How do you know that?
And how did you assume the definition ..."the typical photographer/3880 owner" ? A hobbyist?
I know plenty of 3880/ImagePrint users, who happens to be "typical professional photographers".
/Sven
I am sure there are lots of photographers who are 3880 and ImagePrint users. But that's not the question.
The question was "does the typical photographer with a 3880
need a RIP?"
It's clear that we have different opinions on what constitutes the typical photographer, and what tools are best.
A good RIP offers options and features over the standard driver. The downside is that RIP costs money, and is an extra level of complexity to master. If you don't need the extra features, there is no need to spend the money.
For me, I typically print on cut sheets. If a customer orders 100 5x7 prints, I load a stack of paper into the 3880. Sure, I could print on larger paper and manually cut the images out, but I have better things to do with my time, and 5x7 paper is a stock item with my supplier.
My paper vendor provides profiles for the standard driver, so I don't need a large library of profiles from the RIP vendor. If I need custom profiles, It's no easier to make them with a RIP.
The color gamut from the Epson driver is excellent, and large enough to handle the photos I take. A larger gamut that includes colors not in my photos, wouldn't help me.
The standard printer driver gives me a 16 bit path, so the RIP offers no advantage.
Epson's standard printer driver for the 3880 is pretty good. Much better than drivers from a few years ago. My clients and I are very happy with the quality from this driver, and I don't see a RIP increasing customer satisfaction with my prints.
Photoshop already gives me crop marks, and image placement options. Lightroom allows me to print multiple images per page.
I use Epson's standard inks. I don't have my printer loaded with 8 shades of black. I don't need special software to support non-standard inks.
As to fine tuning the look of my image, I much prefer to do that in Photoshop. Sometimes I need to make images larger than my 3880 can handle or I may want to reprint an image in the future, long after the 3880 is no longer available. If the colors are correct in the image file, any properly calibrated process will make a matching print. If I am fine tuning the image with the RIP, then these changes are lost when I print without the RIP.
If I do want to adjust in the driver, Epson's printer provides excellent B&W options.
For me, the Epson driver meets my needs. There is no advantage to me to spend extra money, time and effort on a RIP, when I have no problems for it to solve.
As you point out, these are just my opinions. I have no data to back it up. My thought is that most photographers fall into the same category that I am in, and don't need a RIP. I am sure there are lots of people who need RIPs, I just think they are in the minority.
Obviously, you are very happy with you RIP, and I see nothing wrong with that. You have given us all your reasons why you think RIPs are a good idea for most photographers. Perhaps you will convince lots of people and they will get a RIP. In a few weeks we might start seeing a rash of posts from photographers who have switched to RIPs and want to share their positive experience. My suspicion is that this will not be the case.
