Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Printing: Printers, Papers and Inks => Topic started by: julienlanoo on November 05, 2011, 06:32:06 am
-
Hi all, I am looking to buy a large format printer.
I would like to have the 11880,
because of the size.
But i see the 9900 has a color more.. so, i wonder, quality wise, is it much better than the 11880,
does any one have experience ?...
thanks
Ju
-
Ju, will 44" wide work or do you need more than 60"? That is the real question. There is also a huge price difference.
-
11880 needs no black ink swapping, both Matte and Photo are on-line. 9900 requires a swap, depending on how you swap (service mode or not) it can take up some ink as the printer may want to do a cleaning after the swap.
If you are going to use both Matte and Photo black equally this is one thing to consider.
The 9900 has the new designed paper handling, no more spools. After using 7800 and 9880's for years I didn't realize just how much I would like the new style. Much easier to use. I don't believe the 11880 has this.
I believe the 11880 has only 1 ink tank size the 700ML, you can purchase the 150, 350 or 700 on the 9900. So far it seems that the use of orange and green is not anywhere as much as the other colors. I am still on my install tanks on these two colors and have long moved to 700ml's on the others.
The 11880, 9880 and 9900 all use the same basic Vivid Magenta K3 ink set, the 9900 adds the Orange and Green and Epson calls it HDR ink. But all the other carts in the HDR set are the same ink as 11880, 9880, 9890 etc. You can verify this on easily as the 150, 350, and 700 carts for the 9900 are interchangeable with the 9890 except for the green and orange. The 11880 and 9880 use the exactly same inks, except the 11880 allows you to have the Matte and Photo available.
As I recall the 11880 has the newer head design with the smaller nozzles and was the 1st Epson with this Technology.
Of course if you need 60 inch prints, then the 11880 is the one to pick.
Quality wise? Both printers should lay down a very similar ink pattern, dither etc.
I really can't see much difference between my 9880 prints and 9900 prints, with the unaided eye, I guess with a loupe I might be able to see something.
Epson has a very good rebate program on the 9900 right now, not sure on the 11880.
Paul Caldwell
-
I believe you will be very, very hard pressed to see any difference in quality, both are superb printers so it really comes down to how often will you need the extra size, will you print over 44" wide often enough to make the investment worthwhile vs outsourcing the massive prints?
-
I have them both.
The 11 is a dream machine, very reliable and has been running almost every day now for four years.
With a couple of services of course.
The 99 is another story. As you can read in many posts here, it's sometimes very unreliable,
with its clogs-and-cleaning cycles. However, after the last firmware update, it is in fact stable and flawless(knock-on-wood).
The only difference, besides the size, is when printing strong and saturated colors, esp. on matte papers.
The 99 has more pleasant, clean and pure hues.
/Sven
-
I also have both (2 11880's actually) but I find my 9900 has been very reliable, a few cleanings, but nothing major. I've had all 3 of the the x900 series, and on all of them I've found them a little finicky when new but after a couple of weeks they seem to need cleaned much less frequently. I also disable auto cleaning and I don't bother cleaning if a single nozzle is missing from a color or two ... it will usually clear itself up. I do think the 11880 was better for the first year (hardly ever need cleaned), but now it seems to be about on par with the 9900 .. maybe once a week might need a clean, sometimes longer sometimes less. The 11880 is now almost 4 years old (Dec 2007) and I've only replaced one maintenance tank.
As has been mentioned, the 11880 has both MK/PK live to the head and if you do a lot of switching between the two is great for that. Paper loading with the long spindle in the 11880 is a pain compared to the terrific loading of the 9900. 9900 cutter is rated for canvas but the 11880 cuts it just fine, you just might have to replace the cutter blade sooner.
as far as quality I think it's also been said very well ... side by side you may see a slight difference in some colors but despite the additional colors and I believe some newer screening of the 9900 for photographic work the differences are undetectable except perhaps a few rare images. I have a 4900 by my desk I print test prints and the first final version at 13x19, and until a couple of weeks ago printed all other sizes on the 11880 ... never a problem or noticeable difference.
-
I vote for the 11880 as well but more to be able to print 50" than 60".
4x8's occur a lot in the world of large format and we frequently do work finished to 48"x96".
Virtually all commercial media is available in 50".
Fine Art paper rarely gets larger than 44"
PS: Don't forget a laminator:)
-
I vote for the 11880 as well but more to be able to print 50" than 60".
4x8's occur a lot in the world of large format and we frequently do work finished to 48"x96".
Virtually all commercial media is available in 50".
Fine Art paper rarely gets larger than 44"
PS: Don't forget a laminator:)
Epson has more than 15 different media in 60" or more, Innova around 10, Hahnemühle too.
Many of them Fine Art. At least here, over the pond ;)
/Sven
-
The 11880 has a LOT of cheap ink on eBay, unlike the 7900/9900, so you can really economise on your ongoing ink expenses.
I'd give another vote for that, assuming you need the extra width.
-
Guys, Thanks for your supper awnsers... !!!
Price isn't really the problem; if i need it, i'll finance it ... that's not it...
The thing why i would use it is to print my own gallery work.
It's not a high printing count... maybe a few PA's, and then the series on it self.
Until now i out sourced my printing work in Paris ( i live in france) , or Lille, or at Grieger in Dusseldorf ... but now growing :) and i would like to do my prints at least in house... As there's always something that isn't perfec on the prints, and i am getting a bit fed-up with compromises...
I was wondering about the 11 just because the size...
I don't have work until now that is bigger than 1meter, but the 10x20 scans are way bigger, it's also 50 asa film max..., and after the last expo i thought some images could be printed bigger, they just need it, as they have so much detail and the story happens within the details.
But then again, it's an older printer, and i though the 9900 could deliver much richer images, as i read on luminous landscape, in combination with color byte...
mhm, i am still not out of it.. :)
I read a post on the difference about the 9890 and 9900, really such a small difference ? ..
-
On our side of the ocean the 9900 is about $4,000.00 cheaper than the 11880 according to MSRP. Lots of rebates and deals going around that change that number regularly. The 9900 is cheaper, has a larger color gamut and is a faster printer than the 11880. I use both but use the 9900 more often. Unless you need to print over 44" on a regular basis I'd go with the 9900. Put another way if I could only have one of the machines it would be the 9900 - no question. The bump from the 880 print heads/ink set to the 900 is also significant.
-
They have the same print head with 320 nozzles/channel, with the exception that the 99 has one more channel.
But with the same printing speed.
Epson's site:
"Stylus Pro 7900 and 9900 builds on Epson’s MicroPiezo TFP (Thin Film Piezo) print head, introduced with the launch of the Stylus Pro 11880"
/Sven
-
360 nozzles per channel. It's the same technology, but not the same print head.
-
Well, some nozzles are often clogged ;D ;D
-
I checked the price difference between the 9900 and 11880 is the same difference as between the 7900 and 9900,...
There is quite a logic in their thinking :)..
Both have serious rebates to over here..
I wonder if the last crisis have anything to do with it :).. man now you can buy a 7900 for the price of a 4800 few years ago...
-
If you don't need bigger then 44" I would buy an 9890 together with a 4900. Invest in Imageprint, it makes printing life much easier. Buy a Rotatrim Professional 54". Get a huge table (custom made) 150cm x 250cm and make sure you can walk around it. Get a flat file, the biggest you can find.
The bigger is better/plexi+dibond trend from the last 10 years seems to be finished (also in Europe). Do you really need 60"? Do you need it for commercial work? How do you want to handle your prints? How often are you going to need that size? What paper stock are you going to buy? both 60" and 44"? maybe 24" rolls? How are you going to stock that?
I have a 7880, 7900 and a 9800. Output for all three is really not that much different. Never really had any clogging problems. Make sure you control the humid level in your printing area (more humid the better for your inks ---> not so good for your paper stock though!!!) The 9800 has been running flawless since 2005. Cutter still ok'ish (although should be changed). For cutting, just stick a 44" strip of dibond on your printer and use it as a cutting mat. The 7900 has a great and fast cutter (almost to fast if you don't want your prints to drop). The 7900 is very efficient on ink.
The 9800 can easily be run with Phatte Black option from ImagePrint. Don't worry about bronzing and gloss differential: it is still there on the 7900 as well (try the on this forum so much loved Canson baryta paper and you know what I mean...)
Jochem
Jochem
-
Do you notice any GD on these Canson Baryta prints? :D
(see image)
/Sven
-
Sorry Sven, but what do you want to show/proof with this image?!
-
What most of us realize/understand.
When framed, nobody will ever notice any form of GD.
/Sven
-
mmmmm.. ??? That was exactly my point when I wrote about the similar output of the 7880, 7900 and 9800
Next time, read the whole post Sven.
J
-
mmmmm.. ??? That was exactly my point when I wrote about the similar output of the 7880, 7900 and 9800
Next time, read the whole post Sven.
J
Don't worry about bronzing and gloss differential: it is still there on the 7900 as well (try the on this forum so much loved Canson baryta paper and you know what I mean...)
That's exactly what I did.
/Sven
-
The Canson Baryta has bronzing on all the makes of printers including the HP and the new Canons, as does its near clone the Ilford Baryta (neither of them have baryta in them by the way). But it is a nice paper with a good gamut and a nice texture. The Harmon B produces no bronzing or much less depending on the inkset.
j
-
Quote from the Canson site:
"Baryta Photographique is a true Baryta paper developed for inkjet technology. It consists of an alpha- cellulose, acid-free pure white paper with the same barium sulphate coating as for traditional silver halide and a premium inkjet colour receiver layer."
/Sven
-
We have both, but I like the build quality on the 9900 better than the 11880. The arm that releases the roll on the 11880 seems flimsy, like its going to break off. Otherwise, the print quality and speed seem the same. The 9900 does have dedicated orange and green ink cartridges, which the 11880 doesn't, but I can gang up more prints on the 60" roll than the 44" roll and save some money.
-
Ok, somehow we went a little off topic here, and it became more of an inkjet paper commercial. But for the original poster:
-Make sure you're able to handle the print size (rotatrim cutter, table size, mounting etc.);
-Bigger is not better. I have been printing for the last 5 years for the Roman international Fotofestival and there is a trend to smaller, more intimate images. For 2011, The large images I printed for Alec Soth where 40" x 30" and the smaller images where 24" x 18". All those images were printed on Epson Premium Luster Paper. The images of Anders Petersen I printed on Epson Cold Press Natural paper and were 24" x 30".
-The epson 9800 prints the same as the 9900. Bronzing and Gloss differential are part of the inkjet process (since the ink is sitting on the paper). I wouldn't bother about it too much. Paper being fragile, now that IS a problem and the coating usually s..kcs. (the hahnemuhle papers are better, but the newer PhotoRag Baryta papers might be a little too "dinosaur skin" like). Nothing you can do about it for now, just "handle with care"
On Inkjet papers:
-Canson Baryta is good, but fragile. Harman/Hahn Baryta is fragile and not as sharp as Canson. Hahn PhotoRag Baryta is excellent but "snake skin like" texture
-Hahnemuhle PhotoRag is still a standard. Portfolio etc. Learn to soft-proof this paper.
-Framed behind glass? just use Epson Premium Luster. Cheap and sharp
J
-
I'm not trying to be a smart ass here, really, but some of this just isn't accurate.
Gloss differential and bronzing were totally eliminated over 5 years ago with the HP Z series on every RC media I've ever used. There was some remaining bronzing with fiber gloss but not rc.
Now that I have the IPF 8300 ( now what 2 years old) and use the Harmon Baryta, which is quite sharp from my files, and certainly sharper than Premium Luster and as sharp as Canson by any measure on my Canon (with output sharpening in the plug-in,) I see it is free of all gloss differential. I'm not seeing bronzing either, even with black and white work when printing out of the True Black and White rip by BawHaus. This is a killer combination and nothing coming out of an Epson printer is looking like this, for both clean monochrome print color as well as lack of three dimensional artifacts. But even if it did have an ultra subtle amount of bronzing, one very light coat of Premier Art and it would be gone. There were only a couple of instances where that was visible with very large areas of pure black against large areas of pure white, but you really had to rotate it in your hand and search for it even then.
I was never able to make that happen, even with spraying on my HP. That gloss optimiser simply didn't work with smooth gloss fiber, but totally worked with rc media.
From reading more about it apparently the Canson is using some baryta sulfate in their coating, but I doubt very much if most of the "baryta' inkjet papers are really baryta coated. It is more about the psychology of a silver print than any real attribute of baryta. Because people still have a mythology about silver that takes over their imaginations.
Right, the Canson and Ilford will scratch if you breathe on them wrong. I had to quit using both when I noticed I had to polish out all the scratches in the border areas, if I was lucky and didn't see any inside the image. That and the bronzing was too much, and it's a shame because the color gamut is very good, but so is the Harmon gamut. Both have a moderate amount of flourescent brightners and are holding up pretty well in the aardenburg tests. The Epson "signature worthy" Exhibiton Fiber is turning gray fast.
.--------------------------
-The epson 9800 prints the same as the 9900. Bronzing and Gloss differential are part of the inkjet process (since the ink is sitting on the paper). I wouldn't bother about it too much. Paper being fragile, now that IS a problem and the coating usually s..kcs. (the hahnemuhle papers are better, but the newer PhotoRag Baryta papers might be a little too "dinosaur skin" like). Nothing you can do about it for now, just "handle with care"
On Inkjet papers:
-Canson Baryta is good, but fragile. Harman/Hahn Baryta is fragile and not as sharp as Canson. Hahn PhotoRag Baryta is excellent but "snake skin like" texture
-Hahnemuhle PhotoRag is still a standard. Portfolio etc. Learn to soft-proof this paper.
-Framed behind glass? just use Epson Premium Luster. Cheap and sharp
J
[/quote]