it should be a good fit if you want automated proof certification.

Thanks Julian,

Very helpful, as was your article.
Really hope Colorburst decide to support the spectrophotometer. It has been a great rip on the 9800, but for those of us who also proof for pre-press, the spectrophotometer makes too much sense to ignore: the rip has to work with it!

Many thanks
Scott

Author Topic: 9880 vs 9900 (Read 13581 times)