SureColor P9570

[langier]

The head on my second-hand 9900 finally after a decade of printing, gave up. Just couldn't get the head clean any more and so I called my expert and asked his advice. I was considering a couple of second-hand 9900s, one about a two hour drive that was on eBay and for sale by a hobbiest. 

Since he had serviced this machine several years before his advice was to replace the head. The head is "new and improved." Besides, I've run out of friends to be "pall bearers" to remove the old 9900 up the steps and bring a new one back down. Then there's the disposal problems with such a beast....

I can tell you a new head was worth it! Despite the costs, including a service call, it was all done in a couple of hours! Checking my custom profiles, they are still fine so I didn't have to redo them all again. Did this two years ago and it's doing as well if not better than when I first brought the 9900 home.

The new head is indeed improved and needs fewer cleaning cycles. Overall, this was the best solution for me and money well spent. If I get several more years of printing with it, I'll be pretty happy! As a back-up, I purchased a P900 17-inch printer for sheets and backup. When I ordered it, it took several months to ship, just like when I bought my Epson 4000 nearly 20 years ago.

So far, both printers are working well and I should be printing trouble-free for years.

[ssgphoto]

Epson just quietly released a PDF about printing on fine art papers with the 9570 and details the media installer. It mostly references things we have learned the hard way over 2 1/2 years and insufficient honest support from Epson, but this will be a helpful reference. It's attached here.

[Rand47]

Epson just quietly released a PDF about printing on fine art papers with the 9570 and details the media installer. It mostly references things we have learned the hard way over 2 1/2 years and insufficient honest support from Epson, but this will be a helpful reference. It's attached here.

Thanks for posting this.  Where did you find it, how did you become aware of it? 

Rand

[ssgphoto]

Hi Rand, We received it from one of our distributors.

[deanwork]

How sweet of them after 2 1/2 years. Oh man. Sounds like they are trying to cover themselves legally.

I’d be highly doubtful that it solves half the problems.

Epson just quietly released a PDF about printing on fine art papers with the 9570 and details the media installer. It mostly references things we have learned the hard way over 2 1/2 years and insufficient honest support from Epson, but this will be a helpful reference. It's attached here.

[hubell]

Epson just quietly released a PDF about printing on fine art papers with the 9570 and details the media installer. It mostly references things we have learned the hard way over 2 1/2 years and insufficient honest support from Epson, but this will be a helpful reference. It's attached here.

Thanks. It is a helpful reference in terms of identifying the various Printer Settings (outside the printer driver) that impact the potential problems with thicker fine art papers. However, the PDF still leaves it to individual users of these printers to determine in key areas exactly which settings to use for a specific paper. For example, there are five different settings for the Platen Gap ranging from 1.2 to 2.4. The PDF notes that a bigger gap than the "standard" gap for the recommended media type may have to be used to avoid head strikes, but there is no recommendation of the Platen Gap for specific 3rd party papers. The PDF tells you to run tests, but also notes that using a bigger platen gap may create banding in the prints. The third party paper manufacturers have also been notably unhelpful. They could run their own tests with their papers and provide a recommended Platen Gap. Same with the settings for the Platen Gap Offset, Paper Suction, and Back Tension.

[ssgphoto]

Although it tells you to run tests it says nothing about the Epson media installers pathetically limited space to save different papers ands settings makes testing all the more difficult and time consuming. There is no documentation I know of that actually lets you know how many media types you can save, which is a critical oversight.

[Rand47]

Although it tells you to run tests it says nothing about the Epson media installers pathetically limited space to save different papers ands settings makes testing all the more difficult and time consuming. There is no documentation I know of that actually lets you know how many media types you can save, which is a critical oversight.

You can gain more "space" for custom media in the Printer / EMI by going into EMI and deleting a bunch of the Epson media types that you'll never use.  I cleaned out at least 20 of them.  It's a pain in the butt, but it works.

Rand

[Ignotus_Mago]

A new head into the 9900 is on order. Thanks for the replies. Will let you know how things go.

Installed the new head and have been printing for about a month. Definitely seems like the right decision. The Epson-certified technician who installed the head for me said as much. In his experience, the 9570 was an advance in printer technology that was not yet fully functional. Evidently the last few years have brought him many service calls.

Though I did install my own new ink selector assembly recently, installing a print head seems much more involved. It's not just a question of getting it in place, but of testing and calibrating. Calling in the service tech was definitely worth it.

I expect to go on for two or three more years with the 9900 with a new head, scrupulously printing every day or two, shaking carts, running nozzle checks, keeping constant 50% humidity in the studio, and performing all the other rituals that keep the printer printing. Right now the results are as precise, bright, and detailed as ever. I'm not sure the 9570 would have been an improvement, despite the wider gamut.

This was my second 9900, 7 years on the same head. Meanwhile, I have my first 9900 in the studio with a cyan head that doesn't print. I have thought of converting it to third party inks, particularly Jon Cone's piezography inks. A printer I talked with in Florida was converting 9900s to dye sub and printing heat transfer images for t-shirts. All very interesting, but I probably just need one printer.

Thanks again for the good advice. It really helped me to make a decision.

[Rand47]

Excellent news!  Here’s to trouble free printing for a few years yet.

Rand

[StuartR]

I just thought I would update this thread to give some experiences, since I originally posted in it looking for advice. Long story short, I have had a very rough time with this printer. There are some positive aspects like what appear to be blacker blacks, particularly in matte prints, and of course the lack of ink switching is extremely useful. But that is about all I can say is good. I have had constant struggles with banding, almost no help from Epson at all, tons of wasted paper, rolls being torn off the core and just a bunch of assorted glitches, hang ups and time wasters (for example, deciding to run a cleaning after a print and making you wait for the cleaning before it will eject the print). The paper loading and handling is extremely tedious, even if you turn off the skew detection. I was printing a large exhibition of very dark black photos and it took me several days to tune out the banding, which involved far more than one might expect or at least what I was used to in the P9000. The most recent problem I am having is that it keeps jamming and creasing very thin papers. For example I have a 90gsm matte proofing paper that I use just for tests, and it will not even load...it just advances into the printer and crumples every time. I am currently doing an exhibition on Murakumo Kozo Select 45gsm, which is admittedly an extremely thin paper, but I used it with no issues at all on the P9000. Now it is starting to crease the paper vertically...I guess between the vacuum nozzles. I have reduced the vacuum to -4 and have the roll tension on high and it still happens. These prints are 180cm long, and it is often not starting to crease until 120cm or so, so it is really adding up in terms of lost materials. If I could wave a magic wand and just have a P9000 again, I would absolutely do it. My experience with the 9900 was also very negative with lots of problems, so I think it is clear that Epson uses their users to beta test these printers. I hope they introduce a better model soon, because this thing is truly a terrible business partner. I am shocked it got out the door, not just for the technical issues, but because of the extremely inefficient usage...the amount of steps involved just to load a single sheet of paper is ridiculous, or the fact that you cannot multitask at all. For example, if you turn on the printer and open the cover to put a roll in, the printer will stop booting up, tell you to close the cover and not do anything until you do. Why not just continue booting up and let me do my work? Sorry for all the gripes, but I am at my wits end. I have had this printer since 2020 or so and it has been a bummer the whole time. I have been running a Certified Studio since 2009 (well, certified in 2015, but the same studio), so it is not like I am a noob who doesn't know how to fix typical issues...
Attached below is a picture of what it is doing to the Kozo paper.

[dgberg]

Installed the new head and have been printing for about a month. Definitely seems like the right decision. The Epson-certified technician who installed the head for me said as much. In his experience, the 9570 was an advance in printer technology that was not yet fully functional. Evidently the last few years have brought him many service calls.

Though I did install my own new ink selector assembly recently, installing a print head seems much more involved. It's not just a question of getting it in place, but of testing and calibrating. Calling in the service tech was definitely worth it.

I expect to go on for two or three more years with the 9900 with a new head, scrupulously printing every day or two, shaking carts, running nozzle checks, keeping constant 50% humidity in the studio, and performing all the other rituals that keep the printer printing. Right now the results are as precise, bright, and detailed as ever. I'm not sure the 9570 would have been an improvement, despite the wider gamut.

This was my second 9900, 7 years on the same head. Meanwhile, I have my first 9900 in the studio with a cyan head that doesn't print. I have thought of converting it to third party inks, particularly Jon Cone's piezography inks. A printer I talked with in Florida was converting 9900s to dye sub and printing heat transfer images for t-shirts. All very interesting, but I probably just need one printer.

Thanks again for the good advice. It really helped me to make a decision.

If you want to talk I converted a  new P8000 to dye sublimation 3 years ago. Was told it couldn't be done and it works fantastic.

[sunnyherman]

Having a hard time reconciling all the issues discussed in this thread with this review, that gushes about the 9570 (I have a Canon iPF 6300 and a PRO 1000, considering a new printer and came across this review of the P9570) -

https://luminous-landscape.com/epson-surecolor-p9570-full-review-the-finest-color-printer-yet-made/'