Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Printing: Printers, Papers and Inks => Topic started by: Some Guy on April 27, 2014, 02:26:40 pm
-
Fwiw, http://www.colourmanagement.ca/product_images/uploaded_images/Canon_iPF6450_Epson_X900_Review.pdf (http://www.colourmanagement.ca/product_images/uploaded_images/Canon_iPF6450_Epson_X900_Review.pdf)
Imho, Epson needs to do some serious fixing of their issues with their large format printers.
SG
-
I own an iPF8400. Neither brand is perfect. Both printer series have lots they can improve on.
The gamut comparison was likely made on glossy paper, favouring the Canon marginally. On matte papers Epson's inkset really shines. Epson's screening is also much smoother than Canon's.
-
Fwiw, http://www.colourmanagement.ca/product_images/uploaded_images/Canon_iPF6450_Epson_X900_Review.pdf (http://www.colourmanagement.ca/product_images/uploaded_images/Canon_iPF6450_Epson_X900_Review.pdf)
Imho, Epson needs to do some serious fixing of their issues with their large format printers.
I stopped reading when I got tot the section on Custom Media. If you can't even work a common dialog box, then I really don't think you should be reviewing printers. Setting up custom media settings is very easy on Epson printers.
Brian A
-
I would definitely agree that Canon and HP printers work much better for those who don't print continuously (i.e. most photographers, as well as those reproducing paintings, drawings and other artworks).
Unfortunately, most custom inksets (Piezography, MIS Eboni, AIS Ultramax, etc.) only work on Epson.
It's a mystery to me why they use Epson rather than Canon/HP for this, since the people most likely to use such custom inksets are photographers are artists who don't print continuously - advertisers and other large-volume commercial printers are more likely to use OEMs or cheap Chinese knockoffs, not custom inksets requiring special calibration and separate CMYK+ RIP software. Also, Canon and HP printers can support 12 different inks used at the same time (since MK and PK run separately) while Epson can only support 8 (non-x900) or 10 (x900) inks at a time, and you can run Canon/HP inks through an Epson, but not vice-versa.
If you could run custom inks through Canon printers, I wouldn't use Epson at all.
-
Similar test - similar results...
http://knikkerprinter.files.wordpress.com/2013/06/canon-ipf8400-44-inch-vs-epson-pro-9900-ectr-051314.pdf
-
and also my personal experience
specialy this:
My office environment is a bit too dry but I consider it a regular working environment. Over the last few months I’ve been called upon to print photos and posters. In one longer print run we were asked to print 18 copies of one poster that was 22 x 36 inches long. The prints were run on the Epson, in the middle of the print run we noticed a colour degradation. So I ran a nozzle check, it showed that the cyan nozzle had lost at least 50%. We had to discard last two prints, run a cleaning cycle and continue the print job. I consider this to be a significant issue as it
pertains to running this device on a regular basis. One would expect you could continue to print without interruption, unattended printing is very common when we have large print runs.
-
Similar test - similar results...
http://knikkerprinter.files.wordpress.com/2013/06/canon-ipf8400-44-inch-vs-epson-pro-9900-ectr-051314.pdf
I stopped reading that "report" once I saw it was commissioned by Canon. ::)
At some point (this one) I think it really is starting to pick at hairs...
ken
-
The difference isn't in image quality, but in reliability and maintenance costs, as well as the fugitive nature of the Epson yellow ink.
-
.....
Unfortunately, most custom inksets (Piezography, MIS Eboni, AIS Ultramax, etc.) only work on Epson.
It's a mystery to me why they use Epson rather than Canon/HP for this, since the people most likely to use such custom inksets are photographers are artists who don't print continuously - advertisers and other large-volume commercial printers are more likely to use OEMs or cheap Chinese knockoffs, not custom inksets requiring special calibration and separate CMYK+ RIP software. Also, Canon and HP printers can support 12 different inks used at the same time (since MK and PK run separately) while Epson can only support 8 (non-x900) or 10 (x900) inks at a time, and you can run Canon/HP inks through an Epson, but not vice-versa.
If you could run custom inks through Canon printers, I wouldn't use Epson at all.
I wondered about that too. I have a local Canon printer dealer, but they cannot get any info on using dye sub inks for Canon nor any Piezo inks either.
Seems Epson, although with all their chipped carts, has found a niche somehow with the "cart pirates" where you can use other inks. Canon seems to be off the non-OEM ink makers and cart pirates screens too.
Too bad Canon doesn't supply empty carts for all their machines without getting into the chipped "Our stuff only" nonsense. A 12 ink Canon running piezo ink in various shades might be a dream.
SG
-
I wondered about that too. I have a local Canon printer dealer, but they cannot get any info on using dye sub inks for Canon nor any Piezo inks either.
Seems Epson, although with all their chipped carts, has found a niche somehow with the "cart pirates" where you can use other inks. Canon seems to be off the non-OEM ink makers and cart pirates screens too.
Too bad Canon doesn't supply empty carts for all their machines without getting into the chipped "Our stuff only" nonsense. A 12 ink Canon running piezo ink in various shades might be a dream.
SG
Thermal inkjet requires a different resin to piezo inkjet, that can withstand the temperature. You can run thermal inkjet inks through a piezo head, but not vice-versa.
What I don't understand, then, is why the makers of specialised inksets all use piezo resin in their inks (which can only run on Epson) rather than thermal-compatible resin, which can be used in any printer.
-
Thermal inkjet requires a different resin to piezo inkjet, that can withstand the temperature. You can run thermal inkjet inks through a piezo head, but not vice-versa.
What I don't understand, then, is why the makers of specialised inksets all use piezo resin in their inks (which can only run on Epson) rather than thermal-compatible resin, which can be used in any printer.
Is it even possible? dye sub works by heating the ink until to the point of gasification. How do you get a thermal head to heat the ink to point required, and yet have it remain in a state it can be heated again for the sublimation process?
-
Is it even possible? dye sub works by heating the ink until to the point of gasification. How do you get a thermal head to heat the ink to point required, and yet have it remain in a state it can be heated again for the sublimation process?
I wasn't referring to dye sub - I was referring to custom pigment inksets like Piezography, MIS Eboni (which has no resin at all AFAIK) and AIS inks. I'm not sure about dye-sub either.
-
A few thoughts
My report was not commissioned by Canon. Canon supplied me with a printer to test for 6 months. They have since asked to use the review and I have no problem with that. I was not paid or in any way compensated. I sell both Epson and Canon. Most people are still asking for Epson's but things are changing.
One poster mentioned that it is just as easy to create a custom media on the Epson. On the EPSON one must use the EPSON LFP Remote Panel 2.app. With this app you can create a custom media BASED ON other Epson medias. But you cannot print ink limit charts to define the total ink limits for a particular media. You also cannot export and distribute the Custom Media file and I could not find a way to re-name the newly created custom media beyond Custom 1. Epson does not make it easy to create, adjust and distribute a custom 3rd media setting. Canon on the other hand does. The MCT or Media configuration Tool supplied by Canon is a wizard based solution that is easy to follow. Just go to the Breathing Color website and look at how slick it is to load custom media settings for their papers. The custom media names simple show up on the Printer menu and in the driver and the user just selects the custom profile, easy.
I also tested a number of different media types and the two printers have very similar gamuts. On the Gloss/SG the Dmax is better on the Canon and the Epsons have slightly better Greens and Oranges. In my opinion the difference is very small and both have huge gamuts.
My biggest issue is that the Epson heads Clog! It's a fact. It's also a pain as you waste ink, time and paper. I have a 4900 in my home office and I always do a nozzle check before an important print. With the Canon I had for 6 months. I NEVER did a nozzle check because it never clogged. I never worried that it would. But yes the Canon's will go through a couple of heads in the printers life time. But a child could change the heads.
I've learned that people are emotionally tied to there printers and it brings up a lot of frustration from people when I suggest that Canon's are a better printer. I can live with that. :-)
Angus Pady
-
Nice review, and glad that Canon felt it was important to use in their own sales.
You are correct on the clogs on Epson, however so much of it can be prevented with some very basic knowledge of the printer. I also strongly feel a lot of what people call clogs, are not something on the head, but a damaged ink delivery system, either a channel or pizeo part in the head. Once that electronic connection has failed that part will never deliver ink again.
This goes back to the epic post Eric G made on this site, remember after all was said and done, and he tore open the head there was nothing in there, no ink residue, etc. The head was clean. They looked at it under magnification. Net, something electronic was dead.
Epson has pairs cleaning but many folks still don't realize that unless you are in Maintenance mode, you only have 2 settings, medium and high, where as in MM, you have 4 settings.
Enough on clogs, yes they happen, but just using the printer everyday or every other day can help a lot. They don't like to sit idle for sure.
Epson's biggest issues to me are:
Gloss differential, and I believe Canon has a little better edge on this, on Epson, it' pretty harsh especially on gloss paper.
Metamerism, on glossy and semi-gloss papers, (color shifits when you move a print around in the light). My 9900 has a real issue with this
my 9900 still gets the work out, like my 7800, (now 6 years old and still running).
Paul
-
Metamerism, on glossy and semi-gloss papers, (color shifits when you move a print around in the light). My 9900 has a real issue with this
It's not metamerism, it's bronzing. Metameric failure occurs when colour changes under different light spectra, at any angle.
-
Thanks for the correction.
Issue I refer to is when print say with a blue sky, with a series of clouds on Canson Platine is made. When you look at the print head on all is fine, however as you move the print around in the light (my case Tungsten or Florescent), you will see the edges of the blue gradations pick up a reddish hue and as again as you move back to center it goes away. Pretty harsh on the 9900 with RC glossy, but at times worse for me with Canson Platine, not as bad with Canson Baryta but still there. The best paper I used that did not show this effect as bad, was the old Breathing Color Vibrance Rag, which had a heavy pebbling on the surface, which may be why this effect was not noticed as bad. The new replacement from BC, Vibrance Baryta shows the issue as bad as platine, however the BC Baryta won't work in my 9900 due to the reverse curling at the edges. Already lost a head due to that.
This issue is why I still look for a way to glossy coat a matte print as you can print matte on the 9900 with none of this, but I have not found a way to coat matte prints to a glossy finish, still working on that.
Paul
-
Apologies to SG first no intent to hijack just a quick note to Paul.
These sample photos do not do justice to the beautiful look and feel of a matte paper with a semi gloss over laminate.
Epson Hot Press Bright covered with Seal's Print Guard Luster which requires a hot roll laminator for application.
The paper texture is enhanced by the laminate but not overly glossy.
Printed on Epson 9900
-
Hey Dan,
what hot roll laminator do you use?
-
Seal 44 ultra
-
Dan,
I fully agree, the look is excellent and the work can be displayed without glazing. However cost and skills in my area don't lend well to this.
I am still playing around with rolling timeless on matte prints, but so far without success.
My issues with spraying is that I have yet to find a HVLP sprayer that will get a fine enough droplet size to work on fine art matte papers like the Epson hot press bright or Optica 1 (which I use more). The spray tends to hit and dry instantly and the size of the droplets leave a pebbled effect.
Moving soon to the Fuji System, and will try again.
Paul