Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Printing: Printers, Papers and Inks => Topic started by: printbreakr on July 29, 2015, 03:10:46 pm
-
I'm in the market for my first large-format (wide-format) printer. I've always been an Epson guy so I naturally gravitate towards Epson printers, specifically the 900-series, like the Stylus Pro 9900. I want to print fine-art photography so I like the extra gamut. I also like the relatively open nature of the Epson printer market, both with people taking them apart and third-party options like those for inks. Since this will be a significant investment for me, I am definitely concerned about the clogging issues; however, after reading about maintaining this printer, studying a good amount of the "confidential" service manual I found all over the Internet, and reading some amazing threads on this forum, I'm confident I can maintain it. I have more time than money so maintaining it myself (as much as possible) and third-part ink options matter to me.
Anyway, here's what I'm actually concerned about: I went through all the Epson Stylus Pro series brochures (just to get an idea of how they have improved over the years) and have noticed something a little disturbing. These are the copyright years listed on each brochure:
Epson Stylus Pro 7000/9000 - 2000
Epson Stylus Pro 7500/9500 - 2000
Epson Stylus Pro 10000 - 2001
Epson Stylus Pro 7600/9600 - 2002
Epson Stylus Pro 10600 - 2002
Epson Stylus Pro 7800/9800 - 2005
Epson Stylus Pro 7880/9880 - 2007
Epson Stylus Pro 11880 - 2007
Epson Stylus Pro 7900/9900 - 2009
Epson Stylus Pro 7890/9890 - 2010
So it seems that Epson has not released a new large-format printer in the fine art category for at least 5 years. Before that, they were putting them out every 2 or 3 years for a decade. This makes me wonder if Epson is giving up on this market OR if the technology has simply matured enough that there is not much else to improve. While I can't think of much else a printer like the 9900 could do, I do know that with electronics, manufactures will often introduce minimal and perhaps useless new features just to sell some more printers. Since Epson doesn't seem to be trying at all anymore, my concern is that Epson might decide they don't want to support an aging product some time soon and there won't be any more parts to service my investment for the next several years.
What do you guys think about this situation? Are these printers just so good there is nothing to improve, is this a category Epson does not see profitable, or is it something else?
-
I have no access to any company-confidential information so anything I say about this is pure logical deduction on my part. I do not believe Epson is vacating this market segment. The P800 is evidence they are researching improved ink-sets and printing algorithms. Having just recently released the P-600/P-800, I don't think all that R&D would be confined to these two prosumer models. To make it commercially viable there must be a long-run strategy to port new materials and software technologies into the higher-end models as well. I would not be the least bit surprised to see SureColor 24 and 44 inch models down the road, and perhaps even a replacement for the 4900 with the new ink-set. But take all this for what's it is - logical deduction, a.k.a speculation.
-
Me with the climate issues dry humidity issues, my 3880 died Epson told me beciase of the dry climate. I would stay away form Epson I use an HP z3200 great pritner and does not drain ink like an Epson does can be left a lone for weeks and then makes a perfect print. If a head does go 50 bucks.
-
Me with the climate issues dry humidity issues, my 3880 died Epson told me beciase of the dry climate.
Pretty dry here in Santa Fe (usually well into single digits). My 3880 can go months without a clog, I don't think I can count on one hand the number of times I've had one. The 4900? Clogged every other day.
-
Maybe you've seen my story of the friend who inherited my 3800, left it unused for close to two years; we switched it on, and after two rounds of nozzle cleaning (no power clean) it was printing quite well. Considering how far out of date the inks were and all that elapsed time, it was kind of surprising. I nonetheless recommended that he reprofile the printer or update the inks, because not all aspects of colour reproduction were spot-on. But hey....
Anyhow Andrew, do you keep your 3880 in a humidified room, or does it sit in single-digit humidity? Epson specs do say a minimum of 20% for these printers.
-
Anyhow Andrew, do you keep your 3880 in a humidified room, or does it sit in single-digit humidity? Epson specs do say a minimum of 20% for these printers.
Sits in a room like everywhere else in the house. No added humidity.
-
I have no access to any company-confidential information so anything I say about this is pure logical deduction on my part. I do not believe Epson is vacating this market segment. The P800 is evidence they are researching improved ink-sets and printing algorithms. Having just recently released the P-600/P-800, I don't think all that R&D would be confined to these two prosumer models. To make it commercially viable there must be a long-run strategy to port new materials and software technologies into the higher-end models as well. I would not be the least bit surprised to see SureColor 24 and 44 inch models down the road, and perhaps even a replacement for the 4900 with the new ink-set. But take all this for what's it is - logical deduction, a.k.a speculation.
Excellent dedications deductions, Mark. Thank you.
-
My 3880 used to run with the RH well below 20% during the winters here in Virginia. I have only ever done two cleaning cycles, and one of those was accidental. Since I got a 44" prints, it sometimes sits for weeks but shows a clean nozzle print.
I now run a humidifier during the winter months, but that is for the 9890, which can clog even in the middle of a print run.
Brian A
-
Excellent dedications, Mark. Thank you.
I think you meant "deductions" - but OK, you are welcome.
-
Maybe you've seen my story of the friend who inherited my 3800, left it unused for close to two years; we switched it on, and after two rounds of nozzle cleaning (no power clean) it was printing quite well. Considering how far out of date the inks were and all that elapsed time, it was kind of surprising. I nonetheless recommended that he reprofile the printer or update the inks, because not all aspects of colour reproduction were spot-on. But hey....
Anyhow Andrew, do you keep your 3880 in a humidified room, or does it sit in single-digit humidity? Epson specs do say a minimum of 20% for these printers.
Another great testimony about out of date ink and use. Epson ink lasts a long time past the expiration date, as long as you keep it indoors.
Paul
-
Sits in a room like everywhere else in the house. No added humidity.
You are doing very well with that Andrew.
-
Another great testimony about out of date ink and use. Epson ink lasts a long time past the expiration date, as long as you keep it indoors.
Paul
In a way yes - shows there's huge leeway, but I do think in this case 2 years was a bit of a stretch, and it was causing him some (not huge) accuracy issues.
-
I was surfing on Epson uk website, and now they have some small printers with ink tanks instead of cartridges. Maybe something for bigger printers in the future? http://www.epson.co.uk/gb/en/viewcon/corporatesite/cms/index/11409?WT.z_an=1187&WT.z_ac=1&WT.z_ap=0
-
Pretty dry here in Santa Fe (usually well into single digits). My 3880 can go months without a clog, I don't think I can count on one hand the number of times I've had one. The 4900? Clogged every other day.
I also had both. After spending lots of $$$s (ink), i gave the 4990 away.....after a year that person is dumping the 4900. 3880 keeps cranking.....no excuse to by a P800 😫
-
I will never buy another Epson after a failed 7900 that would have cost $1800 for new printheads. And it wasn't that old either.
Just bought an HP Z5200 44" wide printer with spectrophotometer. $3200 shipped from atlex.com. You can replace the four printheads yourself for around $70 each. Fock Epson.
So far it's miles ahead of an Epson and the setup directions were easy to understand and thorough.
-
"So it seems that Epson has not released a new large-format printer in the fine art category for at least 5 years. Before that, they were putting them out every 2 or 3 years for a decade. This makes me wonder if Epson is giving up on this market OR if the technology has simply matured enough that there is not much else to improve. While I can't think of much else a printer like the 9900 could do, I do know that with electronics, manufactures will often introduce minimal and perhaps useless new features just to sell some more printers. Since Epson doesn't seem to be trying at all anymore, my concern is that Epson might decide they don't want to support an aging product some time soon and there won't be any more parts to service my investment for the next several years.
What do you guys think about this situation? Are these printers just so good there is nothing to improve, is this a category Epson does not see profitable, or is it something else?"
Or, maybe there was a worldwide financial crisis around 08, the result of which is much tighter credit, therefore there are a lot of customers making do with their equipment, computers included, until they really have to replace them. Epson knows this, too.
The world of print has also continued to die fairly rapidly as screens have become the new paper, and that has reduced demand dramatically from the prepress industry.
-
Part economic downturn (out of that now). Much larger part due to tech advances in general... the better the technology, the longer it takes to produce something significantly better (current crop of printers are very good). Some unknown (to me) part due to a shift to online and electronic displays (phones and tablets, not standalone digital display devices). Very unlikely that Epson or Canon or even HP will not have parts and consumables for quite a while into the future.
-
>>
Epson Stylus Pro 7000/9000 - 2000
Epson Stylus Pro 7500/9500 - 2000
Epson Stylus Pro 10000 - 2001
Epson Stylus Pro 7600/9600 - 2002
Epson Stylus Pro 10600 - 2002
Epson Stylus Pro 7800/9800 - 2005
Epson Stylus Pro 7880/9880 - 2007
Epson Stylus Pro 11880 - 2007
Epson Stylus Pro 7900/9900 - 2009
Epson Stylus Pro 7890/9890 - 2010
<<
There has not been serious competition for Epson in this market segment, wide format - water based inkjet for art/photography, up to 2006. In 2006 both Canon and HP launched their new pigment ink inkjet printers systems for that market, HP added one upgrade since on the 12 ink models and more on the 8 ink models, Canon upgraded the 12 ink models roughly twice and introduced some generations 6 and 8 ink models next to this range. HP might not be in the 12 inks race anymore anno 2015 but still sells the Z3200-PS and fast 8 ink models. Consider something else; both HP and Canon see this market as an extension to their sign and CAD printers market where they compete heavily, both are big in the total printing market after purchasing several companies over the last 15 years. Epson had no real market share in that segment but sold inkjet head technology to partners that were active in that market. Roland, Mutoh, Mimaki, and more. Epson also delivered heads to the dry minilab manufacturers like Noritsu and FujiFilm. With real competition in the art/photography market segment, that already had some signs of saturation, Epson decided to enter both the sign and dry minilab market with complete printer systems and by that going into competition with the two giants and several of its inkjet head purchasers. I can imagine that lots of engineers were involved in that move while declining sales in the art/photography market did not call for new printer models in that segment, inkjet technology already meeting image quality demands. Whether the Epson move into that wider market delivered is another question, there have been many jobs cut. Of course the economy in this period was not healthy either. Epson is just one of several piëzo head manufacturers in the sign market and thermal heads entered that market again with the HP Latex printer models.
The next steps in inkjet technology will aim at printing speed. Page wide heads have been used in dry minilab printers and label printers to widths of approx. 17" so far. Either piëzo or thermal inkjet heads. It looks like thermal heads in page wide arrays above that size have an advantage in their way lower production price per nozzle. Substitution of failing nozzles during print runs is an advantage too of high density nozzle heads, hard to achieve that with piëzo head technology. HP and Canon (Océ) have several models of roll to roll (web) page wide inkjet head printers in that market, already competing with offset printing. After Memjet (dye), HP introduced A4 page wide office printers (pigment) that are very successful in the market. In 2014 Epson announced a model like that too but it was way more expensive, unclear whether it is distributed yet. To get an idea about page wide inkjet heads and their capacity + image quality for web printing in competitione with offset printing: http://whattheythink.com/articles/72283-hp-high-definition-nozzle-architecture/
Canon (Océ/Memjet) and HP have some page wide, wide format models more or less as prototypes as I understand it, more CAD market aimed. It has to be seen whether this art/photography market segment needs page wide inkjet heads. I guess reliability and image quality in intermittent use is a first priority and Epson should address the former in its 360 nozzles per channel heads first, give it the same reliability the 3880 head (180 nozzles per channel) has. Epson seems to have learned something about the longevity of its inkjet inks and changed the yellow ink in the P600-P800 model accordingly. It is possible that the thermal head competition for Epson piëzo heads is less fierce in this segment of the market than in any other inkjet market and Epson has goodwill in this market. However if page wide heads become the norm then Epson will have a hard time to compete on printer price. Maybe something in between dry minilab and the 4900/ipf5100 market could get page wide heads as a first trial, possibly with less ink channels and using dye inks like Claria or Vivera (dye). I actually do not see the 4900 replaced with a similar new model and it was the last one appearing of the x900 range. The 3880 - P800 range is capable enough, if not one than two of them. Canon's iPF5100 has not been upgraded since 2007?, HP never had a similar sized pigment printer in this market, the older HP Designjet 130 etc dye models did not get a successor either. Looks like a small market segment.
For the future of page wide head wide formats in the sign printing industry:
http://www.fespa.com/news/features/what-is-the-potential-for-single-pass-digital-heads.html
is as unsure.
Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst
http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
December 2014 update, 700+ inkjet media white spectral plots
-
Epson has paid Wilhelm to do tests for their new HD inkset and seem to be promoting their greater longevity. Interesting they are placing emphasis on the stability of the gray and black inks, which have performed quite well in the HDR and previous inksets. It's odd he isn't saying anything about the yellow channel yet, which is the weak link. He's not being very specific about what the differences are between the HD and the HDR inks at this point.
http://www.wilhelm-research.com/epson_uchd_nr/epson_uchd_nr.html
I can't see why they would develop an entire new inkset just for this recent desktop printer, unless it is just some marketing ploy, where they think they need to come up with a new inkset every few years. I suspect they will update the LF printers shortly with this new inkset. The real question is, have they solved their ink delivery cart/pressure/head problems with this new line, or will it be more of the same. I personally don't know anyone who would go back to investing in Epson for photo art work unless these issues are seriously addressed. Probably the fall would be the time they would announce a new line if they are going to do it.
john
-
Probably the fall would be the time they would announce a new line if they are going to do it.
john
John, I wouldn't be at all surprised if there were no announcements this Fall, however, that wouldn't necessarily mean there will be no new models over the horizon. As a betting man, I would still expect that some time within the next year or so we will be seeing the new inkset ported into pro models beyond the P800 - or at least an announcement thereof - again pure logical deduction on my part - I have no inside information.
Regarding the inkset and the Blacks, much as I am very skeptical about what appears like marketing hype - recall Michael's interview with an Epson rep in which the word "new" appeared so many countless times it kind of ended-up wearing rather thin - the fact is, based on my testing reported in my P800 review, the P800 produces the blackest blacks I've seen from any inkjet printer I've owned or used over the past 15 years. So there is something real to it. I forget where, but I've also heard or read that Yellow longevity is improved. But on this score, I'd really like to see OEMs porting their longevity testing beyond one lab; for example, I think the approach Aardenburg brings things to the table and reports in a manner that at least complements the material from Wilhelm-Research.
-
Epson is going to annouce a new 64" pigment printer before the end of this year with a brand new inkset. More than what P800 is offering now.
One more thing, the production of 11880 has been stopped for almost a year now.
-
So it seems that Epson has not released a new large-format printer in the fine art category for at least 5 years. Before that, they were putting them out every 2 or 3 years for a decade. This makes me wonder if Epson is giving up on this market OR if the technology has simply matured enough that there is not much else to improve.
What do you guys think about this situation? Are these printers just so good there is nothing to improve, is this a category Epson does not see profitable, or is it something else?
Diminishing returns. I just bought a 3880 about 6 months ago even though the P800 was around the corner. It was cheaper and there only a few specific types of prints on specific papers that would benefit from the differences in this new printer. So for half the money, I got a printer that prints at an overall quality that almost nobody would be able to tell apart from the new printer.
Until there are significant technology changes or a some new functional capabilities, there is no need. Introducing a new printer disrupts the chain and if people aren't going to buy it in numbers necessary to produce a return, it just pisses people off.
-
I believe the company that makes the Epson printers makes other brand name printers, also I don't think enough people print large anymore I also don't think many people print period anymore. Print services print for many occasional users (photographers) why bother to keep a printer going? For a 1000.00 you can have a big screen running your prints 24/7.
-
I believe the company that makes the Epson printers makes other brand name printers....
Actually, that's not true...Epson only makes Epson printers. Epson does OEM print heads to other printer manufactures but not complete printers.
And actually Epson is making big inroads into solvent printers (close to being good enough for fine art printers) as well as fabric printers. But Epson still is one of the best fine art printers along with Canon. Sadly, HP is pretty much out of the biz.
-
The Hp Vivera MK ink that was developed about 8 years ago has a dmax of about 1.8, so what Epson has done with a "blacker" black isn't even catching up to the innovations HP figured out almost a decade ago.
Their color inks won't come close to the longevity of the Vivera pigments either, but might be improved and close to Canon.
What will be interesting is the new 11880 replacement that as Aaron mentioned might be great ( if it doesn't waste ink and have the vacuum problems they have now. The rumor is Epson will add one more gray to that printer ( but not the 44" machine?) making it a truly evenly spaced quad inkset, with all the color inks needed for any toning. That would in my opinion be in the category of an innovation. If it didn't clog I'd buy one. There haven't been any significant innovations from Epson in a long time. The MK to PK ink waste and hassle switching is just an embarrassment at this point in time. The world has moved on from all that crap.
As for Hp being out of the printing biz, that is hardly the case yet. They are out of the photo amateur biz and never produced a usable desktop model, but as far as large format models go they have had several new systems released in the past few years that seem to be selling well.
The fact is HP, Canon, and Epson are going to be fighting over the design and display market, where Roland will probably be wiped out completely, and that is sad because they are the only company besides Mimaki, that makes a truly professional inkjet printer for the high resolution photo market. The design world is where the money is, not in "fine art photo" media and inks, at least for big printers. These days fine art is anything you can put on a wall that will last six months. I'm afraid the days of the Zone System and Paul Caponigro subtlety is ancient history for 99% of photo artists working now. The people doing that kind of work are getting older and older.
I keep hearing these ads on the radio that Epson is doing, promoting their dye-sublimation printers that cater to the fashion industry. Print your own textile designs from home, be your own designer. You don't hear ads on the radio from Epson or Canon talking about printing your own high-longevity photographs for galleries and museums, collections, and portfolios, that's old fashioned, like many of us old timers.
I don't see why HP can't continue to made and sell the Z3200 or a slight modification of as it's photo printer. It uses most all the same parts, and many of the inks as it's design printers. It has not been eclipsed by anything Epson or Canon has come up with in the last 7 years or so, and it uses far less ink, that lasts at least twice as long as the other two brands...... However, if they are trying to market this machine to artists they certainly are doing a pathetic job of it. Like the news, it's all a matter of ratings you know.
-
Their color inks won't come close to the longevity of the Vivera pigments either, but might be improved and close to Canon.
I have no clue where the new Epson HD ink set will rank in comparison to the Canon Lucia and Hp Vivera pigment ink sets in terms of light fade resistance. Hard to say from what Epson and WIR have published on the subject so far as to how the rankings between the big three will now stack up. My own tests of the new Epson HD inks are just in the early stages, so nothing to write about just yet.
One thing for sure... if the Epson HD ink set ends up matching or exceeding Canon Lucia OEM light fade resistance, then the weak link in all aqueous pigmented ink prints made with these top-of-the-line OEM pigmented ink sets is then going to depend to a large extent on the white point stability of the media used in the printmaking process. Unfortunately, there's some popular papers out there today getting high print longevity scores that aren't justly deserved. They will undermine the performance of even the very best pigmented inks.
kind regards,
Mark
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com
-
The fact is HP, Canon, and Epson are going to be fighting over the design and display market, where Roland will probably be wiped out completely, and that is sad because they are the only company besides Mimaki, that makes a truly professional inkjet printer for the high resolution photo market. The design world is where the money is, not in "fine art photo" media and inks, at least for big printers. These days fine art is anything you can put on a wall that will last six months. I'm afraid the days of the Zone System and Paul Caponigro subtlety is ancient history for 99% of photo artists working now. The people doing that kind of work are getting older and older.
It'd be nice if Roland competed in the fine art inkjet market. I own a Roland machine for vinyl and the thing is an absolute beast. It takes abuse all day, every day, and never has a hick-up. If they made a fine-art printer, I wouldn't even waste time looking at Epson's offerings.
-
I'd be interested in pointers to the various "confidential" manuals and threads that you have found useful in how to maintain the 9900.
-
Roland used to make great photo printers, really before anyone else, and the quality and reliability were awesome. They did things right. If you want to remove a head or a damper, or replace a board or anything, and put another one it, it took you a few minutes to change parts out. They didn't have the clogging problems, even though they licensed their piezo heads from Epson. You could easily put in any kind of compatible ink you wanted, or blend your own inks without worrying about the carts being recognized, etc. Their on site service was truly professional. Epson completely knocked them out of the fine art market by selling the printers for basically cost and making it back on the ink used, and service needed. Now that is happening to Roland in the dye sub market as well.
The problem was they cost about three or four times what an Epson or Canon printer cost and they just didn't have enough people willing to pay for it. People would rather pay less for disposable technology, and live under the illusion that each generation is an advancement, it's not. Not only that but you could use Studio Print DaVici software for the greatest precision, linearization, and ink partitions ever made. Really you could print on just about anything. Few people these days have the patience to learn a great workflow like that. Like anything really good, there is a learning curve and a craft involved.
There is a guy selling two big 52" Rolands in Northern California, pick up only, on the Piezo Pro Yahoo list now, with or without the SP software license. One is set up for Cone bw and the other color.
He's getting out of the print business. These units will last for decades. The question is will you be able to buy replacement heads for them now or in the future. They only print 1440 ppi but for someone specializing in matt media you don't need 2880 on a printer like that and I never felt like I needed if for gloss either. If I were in that area I'd probably buy them, providing you can get heads for them.
It'd be nice if Roland competed in the fine art inkjet market. I own a Roland machine for vinyl and the thing is an absolute beast. It takes abuse all day, every day, and never has a hick-up. If they made a fine-art printer, I wouldn't even waste time looking at Epson's offerings.
-
I'd be interested in pointers to the various "confidential" manuals and threads that you have found useful in how to maintain the 9900.
The manuals can be found via an Internet search engine: https://www.google.com/webhp?#q=filetype:pdf+roland+9900+service+manual
You'll have to search the forum yourself.
-
I am in Northern California and your mention of these Roland printers is something I'm going to look into. Thanks for the tip. I always enjoyed seeing work made on the Rolands. The output seemed closest to the old 9000, 9600 and 9800 printers I've owned. Mat black dmax upgrade from the 9600 to 9800 a big improvement.
Interesting that my 9800 and 4800 are now a decade old. No service or major nozzle problems during that time. Guess it matters that these printers are used regularly. Seems the temperature and humidity in Larkspur, CA a good match for these printers.
Paper improvement over the years has taken a big leap forward along with canvas and silk substrates. These older printers handle this work well. Nice to have friendly digital tools that are still working well a decade from purchase. Can't say that about many other areas in the digital world. No complaints since most digital purchases based on significant improvements to camera megapixel count these days from Sony and Canon. A perfect match for those of us who regularly print 20x30 prints and larger. I do enjoy my 30x40 prints but hate the thought of paying for framing them. Framing the business to be in!
Michael
-
The Hp Vivera MK ink that was developed about 8 years ago has a dmax of about 1.8, so what Epson has done with a "blacker" black isn't even catching up to the innovations HP figured out almost a decade ago.
1.8? or did you mean 2.8? 1.8 sounds like black on matt paper.
-
I keep hearing these ads on the radio that Epson is doing, promoting their dye-sublimation printers that cater to the fashion industry. Print your own textile designs from home, be your own designer. You don't hear ads on the radio from Epson or Canon talking about printing your own high-longevity photographs for galleries and museums, collections, and portfolios, that's old fashioned, like many of us old timers.
Wow. What radio station do you listen to?
-
Roland and Mimaki make really good printers.
Sorry for a bit off from the topic:
My friend who is a dealer for Epson and Mimaki has been selling both printers for quite some time.
He said the new Epson S-Series printer are really nice, but not the S30.
The S50 is fast, really fast, but compare the the S70, the S70 produce much better quality than the S50 because of the LcLmLk and Or ink setup.
But he also said, the new Mimaki JV300 can do the same thing as the S70 as well.
Yes, the mimaki is $7000 more than the Epson, but this company has been making these type of commercial printer much longer than Epson with greater durability and capability. There must be still a good place for these types of Brand like Roland and Mimaki.
Back to the topic:
Epson will not give up the 64" pigment machine, at least for now.
The S70675 might be able to create a huge color gamut that close to the 9900 (I haven't done any test, this is just my guess)
But there are a lot of uses for pigment printers such as fine art pritning and proofing. (so far i haven't seen anyone uses a solvant printer to make proofs for press printing).
Just one last thing, UV-curable ink and Latex ink are much more advnaced technology compare to solvant. Solvant printer has been around for decades and I really don't understand why would Epson get into this market. (Mimaki and Roland are working on Latex and small format UV)
I would expect they might come up something like Latex ink or a UV printer (either flatbed or not), but so far, nothing.
aaron
-
I assume readers know the Roland and Mimaki printers are equipped with Epson print heads. Of course there is more to a printer than the head, but it's rather key. Reading the experience reports is very interesting.
-
Crazy question: Is there any chance running pigment ink through a solvent printer would work well, reliably, for a long time?
-
Crazy question: Is there any chance running pigment ink through a solvent printer would work well, reliably, for a long time?
Yes, you can do that.
Piezo printhead is tough and it's reliable.
Basically you can feed in anything and it will print.
Unlike the Bubblejet (Thermal printhead) which will burn up so quickly.
aaron
-
Yes, Roland used the same print heads as my old Epson 10K, only they had two of them installed giving you 12 inks and that was like 15 years ago. These heads never clogged or wasted ink. Never though about screwing with the cap station or the dampers.
After about 6 years of color use I switched out to Piezography k6 inks in it driving it with Studio Print, and that required flushing a lot of ink out for large jobs. The waste tank never filled up after 10 years of weekly use for these large prints. Those were amazing print heads and really built to last. Yea they were 1440 but that's all I needed. They were pressurized but it just worked. On the Rolands it was much easier to remove and replace them if you ever needed to.
This guy turned an 11880 into a very cool flatbed printer. Jon Cone did a similar thing many years ago with his Roland where he prints on super thick custom made kozo papers.
http://www.factum-arte.com/pag/16/Printer-design
-
Yes, you can do that.
Piezo printhead is tough and it's reliable.
Basically you can feed in anything and it will print.
Unlike the Bubblejet (Thermal printhead) which will burn up so quickly.
aaron
I think it is not that easy to switch a machine to water based inks if that printer already used (eco)solvent inks. The other way around at least has an ink medium with more aggressive solvents so will dissolve remains of the water based inks. The first wide format Roland water based ink printers were actually the base for the early ecosolvent models and that development was done by third parties, Roland went along after that with factory made models.
I do not think that Roland, Mimaki and Mutoh are still using Epson heads throughout their total range of wide format printers. Many more inkjet head manufacturers, Ricoh, Hitachi, Konica-Minolta, Xaar, Spectra, etc. UV curing inks are more easily pumped with other types of Piëzo heads.
Flatbed models were made of many Epson models, that could print on corrugated carton for packaging proofs and way more for T-shirt printing.
When HP announced its wide format Latex printer, Drupa 2006 I think, I expected piëzo heads instead of thermal heads. They use thermal heads though, ink is thicker but with the ink heated up it can be done with thermal heads.
Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst
http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
December 2014 update, 700+ inkjet media white spectral plots
-
Yes, you can do that.
Piezo printhead is tough and it's reliable.
Basically you can feed in anything and it will print.
Unlike the Bubblejet (Thermal printhead) which will burn up so quickly.
aaron
Check item #2 here on that: http://www.freestylephoto.biz/canon-printers-versus-epson-printers (http://www.freestylephoto.biz/canon-printers-versus-epson-printers)
Quote: "2. Canon thermal head tends not to clog. Epson printer heads tends TO clog. Canon heads will self-clean if it does clog. Epson's heads do not. Canon's thermal technology (heat) tends to keep the nozzles cleaner than the piezo-electric."
Freestyle in Los Angeles, CA used to be a big time seller of Epson on the West Coast but has since moved to Canon which lessened the "Plugged head complaints" from their Epson customers. They still sell Epson paper and inks, but they push Canon now.
SG
-
Which Piezography list are you referring to (re: the Rolands for sale in Northern California)? I couldn't find mention of anything on piezography3000 yahoo group.
-
Large format Pro Piezotone Users Group on Yahoo Groups. Might have to join to see this.
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/piezobwpro/conversations/messages
-
Check item #2 here on that: http://www.freestylephoto.biz/canon-printers-versus-epson-printers (http://www.freestylephoto.biz/canon-printers-versus-epson-printers)
Quote: "2. Canon thermal head tends not to clog. Epson printer heads tends TO clog. Canon heads will self-clean if it does clog. Epson's heads do not. Canon's thermal technology (heat) tends to keep the nozzles cleaner than the piezo-electric."
Freestyle in Los Angeles, CA used to be a big time seller of Epson on the West Coast but has since moved to Canon which lessened the "Plugged head complaints" from their Epson customers. They still sell Epson paper and inks, but they push Canon now.
SG
Yes and No
Thermal head doesn't clog as much as Piezo head in general.
But the durability is much less then piezo head
also the ink requirement is very high to achieve the longest usage of the head
Let's say if you fill Canon ink into Epson printer, it will run, but it might clog and won't let you have a very good result,
but if you fill Epson ink into Canon printer, it will print and the ink will burn out the head after some square meters of prints.
Also, I used to own Canon's printer, I had chnaged 2 sets of print head within 2 years.
I do print a lot back in the day for commercial work.
Yes, it is cheap and compare to Epson's head, it is nothing.
But I'm just talking about the durability but the price or anything else, pure technical aspect.
freestylephoto is a dealer, if they want to push a product, this is how they do.
I personally like Canon's printer much more than the Epson
But I'm just pointing out what i have seen and experienced.
aaron
-
I’ve owned both Canon and Epson, I still prefer Epson for a few reasons, none of which are significant to anyone but me.
But despite many posts in the past regarding the two technologies, there still remain misconceptions about them.
I do not believe Canon printers clog less than Epsons. Canon’s will automatically try to clear clogs, as will Epson’s if you leave that feature enabled (which most users do not). But where an Epson nozzle must be cleared, the Canon can decide to map that nozzle out and use a “spare” nozzle to replace it rather than using ink to clear it. Thus the Canon head is a “consumable” part, and over time will need to be replaced.
How soon those heads will need replaced depends quite a bit on the environment and usage patterns . A dry climate will consume the head much faster than one at 45% humidity, and a dirty/dusty environment will also shorten head life. Over time the nozzles also wear and enlarge, which eventually will require a new head (although I believe with their newest printer the likelihood of replacement from wearing before using of spare nozzles will only happen with very heavy usage).
but to the end user, Canon effectively hides all of this, making the use of a Canon printer a nice experience. If you choose to let the Epson printer clean itself, it may be problematic and consume a lot of ink if you are an occasional users. Using the Epson may require a little more hand holding, and often what are referred to as “clogs” is simply air seeping back into the nozzles because the printer is off. Unfortunately for Epson, the initial 4900’s had a problem with the capping station which allowed this to happen rather quickly (and of course this can cause ink to dry out inside the nozzle). I’ve heard that Epson improved this but have no proof.
Personally, my TCO of my Epson 9900 has been less than my ipf6100 which required new heads after 18 months. The Epson is now 4 years old, and still has the original maintenance tanks, which indicates I haven’t had to do that much cleaning/clog clearing. I keep the printer in a 45% humidity controlled room, but it can go several weeks without being used. I’ve never done a power clean, my wiper is still pristine, and often after sitting I have no missing nozzles.
As far as the Breathing Color claim a “3 year” life I’m not sure where they got there stats, but I have sold dozens of 78/9890 and 79/9900 printers over the past several years, and I’m not getting a ton of calls on older printers that suddenly die after 3 years.
-
Nah, Epson hasn't gotten totally out of the printer business. They're too busy concentrating on making burger making machines.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7-JR2KDRnEY (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7-JR2KDRnEY)
Wonder if the mustard and ketchup bottles overhead will cost $1/ml for each condiment like ink? :D
SG
-
http://arstechnica.com/business/2015/08/epson-wants-us-to-abandon-those-pesky-inkjet-cartridges-forever/
-
Actually, off that same page I thought this link a bit of fun:
http://theoatmeal.com/comics/printers (http://theoatmeal.com/comics/printers)
:-)
-
I do not believe Canon printers clog less than Epsons.
You're wrong - Canon/HP thermal head produces more pressure than piezo membrane, and has shorter ink channels where air bubbles can gather (which is the main reason of clogging). Since I switched to iPF I've never seen a clog - yes, it maintains and cleans the nozzles, and has spare nozzles that can be remapped, but all in all it's much less prone to clogging than piezo head.
Personally I don't think it ever runs out of spare nozzles, it eventually just dies after approx. >2 years (in my case 800-900 days per print head).
-
You're wrong - Canon/HP thermal head produces more pressure than piezo membrane, and has shorter ink channels where air bubbles can gather (which is the main reason of clogging). Since I switched to iPF I've never seen a clog - yes, it maintains and cleans the nozzles, and has spare nozzles that can be remapped, but all in all it's much less prone to clogging than piezo head.
Personally I don't think it ever runs out of spare nozzles, it eventually just dies after approx. >2 years (in my case 800-900 days per print head).
Marcin, this is interesting - perhaps you could elaborate the explanation - what is the difference in the length of the ink channels between Epson and Canon printheads (for which models are you comparing), what is the mechanism by which air bubbles gather in each model, and exactly how does the difference of the length of the ink channels between these designs contribute to the formation of more air bubbles in the one compared with the other?
As well, I have heard that air bubbles can produce broken test patterns, much like obstructions, such as particulates would, but I have also heard that in all these printers the systems are sealed to prevent this from happening, except for improperly conducted cleaning cycles or improperly functioning cleaning stations. So it isn't clear to me yet whether obstructions or air bubbles are the more prevalent cause of clogging. Perhaps you could point us to conclusive evidence of air bubbles being the prevalent cause as you suggest (whether Canon or Epson).
-
this isn't true.
Sorry, what isn't true?
-
You're wrong - Canon/HP thermal head produces more pressure than piezo membrane, and has shorter ink channels where air bubbles can gather (which is the main reason of clogging). Since I switched to iPF I've never seen a clog - yes, it maintains and cleans the nozzles, and has spare nozzles that can be remapped, but all in all it's much less prone to clogging than piezo head.
Personally I don't think it ever runs out of spare nozzles, it eventually just dies after approx. >2 years (in my case 800-900 days per print head).
But really no way of knowing? Seems to be some logic to your speculation, but the fact is the Canon hides all clogs so effectively it’s hard to say when nozzles have clogged. It consumes ink in cleaning cycles, and consume’s nozzles to remap those that can’t be cleared. I guess it doesn’t matter which clogs “less”, both clog and both have to deal with clogs.
-
Marcin, this is interesting - perhaps you could elaborate the explanation - what is the difference in the length of the ink channels between Epson and Canon printheads (for which models are you comparing), what is the mechanism by which air bubbles gather in each model, and exactly how does the difference of the length of the ink channels between these designs contribute to the formation of more air bubbles in the one compared with the other?
As well, I have heard that air bubbles can produce broken test patterns, much like obstructions, such as particulates would, but I have also heard that in all these printers the systems are sealed to prevent this from happening, except for improperly conducted cleaning cycles or improperly functioning cleaning stations. So it isn't clear to me yet whether obstructions or air bubbles are the more prevalent cause of clogging. Perhaps you could point us to conclusive evidence of air bubbles being the prevalent cause as you suggest (whether Canon or Epson).
Mark, all I know is that piezo membrane (in Epson x900 series) produces less pressure and relatively long ink lines (you can see it on Eric Gulbransen's photos in Epson 7900 from the inside - out thread), where air bubbles cumulate, thermal head (Canon PF-05 in x300 - x400 series) has less potential space where air bubbles can gather, and even if they gather the thermal element produces more pressure, so it can get rid of them - according to that information this is the main reason why thermal head is less prone to clogging than piezo head.
-
But really no way of knowing? Seems to be some logic to your speculation, but the fact is the Canon hides all clogs so effectively it’s hard to say when nozzles have clogged. It consumes ink in cleaning cycles, and consume’s nozzles to remap those that can’t be cleared. I guess it doesn’t matter which clogs “less”, both clog and both have to deal with clogs.
In case of Canon clogging just never happens, period. It maintains the print head, it checks and remaps broken nozzles, but I've (or any of my friends and clients) never seen a single clog during all these years of using iPF6350 and iPF8300, and it's impossible to hide it completely if it ever happened. There's no clogging when you start printing, and it doesn't appear while printing - to my eye it simply doesn't clog at all, and the spare nozzles are only to replace the ones that went out of order due to wear or electric failures. The fact is that after I switched to Canon I quit printing nozzle checks and controlling if there's a trace of clogging while printing, something that was absolutely necessary when I had used my former SP7880.
-
Mark, all I know is that piezo membrane (in Epson x900 series) produces less pressure and relatively long ink lines (you can see it on Eric Gulbransen's photos in Epson 7900 from the inside - out thread), where air bubbles cumulate, thermal head (Canon PF-05 in x300 - x400 series) has less potential space where air bubbles can gather, and even if they gather the thermal element produces more pressure, so it can get rid of them - according to that information this is the main reason why thermal head is less prone to clogging than piezo head.
Marcin, this doesn't really "hang together". For one thing, the pressure at which the printhead spews ink through the nozzles has nothing to do with the length of the ink lines leading to the damper and head assemblies. For another, the mechanisms by which the ink is ejected from the head are totally different between the two, but I haven't seen technical data indicating which ejects ink at higher pressure; however not clear to me it even matters to the question of air bubbles - in fact a thermal head produces air bubbles at extremely high temperature in order to eject the ink. If you haven't done so already, I would recommend you read some real technical material on the comparative functioning of Piezo and Thermal printheads. Nothing you are telling me or I am telling you really explains why one printer model APPEARS to produce more or less nozzle clogs than another. I think there are several reasons why this happens, and what Wayne Fox says above is about as far as I can take it.
(I forgot to mention: it is not the least bit self-evident that the length of the lines has anything to do with whether air bubbles reach the ink delivery paths in a manner that can cause air drops, which in nozzle check results can be confused for clogs. From all I've read, this depends on how the systems are sealed and whether air can be introduced, primarily through the cleaning systems; however, not being technically trained in this area I can only go by the research available in the public domain I have been able to access.)
-
1.8 on matt Canson Rag Photographique with Vivera Mk. It is a very noticeable visual difference from previous Epson and Piezography 1.64 max, which is about the same for Canon Lucia inks on the same matte media. The dmax is also very helpful for those of us who print on things like Belgian Linen, Haboti silk, cotton fabric, and Japanese Washi papers, as well as canvas. It helps a lot on those Kozo papers that usually have muted blacks. And of course the gray inks are neutral so you don't have to add color dots to the mix that often shows up in metameric failure. Hp did a lot of things right.
The Pk black is very close on all the brands.
1.8? or did you mean 2.8? 1.8 sounds like black on matt paper.
-
The Epson print head is open in the sense that it has no obstruction to let ink pass through. The inkselector assy that sits on top of the print head is the thing that control the ink feed to the print head. The inksystem from cartridge up to and including the ink selector assy is pressurized. The dampers have a key role in the ink selector assy, amongst others regulatie the ink flow to the print head. All in all the length of tubing (which is a mechanical given from the sizean configuration of the printer) from cartridge to ink selector assy has no bearing on the functioning of the printhead.