Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Printing: Printers, Papers and Inks => Topic started by: davidh202 on December 14, 2010, 09:20:46 pm
-
While fairly experienced with photography, I am quite new to inkjet printing aside from the basic Inkjet office printer I use for forms.
There seems to be a lot of complaints about Epsons clogging problems, and since I now have a 7900 I keep my fingers crossed I won't have issues with my wonderful printer.
Are clogs due to a single issue such as Ink drying on the head, poor consistancy of the manufactuerd ink,environmental dirt accumulating on the head over time(eg: paper residue),or a combination of all the preceeding issues?
-
In the 10 years I have worked with wide formats and followed the discussions there never was a moment that I thought we know what goes wrong in an inkjet head that causes clogging. Humidity, capping station neatness, air trapped, pigment settling, dampers blocked, dirty paper, etc etc. All solved and still clogging can happen.
That said the general experience is that Canons and HPs have less problems with clogging. My gut feeling is that we underestimated steam power as the driving force of ink droplets. I am curious about the pumping capacity of both technologies for comparable heads. Another reason must be the removal of droplet size variation per nozzle and substituting that by more nozzles per head while still keeping heads cheaper than possible with piëzo heads of the same capacity.
met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst Dinkla
Try: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/
-
My gut feeling is that we underestimated steam power as the driving force of ink droplets.
Very interesting observation. What I'm reading is that the Canon/HP bubblejet system uses heat to eject droplets, the piezo system that Epson uses doesn't. The steam generated by this heating keeps the heads clean. Correct, Enrst?
-
Ernst,
Didn't the 10K Epson's heat up the ink when the heads were charged in a related way to thermal printers? I know an Epson tech told me that years ago. I always wondered why in 8 years of use of that big printer I didn't and still don't have clogs in it and all my other Epsons did.
john
-
The steam generated by this heating keeps the heads clean. Correct, Enrst?
That wasn't what I had in mind. There has been a time that thermal heads were not considered a pro solution for the wide formats we used for art prints and photography. For water based ink systems that has proven to be a wrong assumption. And yes steam power is a formidable force to squirt small ink droplets, not behind piëzo heads at similar frequencies and droplet sizes. It could take more energy to run than a piëzo head but at the total of energy consumption it probably isn't a significant difference.
Actually one of the problems with thermal heads can be the building up of ink on the thermal element in the nozzle construction. Chemistry of the ink has to counteract that. The main advantage of thermal heads is the simple construction of the thermal pump/nozzle and the lower price that goes with it. Where there have been versions that were more complicated to create variable droplet sizes that idea has been abandoned in the models we discuss here. Higher quantities of smaller, simpler nozzles/chambers creating fixed droplets of 3.5, 4 or 6 picoliter in a dense formation on the heads is the better solution. Keeping nozzles in reserve for the ones that fail isn't a cheap trick but a sound solution only possible when you can create high nozzle numbers on a relatively cheap head. The two heads that failed on my Z models didn't show a degradation period though, at least not in the prints and in the printer utility reports, they went belly up in an instant, one with a paper jam that I discovered too late.
In the sign industry it is not uncommon to heat the ink that has to be squirted by piëzo heads, the viscosity of the ink at room temperature not suitable enough to get pumped. There are advantages in the sense of faster "drying", less dotgain, better bond, lower quantities of solvents to use etc. "Drying" can be evaporation of solvents, UV curing, returning to a solid state (wax, resin) or a mix of that (Latex). The idea that piëzo heads run cool is a myth too, at the frequencies they have to run now and with smaller droplets than in the past the cooling effect of pumped ink isn't enough. Whether the Epson 10000 had any extra heating on the ink I don't know.
I have seen some comments that the more complex and larger piëzo pumps tend to trap air more than the smaller simple thermal heads. The inks used in thermal heads are a bit more fluid too if compared to the piëzo types. At least that observation was made on HP Z monochrome inks that were used in Epson piëzo quad systems.
met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst Dinkla
New: Spectral plots of +180 inkjet papers:
http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
-
I am not an expert but I had many printers and I will try to give you some suggestions.
Now I have an Epson R2400, an Epson 4880 and now also an Epson 7900 in one room. I had clogs with all my printers (except for the 7900, but it is a "new entry"), but now I have less to no problems. I never had clogging issues while printing. I could do a cleaning before the prints session (I always start with a nozzle check) but I never ruined a print because of clogging issues if the print was “clean and checked” before the beginning of the print session.
What I do to improve "anti-clogging" is this:
1) Use dust-covers (not necessarily the antistatic ones, also if they do a great job).
2) Check and control the humidity in the room. I had this possibility in the last moths and I can say that, since I started to have 50% humidity in the room, I got no more clogs in the R2400 and in the 4880, also after 2 weeks of not using the 4880 at all.
3) Try to print at least 2/3 prints each week and possibly, when you print, try to print as much as you can. I found that could be better to print twice a week 10 prints for session that 2 prints each day.
I would say that, if you are using OEM inks and good paper, in the 7900 there will be no clogging issues related to them. In the 4880 the paper cutter is slower and makes some "dust", but in the 7900 I could notice no small dots of dust or pieces of paper when I cut the sheets. I really don't know why the printer clogs but, in my experience, I think that the problem is 20% dust and 50% humidity and 30% not-working time between print sessions.
A close friend with an ipf5100 was happy about his printer clogging performance but he had to change print heads after 2 years of usage (he really used the printer for a few prints, 3 set of carts in more than 2 years). Here in Roma, Italy, I go sometimes around for print laboratories and what I could understand (probabily it is wrong, but is my experience) is that Canon are great printers, but if you think that they don't clog "for free" I could be not true. When the Epsons clog the Canons will start to partially kill the print head (usually for low humidity environments) and so what you waste in terms of Epson ink ($$$) is generally wasted for Canon print heads ($$$). Nobody seems to use other brands, so I have nothing to say about HPs or other printers.
You already have an Epson 7900, I think one of the best printers now, try to keep humidity high (if possibile) and to keep dust away from the printer.
-
One of the most basic causes of clogging is turning the printers off, from my experience. Leaving the printer on makes a significant difference in reducing clogging - I've seen it proven out on countless printers. That, in spite of what Epson tech support told one of my clients - to do just the opposite, and turn the printer off when not in use. :D
-
Ernst,
Didn't the 10K Epson's heat up the ink when the heads were charged in a related way to thermal printers? I know an Epson tech told me that years ago. I always wondered why in 8 years of use of that big printer I didn't and still don't have clogs in it and all my other Epsons did.
john
no, all epson heads have a temp sensor to monitor the room/head temp so it can adjust droplet demand to compensate for humidity etc.
also there is a slight warming of the crystals which the ink cools.
it's a shame all the people, the thousands and thousands of people that don't have issues with their printers don't take the time to post on here.....
-
"it's a shame all the people, the thousands and thousands of people that don't have issues with their printers don't take the time to post on here..."
+1 for that comment. It's like root canal. Mine were painless and problem free, but we only hear about the 2-3% of root canals that were very painful. ::)
-
it's a shame all the people, the thousands and thousands of people that don't have issues with their printers don't take the time to post on here.....
I'm one of those, so I'll chime in here, although I don't do a vast amount of printing.
I got an Epson 2200 when they first came out and finally sold it about a year and a half ago when I bought a 3800. The only time I had a significant clog with the 2200 was after a six-week trip to Italy, with the printer off the entire time. It took a few cleaning cycles, with an overnight between a couple of them, before it started printing clean again. Other times I went almost a month between prints and only a couple of times did I need to do a cleaning cycle.
Since I got my 3800 I have not had a single clog, whether printing intermittently or regularly, summer or winter.
One thing that I am certain helps me is that I have whole-house hot air heating and air conditioning and humidification. In my printer room the humidity virtually never gets below 40% or above 50% and the temperature ranges from 65F to 72F (18 to 22 Celsius). The air is constantly filtered, too.
I have never covered either printer, but I am going to start doing that, too, after reading this thread.
So I suspect that most Epsons will behave nicely if given a good, steady environment, with controlled humidity and temperature.
Cheers,
Eric
-
Perhaps it's the lowered humidity of winter, but my Epson 4800 clogging problems are driving me crazy recently. A "Power Clean" a few days ago cleared things up nicely, but now, three prints later, I have problems again.
My (admittedly cheap and probably inaccurate) relative humidity meter indicates about 40% RH. I've just rigged a towel and a bucket of water in the printer room to see if I can raise the RH and evaluate its effects.
What is incredibly annoying is the printer's response to an "auto" head cleaning. On successive cleanings, whole channels can reappear or drop out completely, seemingly at random. Can anyone explain what's happening here? How can an ink channel disappear or get worse with a head cleaning?
>:( >:( >:( >:(
-
What is incredibly annoying is the printer's response to an "auto" head cleaning. On successive cleanings, whole channels can reappear or drop out completely, seemingly at random. Can anyone explain what's happening here? How can an ink channel disappear or get worse with a head cleaning?
>:( >:( >:( >:(
Sounds like your capping station isn't air-tight enough.
/Sven
-
Humidity is definitely an issue, I've seen a number of installs where either the air conditioning in the summer or the heating in the winter required the addition of a humidifier to help with clogging issues. Again, leave the printer on, too.
A nozzle dropping out after a cleaning suggests there's something going on with the cartridges, which may also be what's causing what looks like clogging issues. I've seen cartridges dry out, and air get introduced into the lines... in some cases when nothing else worked, we switched out new cartridges (yes, a pricey gamble) and it fixed the problem right away. If your cartridges are fairly new and have not suffered abuse, the next thing I'd ask is about temperature. Is it staying at a relatively normal room temperature throughout the day, or is the temp. varying a lot?
I was trying to calibrate a display for a guy up here in Boston a while ago- got there first thing in the morning and the studio was down around 50º. Had to essplain to him about LCDs (and fingers) warming up... :D
...not sure what a "capping station" is. ???
-
I wonder if it could be a similar situation people have with plaque buildup in our arteries.?
I think rather than worrying about adding additional colors to the gamut, more emphasis should be spent by the manufacturers on addressing the more serious problem of clogging!!
Aha! Epson should mix a little Lipitor into each ink cartridge (and cut down on the trans fats). ;D
-
it's a shame all the people, the thousands and thousands of people that don't have issues with their printers don't take the time to post on here.....
Yes, though they probably can't help either in analysing what keeps their printers squirting without issues. It usually are drivers that get an accident with a car that causes a recall on thousands of the same model, not the thousands that get home safely driving the same car.
met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst Dinkla
Try: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/
-
...not sure what a "capping station" is. ???
The capping station is where the printhead rests when not in action. And it must be 100% airtight, otherwise you can
get air in the ink chambers and a common result from that is suddenly dropped channels/colors. Here in EU there was
a programme under warranty that replaced the capping station on 4800.
/Sven
-
It could be the cap assembly, but I'd consider the wiper blade first. It may just be getting very dirty and so it's not cleaning the head correctly.
Like any sort of industrial or professional equipment, having it serviced/cleaned periodically is a good idea.
-
it's a shame all the people, the thousands and thousands of people that don't have issues with their printers don't take the time to post on here.....
While that may be true, every Epson printer I have owned (2200, 2400, 9600) had varying degrees of clogging problems. The 9600 was totally unusable, in spite of multiple service calls by Epson. A friend who has a 2400 has periodic clogging as well. In contrast, my Canon printers have never produced a flawed print due to clogging, since any clogged nozzles are remapped to good nozzles in the printhead. I don't even bother doing a nozzle check on the Canon printers.
-
What is incredibly annoying is the printer's response to an "auto" head cleaning. On successive cleanings, whole channels can reappear or drop out completely, seemingly at random. Can anyone explain what's happening here? How can an ink channel disappear or get worse with a head cleaning?
On my 9880 the effect where clogs seem to walk around from nozzle to nozzle means you've got some sort of contamination like dirt, or one of Fluffy's hairs, or cloth fibers, canvas fibers, or media dust, or something like that fouling the heads and the cleaning mechanism. It's not actually clogged nozzles which I think are relatively rare. The nozzles are blocked by something sitting on top of them.
Subsequent cleaning cycles just move the crud around to a different position, without being able to remove it. When I see that happen on two subsequent auto cleaning cycles I give the heads the lintless-paper-towel soaked with water or Windex treatment, and I also very gently wipe the squeegee and the two docking station landing zones with my immaculately clean fingers.
Usually two more cleaning cycles brings everything is back to glowing health, and I'm good to go for 2 or 3 more rolls of canvas. Usually. If the new 8300 ever does that, I'm going to shoot it.
-
Thanks, Bill. I'll try the Windex and paper towel procedure. But first:
The relative humidity in my printer room is 40%. In an effort to raise the RH, I've installed a small plastic tray containing a water-soaked cloth inside the Epson 4800, raised the lid slightly to prevent inadvertent printing and enclosed the whole assembly with a plastic sheet to contain whatever moisture evaporates. I'll report results.
-
Yeah I keep a sponge in a little tray in the 9880's printing head dock, and I built a cardboard wall to isolate that area as a small enclosed space. It seems to help...or at least it makes me feel like I'm doing something.
What I think REALLY helps is just to keep the machine covered in a way that prevents dust from falling into it. I drape a big piece of 44" wide canvas over the entire top of the printer. Canvas doesn't seem to generate static charges. I also am very careful to keep the surfaces above and below the roll holder clean so media can't pick up dust there, and transfer it to the heads. I also dust off the top of rolls before loading. If I cut media off at the outfeed I'm careful to clean up any dust that generates.
-
I have an epson 7900. I was plagued with clogs the first few months. I called Epson out and they determined that I had a bad print head. Now that it has been replaced I have had 1 minor clog that was fixed with 1 cleaning cycle to the channel. I print a lot.
Ever since the print head replacement this has been the best printer I have ever owned. I have owned r800, r1800, r1900, 1400 and 4800 epsons in the past. All of them at one point clogged about once a week. I also owned a HP B9180 that was really bad. I ended up tossing it because it would never work right after it started clogging. I spent hundreds on that hp replacing INK and print heads.
To me the experience with the 7900 has been awesome. The support you get the first year makes this printer well worth the money. If you have problems just call Epson and if they can't get you working over the phone they will send out a technician in 24 hours. By the extended warranty after the first year.
-
Interesting - I have one of the first model of HP B9180 and this printer still works great after so many years, never clog, and never needed to replace head!
-
it's a shame all the people, the thousands and thousands of people that don't have issues with their printers don't take the time to post on here.....
Yes I'm with you on that, what ever their preferred manufacturer. Mine is Epson, I don't have clogs I have a very dusty environment, but I do have a high humidity. I turn the printer off some times and sometimes I forget, no difference. Don't print for months at a time. I do have a SpongeBob sheet that I cover the 4880 with, maybe he soaks up all the crap. Good sealing and high humidity is my thought.
-
it's a shame all the people, the thousands and thousands of people that don't have issues with their printers don't take the time to post on here.....
While that's a valid point, for those who've been on this and other photography forums for years, they will remember the constant flood of long complaint threads about Canon printers shortly after they entered the wide format fine art printer market. The printers appeared to have some serious 1.0 issues and support was atrocious. There was little complaining about Epsons at the time.
It seems that Canon has fixed the issues and invested in support, since we hardly ever read of serious complaints about their printers anymore. Now the complaints are directed at Epson. My take is that Canon has lifted the expectations of printer performance, especially when it comes to clogging, and Epson hasn't been able to fix that or create another competitive advantage which would outshine clogging. At least not yet.
-
it's a shame all the people, the thousands and thousands of people that don't have issues with their printers don't take the time to post on here.....
Absolutely. The other factor people don't engage with is the different market shares of the brands. When I last saw the stats a few years ago Epson were out selling Canon in the amateur photo printer sector by 4 to 1 in Europe. In the wide carriage sector Epson weren't so dominant, but still had a much bigger market share.
So statistically there ought to be far more complaints about Epsons even if the percentage problem rate was identical between brands.
I've never had unexpected problems with any of my 6 Epsons, even with quite sporadic usage. My most recent printers, 3800 & 1800, have been fault free. With no special treatment 13°-24°C at around 23%rh
Paul
-
There was little complaining about Epsons at the time.
Does that mean the Epsons didn't clog then but do now that Canon have got there stuff together?
-
Does that mean the Epsons didn't clog then but do now that Canon have got there stuff together?
No, people have been moaning about Epsons clogging since the original Epson color 500, but then there wasn't anything else to moan about anyway ;-)
-
There was little complaining about Epsons at the time.
Does that mean the Epsons didn't clog then but do now that Canon have got there stuff together?
No, and I addressed this already: "My take is that Canon has lifted the expectations of printer performance, especially when it comes to clogging, and Epson hasn't been able to fix that or create another competitive advantage which would outshine clogging."
-
Well good for you guys, mine don't clog and I am not complaining about Epson or about the others, I'll let you experts tell all.
-
Absolutely. The other factor people don't engage with is the different market shares of the brands.
Which is all well and good if you were speaking of random problems. But that does not hold true once a SPECIFIC flaw is repeatedly posted. Ask any statistician. ;)
Epson has apparently institutionalized two engineering flaws... clogging and the ink change idiocy. People put up with that because the output was excellent. But now there are other machines from other manufacturers without those flaws... whose output is also excellent.
Tom
-
So make your choice
-
Epson has apparently institutionalized two engineering flaws... clogging and the ink change idiocy.
Well we're not discussing "random" problems, we're talking about the specific fault of ink clogging. Epsons suffer it, so do Canons, HPs & Lexmarks.
"Ink change idiocy" ? not sure what you mean by this. If you're referring to the way Epson inks are changed or the way matt and gloss inks are swapped, that's not a fault as such, it's just the way Epson have designed the printers.
-
Well we're not discussing "random" problems, we're talking about the specific fault of ink clogging. Epsons suffer it, so do Canons, HPs & Lexmarks.
"Ink change idiocy" ? not sure what you mean by this. If you're referring to the way Epson inks are changed or the way matt and gloss inks are swapped, that's not a fault as such, it's just the way Epson have designed the printers.
Now that is funny. Thanks for making my point for me. :)
Tom
-
I always enjoy when a thread gets around to the cost of inks and how "fussy" printers are these days... ::)
...makes me yearn for the early days of inkjet printers. Anyone remember trying to get a print that looked good and lasted more than a year out of a Stylus 1200, or is it just me? ...or the days of running a color lab or paying $50 for a decent 8x10 color print.
Oh just saying that gives me the shudders. :D
-
"Ink change idiocy" ? not sure what you mean by this. If you're referring to the way Epson inks are changed or the way matt and gloss inks are swapped, that's not a fault as such, it's just the way Epson have designed the printers.
Ah, the classic "it's a feature, not a bug" defense.
-
Ah, the classic "it's a feature, not a bug" defense.
I'm not saying it's a "feature", or that I like the behaviour myself, but that's how Epson designed it to perform. It's not an error or 'bug'.
I think it could be better implemented in the drivers, but that really is a question of preference. Just how idiot proof do people expect their hardware/software to be ?
Adding an extra head to avert changing black carts would add to the machine's cost and Epson presumably decided it was a cost that the majority of customers wouldn't accept. They may be wrong, but that's a question for their focus groups and customer feedback.
-
"Ink change idiocy" ? not sure what you mean by this. If you're referring to the way Epson inks are changed or the way matt and gloss inks are swapped, that's not a fault as such, it's just the way Epson have designed the printers.
Whatever you call it, Epson is lagging badly in this department compared to Canon and HP. The lack of this feature is something that may make some take a closer look at competitors. The same is true of ink clogging problems.
-
The issue is having different inks for matte and glossy.
It's a fundamental problem with no easy solution.
Newer Epsons share a head for both gloss and matte ink. When switching form one to the other, some ink needs to be flushed. The trick is to minimize the amount that is flushed so it isn't a problem.
You could have separate heads for the two black inks, but that might waste even more ink. If you mostly printed glossy, the printer would need to occasionally purge the matte black head to keep it from drying out and clogging.
So you see, you can build a printer for people who
- never switch blacks (you have to change the carts and do a major purge to switch)
- occasionally switch blacks (they share a head, and only a minimal purge is needed to switch)
- frequently switch blacks (separate black heads that are always live)
There is no single solution that is best for everyone. Epson is just trying to find the solution that maximizes happiness for the largest number of customers.
-
My root canal was painFUL. The R3880 doesn't clog.
Dave
-
The lack of this feature is something that may make some take a closer look at competitors.
The other side of that issue is that some us aren't at all bothered by the issue and prefer the cost saving of not having extra heads. I rarely print on matte materials these days. It's taken three years to run out of MK ink in my 3800.
The same is true of ink clogging problems.
The vast, silent, majority of users DON'T see this problem. If it really was as bad as some folk assert, Epson wouldn't still have their dominant market share.
As has already been pointed out the people without problems rarely mention "everything's fine".
-
The issue is having different inks for matte and glossy.
It's a fundamental problem with no easy solution.
(snip)
There is no single solution that is best for everyone. Epson is just trying to find the solution that maximizes happiness for the largest number of customers.
It is an easy solution on the Epson 11880, 4000, all HP Z models, many Canon models. I have never seen a complaint that there is an extra black channel, cart>tube>head, on printers like that. I have not seen it described as wasting more ink, being prone to more clogging or anything that may indicate it is a bad design and not functioning in practice. There have been bad experiences with the 4000 but I know a happy 4000 owner who exchanged it for a 3880 about a year ago which he likes too BTW. He prints matte and glossy. I do not see why a photographer or print shop wouldn't like to have the instant availability of a gloss and matte printer in one package. About versatility there is no discussion needed anymore, all recent Epson wide formats can now change between matte and gloss black. It would surprise me if that isn't addressing a request in the market.
It is simple: an Epson piëzohead nozzle is expensive so compromises have to be made on the number of heads, the number of nozzles per head. It is reflected in the two Epson wide format ranges. It is reflected in the matte/gloss black ink switches..
met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst Dinkla
Try: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/
-
I do not see why a photographer or print shop wouldn't like to have the instant availability of a gloss and matte printer in one package.
Sure, but are they prepared to pay for that facility ? They'd probably like to be able to use roll paper and have a vacuum print path, but they add cost too.
The other issue is that adding an extra print head would increase the physical size of the print head assembly, necessitating a longer sweep to clear both sides of the paper, this in turn makes the printer wider and less home friendly.
The 3xxx series has been spectacularly successful for Epson mostly due to hitting an acceptable price point with low running costs, small physical size and great output and facilities. I'm sure that feature set was carefully researched and considered, any compromises were considered acceptable for the majority of users. I'm sure they know their business better than us.
-
Sure, but are they prepared to pay for that facility ? They'd probably like to be able to use roll paper and have a vacuum print path, but they add cost too.
The other issue is that adding an extra print head would increase the physical size of the print head assembly, necessitating a longer sweep to clear both sides of the paper, this in turn makes the printer wider and less home friendly.
The 3xxx series has been spectacularly successful for Epson mostly due to hitting an acceptable price point with low running costs, small physical size and great output and facilities. I'm sure that feature set was carefully researched and considered, any compromises were considered acceptable for the majority of users. I'm sure they know their business better than us.
Sure the 3800 and 3880 fitted in nicely, first model that had the switch and introduced at the time the competition had hardly a printer in that segment, still doesn't in a way. The iPF5000 was there but fell somewhat outside that segment, it was however an early bird of what would happen in the wide format market and Epson may not have been so well informed there.
They know their technology and most of the time their business. We know or should know what we want. We do not always get that as there has been a time that there was no competition in the market. Almost 5 years ago the competition had a first competing model, the iPF5000. Within a year the wide format market was completely changed (Photokina 2006, HP Canon) and Epson had to adapt and did so. The 4900 is the last one of that process, 5 years after the Canon iPF5000 appeared Epson has an N-color roll printer for 17" wide with a matte and gloss black switch. 5 years is a long time in a market that is 10-12 years old. I'm sure Epson knows the market and knows how to play it. I don't think Epson was surprised that customers liked the new features of the competition. I think Epson was surprised that the competition could deliver them end of 2006. In that sense they didn't know their business in 2006. I'm sure they did know what the customers wanted end of 2006, we told them and in some cases showed them way before that moment what would be nice features for a wide format inkjet printer. How to play the market with and without competition is a company's goal. Whether customers get what they want should be judged by the customers themselves.
met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst Dinkla
Try: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/
-
DBarnes,
I'll take a painful root canal and a printer that doesn't clog. Your post gave me a good morning laugh. ;D
-
Interesting discussion on the merits of the printers from different manufacturers. I don't know what the sales numbers are which we would need in order to do a good statistical analysis of which printer is more reliable from a clogging perspective; I doubt that this thread will assist us in that matter. Ernst makes some good points about the differing technologies regarding print heads and why Epson have gone down the path they have. Will they come out with a new approach to printer design? Probably so, we will just have to wait and see. I have a 3880 and am pleased with the output. I've not had a single clog (and I've already on the second set of a couple of cartridges) and print on both matte and gloss paper. I don't mind the switchover and find that it really doesn't consume that much ink. The only minor quibble is the lack of 17x25 paper in the brands I print on (Museo Silver Rag and Portfolio Rag and Ilford GFS) which means that if I do want to print 16x24 prints I need to have my friend who has an Epson 7900 do it or cut roll paper to size (which I have not yet tried).
-
The other side of that issue is that some us aren't at all bothered by the issue and prefer the cost saving of not having extra heads. I rarely print on matte materials these days. It's taken three years to run out of MK ink in my 3800.The vast, silent, majority of users DON'T see this problem. If it really was as bad as some folk assert, Epson wouldn't still have their dominant market share.
As has already been pointed out the people without problems rarely mention "everything's fine".
Well, that post clears up a lot. You are not talking about a large format printer... I am. A 3800 is not a large format printer. And I have heard good things about the 3800 not clogging as frequently as older desktops, so Epson improved at least in that category.
Second, I did not pay a premium for the extra "heads" when I bought my latest Canon. It was WAY less expensive than its Epson counterpart, heads and all... as were the three previous Canons I bought. No wasted time OR ink when different print jobs calling for different blacks come up. No running nozzle checks before every job. No forced cleaning cycles before every job. No babysitting the printers to ensure each print job completes without a head clogging (or worse, getting to the end of a large run and discovering a clogged channel mid-way through).
Life is too short and business is too pressing to worry about ink clogs.
Tom
-
The 3800/3880 is a large format printer and it uses the same technology as the larger models in the range.
I don't do nozzle checks before every job (nor even every day), I don't have any forced cleans before jobs, I don't need to babysit the printer and I haven't lost any prints due to clogging part way through. Since your last 3 (or 4) printers were Canons, I'm left wondering about how much direct experience you have with recent models from other manufacturers.
There's no doubt that some people experience problems, just as they do across any brand or type of product.
If the Canon is the printer that suits you best, then I reckon that's the best choice you could have made and well done.
Discussing pros and cons helps everyone, including the manufacturers. Simply ragging on models other than the one you have, and withouot recent direct experience, is of little value. You'd be better extolling the virtues of your Canon and your positive (and negative) experiences.
Finally, it's worth remembering that photography is not the only market into which these printers go. Indeed, it's not even the largest.
-
The 3800/3880 is a large format printer and it uses the same technology as the larger models in the range.
I don't do nozzle checks before every job (nor even every day), I don't have any forced cleans before jobs, I don't need to babysit the printer and I haven't lost any prints due to clogging part way through. Since your last 3 (or 4) printers were Canons, I'm left wondering about how much direct experience you have with recent models from other manufacturers.
There's no doubt that some people experience problems, just as they do across any brand or type of product.
If the Canon is the printer that suits you best, then I reckon that's the best choice you could have made and well done.
Discussing pros and cons helps everyone, including the manufacturers. Simply ragging on models other than the one you have, and withouot recent direct experience, is of little value. You'd be better extolling the virtues of your Canon and your positive (and negative) experiences.
Finally, it's worth remembering that photography is not the only market into which these printers go. Indeed, it's not even the largest.
Total Agreement
-
To say that the 3880 model desktop units are the same situation as the giant pressurized carts of the 44" models is a distortion of reality. The issues with the 11880 and the 9900 series machines is that they require a lot more pressure and subtle engineering, ink limitations for media, etc. I wouldn't even remotely compare the two types of printers, regardless of them using the same inks and papers.
j
-
The pressure has nothing to do with the operation of the print heads. The ink is transported into a damper and then it feeds (without pressure) into the head and is ejected as droplets by the peizo. There's no direct pressure from the cartridges to the print head via the ink lines.
RIPs exist for the 3800/3880 as well so issues of ink limitation and such are the same.
Yes, they are different in some ways, but the basic technology and ink delivery is the same.
Furthermore, the cartridges in the 44" machines are the same as the ones in the 24" and the same technology as those in the 17" machines. The 3800/3880 is a little different, but we're talking about a 2880 here, which is certainly a different situation.
-
You are not talking about a large format printer... I am.
No, I'm talking about inkjet printers in general.
A 3800 is not a large format printer.
You may not consider it one, but that's how it's categorised by Epson and it's resellers, check B+H or Bodoni for how it's listed. It also falls into the professional range and gets supported as such. See other posts for more explanations as to why this is the case.
And I have heard good things about the 3800 not clogging as frequently as older desktops,
I think I've yet to read of any unexpected clogging with this printer. The point is that things have moved on since the time when people reported clogging with their older printers.
I did not pay a premium for the extra "heads" when I bought my latest Canon.
The question you need to ask is how much cheaper would have been with a different spec ?
Life is too short and business is too pressing to worry about ink clogs.
That IS true, but I'll repeat again I've never suffered with print head clogging on any of my 6 Epsons over the years and from what I hear from my customers I'm sure it's an exaggerated problem.