Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Printing: Printers, Papers and Inks => Topic started by: mziegler on September 28, 2013, 06:19:46 pm
-
I need some printer recommendations. I have three classes, 105 students. My hope is to display their work (probably 8 x 10's) around school and in the community. I am going to collect $20 per student (well, many of them) and print 10 for each student, which means about 1000 copies a year. The printer will be shut down during the summer (I believe this is a problem with inkjets).
I have been considering the Canon Pro-10 and Canon R-3000. Is there a consensus about which is better? Is there a better printer for my needs? Obviously I am deeply ignorant. I would appreciate any advice.
-
I need some printer recommendations. I have three classes, 105 students. My hope is to display their work (probably 8 x 10's) around school and in the community. I am going to collect $20 per student (well, many of them) and print 10 for each student, which means about 1000 copies a year. The printer will be shut down during the summer (I believe this is a problem with inkjets).
I have been considering the Canon Pro-10 and Canon R-3000. Is there a consensus about which is better? Is there a better printer for my needs? Obviously I am deeply ignorant. I would appreciate any advice.
Probably an Epson r3000, not Canon?
I would look at cartridge capacity, which tends to directly relate to ink costs per print. I would even look at he Epson 3880, which is bigger than you need but has 80 ml cartridges. It comes with about $450 more ink than the 13 inch printers.
Brian A
-
Pigment printers are the ones that tend to clog when not used regularly. A Canon PRO 100 (NOT the PRO 10) might be a good choice for you. Although a dye printer, it has impressed several on this forum. Dye printers naturally get very rich color, some say too rich. The PRO 100 also has black, grey, and light grey carts so also prints very nice B&W. With Canon or Ilford RC papers, fade resistance is reported to be excellent and many paper companies are producing profiles for their paper and the PRO 100. It's also a great buy right now.
While dye printers tend to be more maintenance free and have excellent color, their prints typically won't last as long as pigment. But both type will outlast wet lab prints. The PRO 100's ink carts are small compared to some of the Epson printers, like the 3880, mentioned by others and Canon printers tend to use more ink than Epson. So consider ongoing expenses as well as initial costs when making your decision.
-
Personally, at 1000 8x10 prints a year, I'd start the thinking at an Epson 3880, but would seriously consider an Epson 4880, an Epson 4890, and also check out the feasibility of an Epson 7890. (I haven't looked recently, but the last time I did there were no dye based printers that produce water resistant prints. One small drop, and the print is destroyed.)
If you must do sheets, the Epson 7890 isn't such a good idea. If the only use is photographs or graphics that can be printed on roll paper then the Epson 7890 is probably the best way to go. It will have other side benefits, but lower ink cost and lower paper costs are the main issues. The ability to print on 24in rolls is a serious benefit that you just won't really believe until you do it! For example, 16x20 canvas wraps can be done...
The Epson 4880 and 4900 can also do sheet feeds. The 4900 is more tempermental apparently, but it can switch between PK and MK inks for little cost. The 4880 will cost roughly $60 to switch inks and that is probably not economical for what you are doing.
The 3880 does not do roll paper, has a significantly higher ink cost (but is still way less than consumer grade printers), and does not quite have the quality of build that the 48xx and 78xx series of printers do. For example the 3880 does not have vacuum assisted paper transport (and you will like that).
Given that you will have students operating the printer the higher build quality of the commercial grade printers is significant. The larger ink cartridges (80ml for the 3880, 200ml for the 4900, 220ml for the 4880, and 700ml for the 7890) make life easier and cost less per milliliter. The 3880 ink, a year or so ago, cost 75% of ink for a 2880, and the other are about 1/2 the price of ink for a 2880. Roll paper doesn't save quite as much, but it does save some and is easier to deal with too. (Just note that the paper cutter on the 4880 cannot handle heavy paper like canvas, while the 4900 and 7890 can.)
When you figure up the cost, consider the amount of ink that comes with the printer. Also figure the cost of ink over a 5 year period. You'll find that 1000 8x10's a year puts you well past the breaking point to make a commercial grade printer actually less expensive in the long run. (Except for the fact that your cost will be higher than you'd expect, simpy because after 1 nice 20x30 print it will be difficult to print 8x10's any more! And with a 24in printer you'll waste paper to some degree printing 8x10, which I do two at a time at 8x20 using a 10x20 paper size.)
-
Personally, at 1000 8x10 prints a year, I'd start the thinking at an Epson 3880, but would seriously consider an Epson 4880, an Epson 4890, and also check out the feasibility of an Epson 7890. (I haven't looked recently, but the last time I did there were no dye based printers that produce water resistant prints. One small drop, and the print is destroyed.)
If you must do sheets, the Epson 7890 isn't such a good idea. If the only use is photographs or graphics that can be printed on roll paper then the Epson 7890 is probably the best way to go. It will have other side benefits, but lower ink cost and lower paper costs are the main issues. The ability to print on 24in rolls is a serious benefit that you just won't really believe until you do it! For example, 16x20 canvas wraps can be done...
The Epson 4880 and 4900 can also do sheet feeds. The 4900 is more tempermental apparently, but it can switch between PK and MK inks for little cost. The 4880 will cost roughly $60 to switch inks and that is probably not economical for what you are doing.
The 3880 does not do roll paper, has a significantly higher ink cost (but is still way less than consumer grade printers), and does not quite have the quality of build that the 48xx and 78xx series of printers do. For example the 3880 does not have vacuum assisted paper transport (and you will like that).
Given that you will have students operating the printer the higher build quality of the commercial grade printers is significant. The larger ink cartridges (80ml for the 3880, 200ml for the 4900, 220ml for the 4880, and 700ml for the 7890) make life easier and cost less per milliliter. The 3880 ink, a year or so ago, cost 75% of ink for a 2880, and the other are about 1/2 the price of ink for a 2880. Roll paper doesn't save quite as much, but it does save some and is easier to deal with too. (Just note that the paper cutter on the 4880 cannot handle heavy paper like canvas, while the 4900 and 7890 can.)
When you figure up the cost, consider the amount of ink that comes with the printer. Also figure the cost of ink over a 5 year period. You'll find that 1000 8x10's a year puts you well past the breaking point to make a commercial grade printer actually less expensive in the long run. (Except for the fact that your cost will be higher than you'd expect, simpy because after 1 nice 20x30 print it will be difficult to print 8x10's any more! And with a 24in printer you'll waste paper to some degree printing 8x10, which I do two at a time at 8x20 using a 10x20 paper size.)
All good points. With 35 years of HS teaching experience, I know that the OP's funding circumstances may not allow these choices but they are probably best if the budget will allow. You should always go for the most professional experience for your students that the budget will allow but sometimes uncomfortable corners have to be cut.
One minor quibble. I recently had a large rain drop hit a print from my Canon PRO 100. The print was made on Canon's new Luster paper. I was sure it was ruined but I dabbed the water off of the print and waited for it to dry. No ink on the towel and when the print dried there was no sign of damage on the print. The old saw about water and dye ink may no longer be accurate. Technological advances have done wonders for the widely publicized weaknesses of both dye and pigment printers and their prints.
-
The 3880 is about the only pigment inkjet that owners feel comfortable with shutting down for weeks or months at a time. Mine has gone 4-years with no clogs even though it sits turned off for weeks/months. The original ink lasted for 3-years.
I would recommend avoiding printers with small carts. They cost more per ml of ink and waste ink every time the carts are replaced, which is often.
Sal
-
Clogging of nozzles isn't something I would be at all concerned with. I use both an Epson 4880 and an Epson 7890, and there are times, particularly with the 4880, that each goes without being used for weeks, sometimes months. Not that the heads don't clog, just that cleaning them actually is easy.
First, the head cleaning routines provided by the printer work very well.
But if they don't it is no trick at all to clean the heads with isopropyl alcohol or an ammonia based glass cleaner. I much prefer alcohol because it evaporates very quickly and won't likely damage anything. The method is to spill a pretty good puddle of alcohol on a large sheet of paper while it is being printed on. Let the print head go back and forth across the puddle 15-20 times. The eject the paper and wipe up as much excess liquid as possible and wait a while until the rest evaporates. Clean heads are the guaranteed result, every time. It's even easier than it sounds.
-
I have to ask this -- someone suggested a Shinko S1245 printer. It's a dye-sub. Is this just a ridiculous suggestion given my needs?
-
Clogging of nozzles isn't something I would be at all concerned with. I use both an Epson 4800 and an Epson 7890, and there are times, particularly with the 4880, that each goes without being used for weeks, sometimes months.
But neither of these printers is still in production.
Brian A
-
I have to ask this -- someone suggested a Shinko S1245 printer. It's a dye-sub. Is this just a ridiculous suggestion given my needs?
Depends on whether you want to teach the whole process, or just the camera/image end.
Brian A
-
Actually I was about to say a dye sub printer might suit your need.
max size 8x12, can also do 4x6 & 5x7
good for school investment
And it can stay for a whole entire summer without a single problem.
and it's easier to calculate the print cost too.
a DNP DN80 cost 1550
aaron
-
Depends on whether you want to teach the whole process, or just the camera/image end.
Brian A
My only purpose for the printer is to display student work. I am in no position to teach anything about printing.
-
But neither of these printers is still in production.
The Epson 7890 is a current model. The Epson 4880 is now discontinued, but it hasn't been for all that long and there are still new ones available that might be considered. The 4880 is probably not suitable for the OP's needs for the reasons I previously listed. The 7890 might or might not be, and if the OP's needs match a roll paper only printer the 7890 is an exceptionally good choice.
Regardless, the article you responded to had nothing at all to do with the OP's needs, but listed the printers that I own and use and how ink/nozzle clogging affects their use. Whether the two printers mentioned are current models is irrelevant.
-
The Epson 7890 is a current model. The Epson 4880 is now discontinued, but it hasn't been for all that long and there are still new ones available that might be considered. The 4880 is probably not suitable for the OP's needs for the reasons I previously listed. The 7890 might or might not be, and if the OP's needs match a roll paper only printer the 7890 is an exceptionally good choice.
Regardless, the article you responded to had nothing at all to do with the OP's needs, but listed the printers that I own and use and how ink/nozzle clogging affects their use. Whether the two printers mentioned are current models is irrelevant.
Yes, sorry. The 7890 is definitely a current printer. But to what article are you referring? I was responding directly to your post.
Brian A
-
Yes, sorry. The 7890 is definitely a current printer. But to what article are you referring? I was responding directly to your post.
The article you responded to listed those as the two printers that I use, and discussed nozzle clogging and cleaning methods.
-
I would recommend avoiding printers with small carts. They cost more per ml of ink
The total cost of owning and using a printer is the upfront cost + running costs. Depending on the number of prints expected, one or the other may dominate. You are probably right that at 1000 prints a year, the running costs become quite significant.
I am a hobby user, doing a few prints for myself and my family. For me, spending something like $1500 on a printer would likely not be worth it economically, even if the included inks lasted forever. Now, if there was a 17" consumer dye printer (at low initial cost, relatively small/expensive carts), I might be tempted...
and waste ink every time the carts are replaced, which is often.
Why is that? I run my Canon 9000 mk2 cartridges until they are dry. Does not seem to be any significant amount of ink that is wasted.
-h
-
The total cost of owning and using a printer is the upfront cost + running costs. Depending on the number of prints expected, one or the other may dominate. You are probably right that at 1000 prints a year, the running costs become quite significant.
I am a hobby user, doing a few prints for myself and my family. For me, spending something like $1500 on a printer would likely not be worth it economically, even if the included inks lasted forever. Now, if there was a 17" consumer dye printer (at low initial cost, relatively small/expensive carts), I might be tempted...Why is that? I run my Canon 9000 mk2 cartridges until they are dry. Does not seem to be any significant amount of ink that is wasted.
-h
The 3880 is only $929 w/free shipping. It's ends up being the less expensive option because it comes with $450 more ink than the r3000. The 3880 has a strong reputation for not clogging, which means no ink is thrown away for head cleanings. A small amount of ink is wasted in inkjet printers when carts are replaced because of the need the charge the lines. Printers with small carts need carts changed 3 to 4 times more often than the 3880 which I'm guessing would be a PITA in a classroom setting. And going forward with small carts, the funding needed for replacement ink will require higher amounts of funding each year.
Sal
-
The 3880 is only $929 w/free shipping.
Where I live, it is $1834 + shipping.
I could buy it from the US, but many US companies don't want to ship abroad, and if they do, one has to pay insane shipping costs + 25% VAT + import transaction fees...
The 3880 has a strong reputation for not clogging, which means no ink is thrown away for head cleanings.
When I investigated a printer for my needs I found several reports about persistent clogging in various Epson printers and none in Canon printers. Since I use mine very seldomly, that is important to me.
A small amount of ink is wasted in inkjet printers when carts are replaced because of the need the charge the lines.
As ink cartridge is integrated with nozzles, and using visual inspection, I cannot imagine that being a significant factor with the Canon A3+ printers.
What _is_ a significant factor (for the OP) is the real-world price per 8"x10" print when you do 1000 a year. And that will probably be smaller for something like the 3880 than the pro 100.
-h
-
I need some printer recommendations. I have three classes, 105 students. My hope is to display their work (probably 8 x 10's) around school and in the community. I am going to collect $20 per student (well, many of them) and print 10 for each student, which means about 1000 copies a year. The printer will be shut down during the summer (I believe this is a problem with inkjets).
I have been considering the Canon Pro-10 and Canon R-3000. Is there a consensus about which is better? Is there a better printer for my needs? Obviously I am deeply ignorant. I would appreciate any advice.
My 2c. Determine your break even point and then go from there.
To do that - Check out the cost per print posted on the Canon 100 thread. While you will invest more (capital costs) for the 3880 (here in Ontario it is around $1400 before tax without rebates or $1000 with rebate which I believe is over for the time being) - your break even may not be that unattractive when you consider the cost per print is about half of the Canon 100 pro.
Below is an extrapolate of my calcs based on information provided to me by others here (posted on the thread link I provided)
If you are doing 1000 prints a year -and assuming that costs can be applied at the same rate on smaller prints - you would pay 40% more in ink cost on the Canon pro 100 then on the 3880 and if you check out that Red river price comparison on ink the Canon 10 is even higher.
********************
Epson Ink 80 ml cartridge $64.95 /80 ml = .811 cents per ml
9 x 80 ml cartridges = 720 ml of ink included on purchase x .811 cents = 583.00
Canon Ink 13 ml cartridge $19.95 /13 ml = 1.5 cents per ml
6 x 13 ml = $119.00 ink included on purchase
Net printer cost for Epson is about $400 with rebates (1000 - 583) in Canada vs $180 for Canon (300 - 119)
So for $220 more, I get a wide format, pigment printer which over time will cost much less to use.
Red River Paper has some analysis of this: http://www.redrivercatalog.com/cost-of-inkjet-printing.html
Brian A
A Canon 100 13x19 print is $2.70 based on ink cost of $16.99 per cartridge.
Canada pricing is $19.99 - so without pro-rating, I estimate 20% and round to $3.20 per print (excluding cost of paper)
The Epson is $2.00 per print based on ink cost of $54.99
Canada pricing is $65 - so rough prorating, that's 20% increase or $2.40 per print (excluding cost of paper) - less for non-matte.
Ink costs about 40% more from Canon.
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=81853.20
**********
ETA: While I don't own the 3880 - the feedback that I have read on this forum - some included in that link attached, indicates the 3880 performs well even with minimal use. Having said that, I don't quite understand why you cannot still leave the printer ON in power save mode over summer break (assuming the epson does what my canon 6100 does - perform routine nozzle checks and agitation while it sleeps).
-
So far the information has been quite useful. Thanks!
I am convinced that I need a pro series Epson, especially considering the operating cost. Budgets mean everything in a school setting.
When I look at print speeds, suddenly the 4900 looks like the way to go. I will be printing up to 70 at a time, and time is an important consideration. Even more attractive is that replacements cartridges are 200ml.
Two additional inks, however, will increase the price per photo, right?
-
Another question: do I want the standard or designer version?
-
So far the information has been quite useful. Thanks!
I am convinced that I need a pro series Epson, especially considering the operating cost. Budgets mean everything in a school setting.
When I look at print speeds, suddenly the 4900 looks like the way to go. I will be printing up to 70 at a time, and time is an important consideration. Even more attractive is that replacements cartridges are 200ml.
Two additional inks, however, will increase the price per photo, right?
I own a Canon Image prograf 6100 which is btw, very inexpensive ink wise and very reliable to infrequent use but I didn't recommend it because it is 24" wide and I assumed you want to stay smaller.
Anyway, I've been researching Epson as a second printer to complement my needs (specifically b/w)and the 3880 stands out as exceptional workhorse with great quality without the problems of some of the other models
Point: the 4900 may be a beast if you don't print weekly and nozzle clogs will really slow down production. I would search the forum first for threads on the 4900 to see - accepting people only usually post if they have a problem but still, you can get a sense of what the strengths and weaknesses are.
Regarding 70 at a time, if you have a roll - and are printing 8x10 - you can print 2 across and just let them roll off - of course, you now need a cutter but I assume schools have lots of those kicking around.
-
I am convinced that I need a pro series Epson, especially considering the operating cost. Budgets mean everything in a school setting.
When I look at print speeds, suddenly the 4900 looks like the way to go. I will be printing up to 70 at a time, and time is an important consideration. Even more attractive is that replacements cartridges are 200ml.
I would not recomend the 4900, unless you are printing a least every two or three days every week of the year. The clogging problems are well known for this an other Epson x900 printers.
Two additional inks, however, will increase the price per photo, right?
No, no more ink goes down, just different mixes of the same quantity.
Another question: do I want the standard or designer version?
The standard version is what you want, and that goes for the 3880 too.
Brian A
-
When I look at print speeds, suddenly the 4900 looks like the way to go. I will be printing up to 70 at a time, and time is an important consideration. Even more attractive is that replacements cartridges are 200ml.
Two additional inks, however, will increase the price per photo, right?
It basically takes just so much ink to cover a given area on a print. More colors just means less of another color is used. The ink usage probably won't change enough to notice. (The two extra inks rarely get used.)
I don't know what current ink prices are, but expect the comparison will not be much different from a year or two ago. Last time I did a cost comparison the 3880 80ml carts were $0.75/ml, the 4880 110ml carts were $0.64/ml, the 4900 200ml carts were $0.50, the 7890 350ml carts were $0.46 and the 7890 700ml carts were $0.40/ml.
As you can see, very clearly the larger the cartridge the lower the operating cost, but the difference between the 4900 220ml carts and even the 700ml carts is not that huge. At 1000 8x10's a year it works out to less than $100 difference in ink costs in a year.
The print speed is greater with the 7980. Epson says the average 16x20 takes 3:47 for the 7890 and 4:11 with the 4900. Again, not a huge difference (printing 70 8x10's 4 at a time would take 8 minutes longer on the 4900).
My experience is that I need both a 4880 and a larger printer too. I use the 4880 for all standard printing services (letters. brochures, flyers, etc) that require sheet feeding and never use roll paper with it. The 7890 is used for almost all photographs. My only reason for not having a 9890 is space, because I am positive that would be even better than the 7890. It is very hard to realize how nice it is to be able to make large prints!
-
I would not recomend the 4900, unless you are printing a least every two or three days every week of the year. The clogging problems are well known for this an other Epson x900 printers.
It just isn't really a problem though. And that would be particularly true for what appears to be the environment the OP will be operating in.
At the start of each day, print a "Nozzle Check". If it isn't perfect, run a Nozzle Clean routine. Simple as that. It wouldn't be unreasonable to just start every day with a cleaning routine either, needed or not, and particularly so on Monday mornings.
When these printeres are unused for a long period (several months or a year or more) it is possible to get a clog that takes more than one or two stabs at the cleaning routine. The cure is a manual swabbing (described here previously) with isopropyl alcohol, which is 1) easy and 2) works every time. Beyond that, virtually any printer might need a more aggressive cleaning if it has not been used for multiple years...
-
It just isn't really a problem though.
Really? Probably the longest running thread on Lula forums, and there are many others:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=61585.0
Brian A
-
Really? Probably the longest running thread on Lula forums, and there are many others:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=61585.0
Brian A
But that doesn't make clogging a real problem with those particular printers.
-
It just isn't really a problem though. And that would be particularly true for what appears to be the environment the OP will be operating in.
At the start of each day, print a "Nozzle Check". If it isn't perfect, run a Nozzle Clean routine. Simple as that. It wouldn't be unreasonable to just start every day with a cleaning routine either, needed or not, and particularly so on Monday mornings.
When these printeres are unused for a long period (several months or a year or more) it is possible to get a clog that takes more than one or two stabs at the cleaning routine. The cure is a manual swabbing (described here previously) with isopropyl alcohol, which is 1) easy and 2) works every time. Beyond that, virtually any printer might need a more aggressive cleaning if it has not been used for multiple years...
Based on the continued reports in this and other forums about 4900 head clogging problems I don't see how it could be a good choice for someone who needs to shut the printer down for several months each summer.
Sal
-
Ziegler,
You don't say where you are located. If in the US have you considered Costco or Walmart or Sam's Club?
An 8x10 is only a buck and a half at Costco. You cannot print on an inkjet for that besides the maintenance headache of keeping your own printer going.
IMHO the 4900 is the last printer you should be buying. The x900 head is prone to die or clog not just betweeen jobs but between prints, they seem to be more prone than previous printer models.
If you were doing the printing for just yourself, I would say go for it. Do you want to take a chance with your students work. Without experience the 4900 is not the printer you want unless you can get a good supply of Excedrin with it.
My take on the whole thing.
Rich
-
Why hasn't anybody suggested the new Epson CISS printers? They're small format, cost peanuts and the running economy will trump even pro printers since you buy ink by the bottle--you can even substitute with 3rd party inks and push running costs down to near zero with little trouble. They're even dye based for the least clogging trouble. Even the top model L800 costs just $500 or so.
Of course, any printer can be converted to CISS by aftermarket modders. I was offered to have my $200 Canon iX6560 (that prints 13" wide) converted to CISS for a mere $30. Maybe I should have taken them up for that offer... ;D but such warranty-voiding measures may be hard to swallow for the school administration... hence the suggestion for the Epson L-series...
-
With a X900, you're rolling the dice what's going to happen when it sits quite a while. Don't chance it.
Plan for that, and purchase the software called Harvey Head Cleaner.
It's a whopping $40, and prints a small pattern every day so your printer isn't actually sitting unused. Throw a roll of inexpensive plotter paper in, and over the summer and even on the weekends leave big signs on the printer and computer running the software, saying "DO NOT TURN OFF - YOU WILL DESTROY THE PRINTER" for maintenance staff.
-
Based on the continued reports in this and other forums about 4900 head clogging problems I don't see how it could be a good choice for someone who needs to shut the printer down for several months each summer.
Sal
Somebody said so on the Internet, so it's true that the sky is falling...
It might be true that the heads clog more frequently on the 4900 than on other models. But note that we don't hear the same noise about the 7900 and the 9900 models using the same head technology. The users of the wider carriage models are probably more technically savy and definitely more serious too.
The bottom line is that just because head clogging happens doesn't make it a big problem. There are rather easy ways to deal with it, so it just is not really a problem.
If the OP wants to stick with a 17" carriage or cannot budget an Epson 7890, the Epson 4900 is clearly the best choice. There may be some Epson 4880 models still available new, but the cost of changing between PK and MK inks is excessive, plus the paper cutter cannot deal with heavy weight paper. Hence the 4900 is the right 17" Epson model.
However, I would highly recommend finding a way to budget an Epson 7890. It's easier to operate, it prints faster, plus the paper and the ink are less expensive. It has disadvantages that do not appear to affect the OP. Specifically it cannot auto feed sheet paper, but it appears the OP probably has access to other printers for times when sheet feed is useful. For photographs only, printing on roll paper, the Epson 7890 is a very good choice. (And yes the heads clog, but that is not a "real problem".)
-
Somebody said so on the Internet, so it's true that the sky is falling...
It might be true that the heads clog more frequently on the 4900 than on other models. But note that we don't hear the same noise about the 7900 and the 9900 models using the same head technology. The users of the wider carriage models are probably more technically savy and definitely more serious too.
The bottom line is that just because head clogging happens doesn't make it a big problem. There are rather easy ways to deal with it, so it just is not really a problem.
If the OP wants to stick with a 17" carriage or cannot budget an Epson 7890, the Epson 4900 is clearly the best choice. There may be some Epson 4880 models still available new, but the cost of changing between PK and MK inks is excessive, plus the paper cutter cannot deal with heavy weight paper. Hence the 4900 is the right 17" Epson model.
However, I would highly recommend finding a way to budget an Epson 7890. It's easier to operate, it prints faster, plus the paper and the ink are less expensive. It has disadvantages that do not appear to affect the OP. Specifically it cannot auto feed sheet paper, but it appears the OP probably has access to other printers for times when sheet feed is useful. For photographs only, printing on roll paper, the Epson 7890 is a very good choice. (And yes the heads clog, but that is not a "real problem".)
The question was asked on the Internet, in a forum populated by knowledgeable people. The the question has been addressed by many here. What's with telling a classroom school teacher that clogging is not a big deal? It costs money in significant wasted ink, frustration, time wasted and failed prints.
I can only speak from my personal experience. My 3880 has not had a clog or required a head cleaning in 4 years. Many others in this forum have had similar experience. In this same forum, others have reported terminal 4900 head clogs and the need to keep the printer in constant use to minimize the repeated clogs. Unless there's a conspiracy afoot in this and other photography printing forums there is a clear difference between the reliability of these 2 printers.
The OP wants something that can just be turned on, produce high quality prints, and turned off or go unused for months. In my Internet opinion, the 3880 is clearly the best shot at achieving this goal with reasonable consumables costs and no need to learn how to soak and clear delicate print head in a classroom setting with no IT support. Stubborn clogs that prevent a room full of students from printing their projects would be a big deal IMO.
Sal
-
I guess the technical competence, willingness to do service, and the level of cooperation from the students is information lacking from the OP. Is the OP interested in doing whatever work/training needed to get optimal results at a reasonable price, or does he just want something that "works"?
Does it need to work like a prison pay-phone (withstanding any level of abuse and still working), or will it be treated more like a lab-piece of equipment?
-h
-
I own an Epson 4800 and find that I have to run the power cleaning function after the summer. I never print in the summer and my digital lab gets quite hot. I'll have to try using alcohol to clean the heads this time. Furthermore, I'm also a teacher (grades 4,5,6) and have given up on the Epson 2200 in my classroom. I just print their photos from home, spending my own money.
-
I can only speak from my personal experience. My 3880 has not had a clog or required a head cleaning in 4 years.
Wonderful, but irrelevant. The Epson 3880 would not be a better choice than the Espon 4900.
Many others in this forum have had similar experience. In this same forum, others have reported terminal 4900 head clogs and the need to keep the printer in constant use to minimize the repeated clogs. Unless there's a conspiracy afoot in this and other photography printing forums there is a clear difference between the reliability of these 2 printers.
Well, that's true. The Epson 3880 doesn't have the build quality, nor the convenience, of the Epson 4900. For someone expecting to run off 70 8x10's at a time, the Epson 4900 is a much better choice in terms of reliability.
The OP wants something that can just be turned on, produce high quality prints, and turned off or go unused for months.
That's not quite what he described though. He wants to make 1000 prints, as many as 70 at a time, over the course of a "school year". The machine will go unused for one interval per year.
That schedule makes operation very easy. When a production run is started, the first operation is to print a Nozzle Check, which takes a few seconds and uses a couple inches of paper and an insignificant amount of ink. If it isn't perfect, a Nozzle Clean routine is run. That takes only a bit longer, uses no paper, and a very small amount of ink.
In fact, if the printer is turned off when not being used the Nozzle Clean can be set up to automatically happen when the machine is turned on. All that would need to be done normally is to print a Nozzle Check while checking ink and paper.
If the printer is in use once a week or so it is exceedingly unlikely that anything more than the above will be required. It also allows checking the paper roll and the ink supply at the same time, so the basic routine is a good practice anyway.
If the printer ever does need more attention, and that is very likely at the beginning of each school year, the process to clean a severely clogged head is extremely simple. Feed a large sheet of paper and give it a simple image that will put at least something in the middle of the sheet, and poor a puddle of isopropyl alcohol into the paper and allow the head to move through it several times. End of "problem". If that is too much effort, perhaps printing a Walmart is a better solution anyway! :-)
The time "wasted" and the amount of "frustration" over the above with the 4900 is significantly less than just the amount of time and frustration that will be experience waiting for a 3880 to finish the job, compared to the 4900 which prints about 2.5 times as fast.
If students will actually be operating the machine the ease of use needs to be considered too. Sheet feeding is comparatively error prone for newbies, while roll paper requires much less fiddling.
In my Internet opinion, the 3880 is clearly the best shot at achieving this goal with reasonable consumables costs and no need to learn how to soak and clear delicate print head in a classroom setting with no IT support. Stubborn clogs that prevent a room full of students from printing their projects would be a big deal IMO.
Do you have any experience with commercial grade printers other than the 3880 you recommend? I'll grant that there are situations where a 3880 is ideal. This is clearly not one of them.
-
Do you have any experience with commercial grade printers other than the 3880 you recommend? I'll grant that there are situations where a 3880 is ideal. This is clearly not one of them.
May I ask, what specifically makes your experience more credible than another posters? Do you have 3rd party, independently peer reviewed data that you will provide here that supports your position? I note you have a couple printers, and you print stuff. I assume that your views are therefore anecdotal - correct?
Regardless, here is yet ANOTHER diatribe on the infamous clogging Epson and why people (like me) opted to go with Canon for their wide format needs.
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3373118
Anyway, to the OP: If it was me, I would opt for the devil I know. The 3800 has a ton of other features that I like, for example, Simon Chan (name?) has provided some excellent profiles free (google his name assuming I am not having a senior moment, in which case someone here will surely correct me :0-) ) for black and white or (I believe) colour. It was yet another reason I determined the 3800 would be a good choice - because profiles are tried and tested and free. Its because this printer has such long-standing success that experts recommend it and support it.
In spite of anything written here, I would NOT go with the 4900 to simply save a bit of time, if that is the only reason you are considering it, because you are assuming all other factors remain the same (ie clogging, maintenance, etc) - and I simply don't accept that to be true.
To summarize: You will never get everything you want in one printer, and each one has its quirks I guess. The canon 100 is as one person posted capable of providing very excellent prints under prime conditions (ie the right paper) - but its optimal for low volume.
However, just to confuse thing, if you have the capital to spend and want something that longer term will be cost effective - I would look at Canon 6400 as a good choice.
My 6100 is now in year 5, I was away 7 months last year and just left it in sleep mode, (yes I came home every so often but never printed) - its been an exceptionally reliable printer with very good print quality. Its a miser for ink and the advantage over Epson is the Canon has matte and black ink cartridges so when you switch media types it doesn't dump ink as waste to manage. It is a bit of a dog for printing sheet vs roll - I tend to find sheet printing not worth the hassel on my 6100 and would suggest you just go roll and cut them afterward - its cheaper and hand feeding sheets is more of a time commitment than letting a roll run.
No its not ideal in B/W - hence my 3800 ambition. If b/w is an important part of your curriculum and you want a printer that will do both well, without having to be an expert - I would still go back to the 3800.
I think you can surmise that you need to make a top 5 priority list and then trade off what is less important. Only you can decide that.
Good luck.
-
Wonderful, but irrelevant. The Epson 3880 would not be a better choice than the Espon 4900.
Well, that's true. The Epson 3880 doesn't have the build quality, nor the convenience, of the Epson 4900. For someone expecting to run off 70 8x10's at a time, the Epson 4900 is a much better choice in terms of reliability.
That's not quite what he described though. He wants to make 1000 prints, as many as 70 at a time, over the course of a "school year". The machine will go unused for one interval per year.
That schedule makes operation very easy. When a production run is started, the first operation is to print a Nozzle Check, which takes a few seconds and uses a couple inches of paper and an insignificant amount of ink. If it isn't perfect, a Nozzle Clean routine is run. That takes only a bit longer, uses no paper, and a very small amount of ink.
In fact, if the printer is turned off when not being used the Nozzle Clean can be set up to automatically happen when the machine is turned on. All that would need to be done normally is to print a Nozzle Check while checking ink and paper.
If the printer is in use once a week or so it is exceedingly unlikely that anything more than the above will be required. It also allows checking the paper roll and the ink supply at the same time, so the basic routine is a good practice anyway.
If the printer ever does need more attention, and that is very likely at the beginning of each school year, the process to clean a severely clogged head is extremely simple. Feed a large sheet of paper and give it a simple image that will put at least something in the middle of the sheet, and poor a puddle of isopropyl alcohol into the paper and allow the head to move through it several times. End of "problem". If that is too much effort, perhaps printing a Walmart is a better solution anyway! :-)
The time "wasted" and the amount of "frustration" over the above with the 4900 is significantly less than just the amount of time and frustration that will be experience waiting for a 3880 to finish the job, compared to the 4900 which prints about 2.5 times as fast.
If students will actually be operating the machine the ease of use needs to be considered too. Sheet feeding is comparatively error prone for newbies, while roll paper requires much less fiddling.
Do you have any experience with commercial grade printers other than the 3880 you recommend? I'll grant that there are situations where a 3880 is ideal. This is clearly not one of them.
Not at home, do you have personal experience using a 3880?
If you consider actual user experience with a printer to be irrelevant, you're in no position to offer credible advice.
Most all pro printers do better when being used a lot. The 3880 is one that also does well when shut off for periods of time. I would say that the printer with the best build quality is the one that works perfectly year after year with few to zero clogs no matter how often it's used.
Sal
-
Before my last post I read through the responses at least three times. I am trying to take everything in.
My situation: I have advised award-winning newspaper and yearbook for 26 years in Southern California, but I only got into photography when Nikon released the D1. Along with a number of f/2.8 lenses, I really needed to learn how to use the equipment. At this point I'm a good sports photographer, and I am learning a lot about portraits.
Last year was my first teaching photography. This year I have two beginning classes and one "advanced." The beginners are mostly seniors with terrible grades. They have been quite enthusiastic, and fairly quick to pick up camera basics -- they are getting correct exposures with manual settings.
I am charging a $20 lab fee. My goal is to display their work around school and in the local Starbucks and other coffee houses. I am working on the assumption that the fee will cover 10 8x10 prints (my working assumption is $.50 for paper). Students who do not pay will not be able to print (grading will be done on my computer).
I have thought about using Costco. At $1.49, plus tax, I thought it might be a more expensive option. Since there is one near me, it might be more convenient.
I really know nothing about printing and printers. Right now my need for printing is to display their work. As I become more adept as a photography teacher, printing might become part of the curriculum.
I will not be printing that often, although that may change. There will be times when I ask the students to print a worthy shot, as I try to arrange for an exhibition. This will not be on even a weekly basis. At most it would be every other week.
The idea of buying software to run a test print on a regular basis is a great one, no matter what printer I get.
My room, btw, is air conditioned, which mean that humidity will be low. I can keep a printer in a room without air.
I would certainly use the printer for more than my photo classes. My publication photographers win national awards, and it would be great to be able to display their work too.
I hope this helps.
Mitch
-
Mitch
Printing is a learning curve. I don't think anyone can say they just "run" - unless of course you don't really care about what comes out.
Using Costco vs buying a 3800 is apples and oranges.
One of the big reasons I like the 3800 is you can make it a dedicated b/w printer with Piezo inks - that means 7 "shades" of black . Taking that and comparing it to Costco is like comparing a crunchy bar made with edible oil products to Godiva chocolates - its simply not fair to compare.
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/piezo.shtml
I bought a printer because I wanted a longer term investment and while I knew NOTHING about printing when I started ( and I am certainly not a pro by any stretch now) - using it has taught me volumes. Its something you either decide to do - or not. I'm sure your students would get more out of learning about Giclee printing then drawing straws on who has to go to pick up the prints at Costco.
In terms of your fee: it should work assuming the capital investment is not included. Printers that are used with relatively high(er) volumes (I don't print anywhere near 1000 a year ) will have a shorter life on parts and I think most have a 1 year manufacturer warranty (you may want to look at buying some extended warranty) - but I would hope you would get 2 years minimum before any major replacement part is required.
The other option is lease it for 2 years instead of purchase - but its something you need to inquire about because I believe maintenance in a lease agreement is still your responsibility.
-
I have advised award-winning newspaper and yearbook for 26 years
I'd expect that experience to be of much greater significance than either photography or printing experience. Knowing how your particular students work and react is important. Teachers are necessarily resourceful people, who as a rule are very able at being resourceful in terms of budgets and supplies and are good at making things work.
The fact that you stated to begin with that you are a long time school teacher is specifically something I've been taking into account. Printing is "easy" only to the degree that you either have no concerns about quality and will accept anything, or you are willing to pay attention to many fine details in the entire process (including putting thought into physical operation of a printer).
The beginners are mostly seniors with terrible grades. They have been quite enthusiastic, and fairly quick to pick up camera basics -- they are getting correct exposures with manual settings.
That observation is interesting. One of the most significant characteristics of digital photography today, as opposed to the way film photography worked 15 or more years ago, is the very fast feedback loop. A fast feedback loop allows many people to learn much easier now than it was with film.
And while much of photography today can be computer based with no need to ever make a print, the value one gets from printing has a similar dichotomy. Getting prints made at a "local print shop" has a significantly longer feedback loop than is accomplished when operating your own printer. I would expect that short feedback loop may be a necessary part of your effort to include prints in the curriculum, even when they are done only as a bit of extra inspiration.
In addition to a base fee and providing a packet of 8x10 prints (particularly if you make the choice of images to print rather than letting the students experiment with it on their own), perhaps it might also be useful to work out a way to allow them to pay for the supplies used and let them print whatever they like.
I have thought about using Costco. At $1.49, plus tax, I thought it might be a more expensive option. Since there is one near me, it might be more convenient.
The feedback loop using Costco is too long, but whacking out 3 or 4 variations on a single image right there in class, even at $1 each, might be a terrific way to keep students inspired.
And while 16x20 prints can be done easily with a 17" carriage printer, 20x24 and 20x30 prints cannot. Likewise a 16x20 canvas wrap, which is very easy and inexpensive to produce and terrific for exhibition, requires a larger print than a 17" carriage can produce.
You might find a package of 5 8x10's plus one large print would be more inspiring for students than 10 8x10's. It won't be initially... but by the time they are nearing the end of the course and have seen even a couple of large prints made it will be!
The idea of buying software to run a test print on a regular basis is a great one, no matter what printer I get.
That is an interesting suggestion, and in some cases it is very useful. Note however that as you do more research you'll find that "ink waste" is even a bigger cause of complaints than "clogged heads". The cost of ink per millilitter is enough to get people excited. The relevance is questionable, and the total cost of ink per production print is the figure to pay attention to. In the long run, ink is not such a huge expense.
Still, one theory is that the printer should never be turned off and should never have a head clean routine run unless the head is known to be clogged (most printers run a cleaning routine when powered up, some will do that automatically at other times too). All because of the "wasted" ink. And of course a "maintenance print" will also waste ink... :-)
My view is that because cleaning heads is so easy, I don't let it happen automatically. But that has nothing to do with the cost of ink either, because the amount used for cleaning is a drop in the bucket compared to the number of "test prints" I toss in the trash on a regular basis.
My room, btw, is air conditioned, which mean that humidity will be low. I can keep a printer in a room without air.
That's another one where there are many theories, and but no consistancy. Where I live we experience some very wide ranges in relative humidity over a year's time. I've never been able to correlate humidity to head clogging. I did, years ago, find that printers that do not have vacuum assisted paper transport systems can be very touchy about sheet feeding. Some papers worked well with higher humidity and some worked well with lower humidity. It was extremely annoying.
I would certainly use the printer for more than my photo classes. My publication photographers win national awards, and it would be great to be able to display their work too.
You need a 24" wide printer.
-
I'm dealing with a number of learning curves right now. I need to learn about printing before I teach it.
I learned a little about Piezo years ago, around 2006. It was cool then, and I can only imagine what the results are with 7 inks.
If I go with an Epson inkjet, I have a feeling the 3880 will be the one, although I am going to check out the offerings from Canon (yes, I do read posts).
-
You can print quite a bit without learning the whole thing and for many people that is OK. But you are in a teaching role and people expect (I presume) you KNOW what you are talking about.
What really can make or break you is matching the print to what the student (and you) saw on the monitor. THAT is what will have students asking questions.
The proverbial "why is my print too dark" question will haunt you till end of days.
If you are brand new, and yet need to demonstrate knowledge as a teacher - you need to buy the thing, use it, and practice a bit before you teach it. Get some media and try it - what prints on paper (RC lustre) well isn't going to necessarily look good on canvas (assuming you even go that route).
If you do, then there's the whole coating the canvas lesson - which is really an entire course in itself.
I would set some boundaries on what you will teach and what media you will use - and if its your first printer, stick to the RC coated papers. YOu can always outsource to get a profile made for you (not that expensive - maybe $25) -and this profile would work on one media type. At least that way, you have a foundation.
Whether its Epson, Canon or HP, no printer miraculously prints things consistently and while you may luck out and print a few that look great, there will always be the ONE that didn't go according to plan.
I guess it depends on you and how important it is to be perceived as an expert.
I took a computer programming course in college and after day 2 it was pretty obvious the instructor was learning the language as we went. I admit I was not impressed but he was good (I guess) at faking it -and in the end, the class did OK.
-
I want to print in order to display the students' work, so yes, I am sure as hell going to know what I'm doing, just like the time I first bought the Nikon D1 and a slew of good lenses. I learned how to shoot at night football games, then taught my best two students how to use the camera, then they taught other students.
At first, in other words, I will be the only one printing.
-
Why hasn't anybody suggested the new Epson CISS printers? They're small format, cost peanuts and the running economy will trump even pro printers since you buy ink by the bottle--you can even substitute with 3rd party inks and push running costs down to near zero with little trouble. They're even dye based for the least clogging trouble. Even the top model L800 costs just $500 or so.
Of course, any printer can be converted to CISS by aftermarket modders. I was offered to have my $200 Canon iX6560 (that prints 13" wide) converted to CISS for a mere $30. Maybe I should have taken them up for that offer... ;D but such warranty-voiding measures may be hard to swallow for the school administration... hence the suggestion for the Epson L-series...
I actually have no idea what this is about. What is the quality of the photos?
-
I want to print in order to display the students' work, so yes, I am sure as hell going to know what I'm doing, just like the time I first bought the Nikon D1 and a slew of good lenses. I learned how to shoot at night football games, then taught my best two students how to use the camera, then they taught other students.
At first, in other words, I will be the only one printing.
OK. Good luck.
-
I actually have no idea what this is about.
Well, that could be because they are not available in the US or Europe.
Brian A
-
Of the Epsons, the 4900 looks ideal in terms of specifications, but I am just not comfortable with the nozzle problems associated with it. I would not mind getting a 24'' printer, since I could print 8x12's, right? Of course I don't know if I will have the money for those.
Based on comments here, I am looking at some of the large format iPF Canons, which look promising. Any thoughts about those would be appreciated.
-
Well, that could be because they are not available in the US or Europe.
Brian A
Here's a US ebay listing for the Epson L800:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Epson-L800-Original-continuous-Ink-Tank-System-CIS-CD-DVD-Paper-Inkjet-Printer-/260911070734
And this EU page is the first google hit for the Epson L800 so I assume it is available somewhere in the EU too:
http://www.epson.eu/ix/en/viewcon/corporatesite/products/mainunits/overview/11398
-
Here's a US ebay listing for the Epson L800:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Epson-L800-Original-continuous-Ink-Tank-System-CIS-CD-DVD-Paper-Inkjet-Printer-/260911070734
The Ebay sale is a gray import. The seller claims to be ‘US’ based, but can’t form an English sentence: ‘By purchasing this item, buyer must agrees to our Return Policy’.
When Epson announced the L800, it was said to be only for Asian and Middle Eastern markets. There is no mention of it on the US, UK, French, Dutch, or German Epson websites: ‘Ihre Suche war leider erfolglos, bitte versuchen Sie es erneut.’
And this EU page is the first google hit for the Epson L800 so I assume it is available somewhere in the EU too:
http://www.epson.eu/ix/en/viewcon/corporatesite/products/mainunits/overview/11398
If you follow that link, then click on the 'Find a Dealer' button, and then try any capital city in Europe.
Brian A
-
Wonderful, but irrelevant. The Epson 3880 would not be a better choice than the Espon 4900.
I disagree. I have both. The 3880 never clogs. The 4900 all the time. Both live in the same environment. The 4900 clogs so often I hate it. The OP teacher can actually come to Santa Fe and I'll give it to him. And FWIW, I've owned probably dozens of Epson's dating back to the 1200. The 3880 is the best printer they have built by far. The 4900, far from it.
-
Santa Fe is a great town! Maybe I should take you up on it. ;D
-
Santa Fe is a great town! Maybe I should take you up on it. ;D
Come and get it (but bring a large vehicle).