Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5   Go Down

Author Topic: Best 44" printer for fine art  (Read 3686 times)

I.T. Supplies

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 358
Re: Best 44" printer for fine art
« Reply #20 on: September 24, 2018, 06:36:00 PM »

Just curious on why so many are saying that HP Vivera inks are better than Epson and Canon.  Where are these results coming from to say this and what's being used to do the comparison?
Logged

John Nollendorfs

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 504
Re: Best 44" printer for fine art
« Reply #21 on: September 24, 2018, 11:40:44 PM »

Just curious on why so many are saying that HP Vivera inks are better than Epson and Canon.  Where are these results coming from to say this and what's being used to do the comparison?
Check out results here
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com

Also check out Wilhelm"s results.

It's pretty conclusive that the Vivara inks pretty much have double the life. Mainly because of their nearly linear fade characteristics.

But both Canon & Epsons newest inks have slightly wider gamut in certain areas.

Sent from my XT1575 using Tapatalk

Logged

mearussi

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 300
Re: Best 44" printer for fine art
« Reply #22 on: September 25, 2018, 09:30:07 AM »

Just curious on why so many are saying that HP Vivera inks are better than Epson and Canon.  Where are these results coming from to say this and what's being used to do the comparison?
You guys have all three in your store. Do your own tests and tell us.
Logged

Mark Lindquist

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1370
  • itís not about the photos we take - itís the ones we leave
    • LINDQUIST STUDIOS
Re: Best 44" printer for fine art
« Reply #23 on: September 25, 2018, 02:21:00 PM »

Just curious on why so many are saying that HP Vivera inks are better than Epson and Canon.  Where are these results coming from to say this and what's being used to do the comparison?

Very surprised that you would ask a question like that when it has been common knowledge, especially on this forum that HP Vivera inks have been "King of the Hill" for at least 11 years now based on test results from both Wilhelm and Aardenburg. 

But it's not just that the inks are superior in archival aspects, but fade results in terms of longevity ramps, meaning that Vivera inks fade gracefully as a whole rather than falling off a cliff turning faces purple like other insets do after certain light exposure limits.

But more importantly, with the embedded spectrophotometer (standard equipment with all z3200ps printers) hyper-profiles are possible.  The ability to make 6000 patch target ICC profiles in house, literally, using the ESP in the printer, assures amazing results mostly not done with other printers.

Vivera inks far outperform Epson and Canon inks - the literature is out there supporting it.

But wait, you actually sell these machines.  You already know this, right?  :-)

Mark
Logged

MHMG

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1142
Re: Best 44" printer for fine art
« Reply #24 on: September 25, 2018, 02:48:22 PM »

Very surprised that you would ask a question like that when it has been common knowledge, especially on this forum that HP Vivera inks have been "King of the Hill" for at least 11 years now based on test results from both Wilhelm and Aardenburg. 

But it's not just that the inks are superior in archival aspects, but fade results in terms of longevity ramps, meaning that Vivera inks fade gracefully as a whole rather than falling off a cliff turning faces purple like other insets do after certain light exposure limits.

But more importantly, with the embedded spectrophotometer (standard equipment with all z3200ps printers) hyper-profiles are possible.  The ability to make 6000 patch target ICC profiles in house, literally, using the ESP in the printer, assures amazing results mostly not done with other printers.

Vivera inks far outperform Epson and Canon inks - the literature is out there supporting it.

Mark

All we need to do now is rinse and repeat some print quality and print longevity tests with a new Z9+ printer and its new Photo Vivid ink set with new screening algorithms and drop size pattern (easier said than done).

...and also hope that the embedded Z9 spectrophotometer hasn't been crippled in its target measuring capability compared to the older Z3200PS. I haven't yet spoken to an HP rep or a dealer that seems to be able to answer those key questions with any confidence, and I have tried several times to date :(

cheers,
Mark
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com

« Last Edit: September 25, 2018, 03:12:27 PM by MHMG »
Logged

MichaelEzra

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1027
    • https://www.michaelezra.com
Re: Best 44" printer for fine art
« Reply #25 on: September 25, 2018, 03:47:40 PM »

What about the Latest Epson HDX inkset vs Vivera -are they comparable in fade-resistance?
I was browsing through the test results and could not find apples to apples comparison of 7800/4800/K3 vs Z3200/Vivera or Ultrachrome HD vs Z3200/Vivera on the same, preferably OBA free, paper.

Mark, in case I missed it, could you please point me in the right direction?

I took the liberty to take screenshots of three reports from http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com to look at them side by side.
Mark, if you would like me to not  display it here, just let me know.

This is Ultrachrome K3 vs Ultrachrome  HD vs Vivera prints, but all on different media, all at 100 Mega Lux.
I do see the overall progression in lightfastness from left to right, but is Vivera twice as lightfast as HD/HDX ink on the same media?
« Last Edit: September 25, 2018, 04:14:59 PM by MichaelEzra »
Logged

John Nollendorfs

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 504
Re: Best 44" printer for fine art
« Reply #26 on: September 25, 2018, 04:15:40 PM »

Not even close! Not on the same exact media, but you should get the idea. I do believe Mark has "comparative" data though!
Logged

John Nollendorfs

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 504
Re: Best 44" printer for fine art
« Reply #27 on: September 25, 2018, 05:33:44 PM »

Found Wilhelm results comparing all 3 printers on Canson Paper
Logged

MichaelEzra

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1027
    • https://www.michaelezra.com
Re: Best 44" printer for fine art
« Reply #28 on: September 25, 2018, 06:05:54 PM »

Thank you John, this is very helpful.

I wonder how "poor" really is the gamut of Z3200 compared to HDX ink.
Color profiles for Z3200 are *.oms files and using Gamutvision I cannot compare them to ICC profiles which are available for the Epson printers.
Can .oms file be converted to icc, or can icc be extracted from oms?
« Last Edit: September 25, 2018, 06:09:01 PM by MichaelEzra »
Logged

glyph

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 34
  • Ron H.
    • Glyph Art Studio
Re: Best 44" printer for fine art
« Reply #29 on: September 25, 2018, 06:21:44 PM »

Obviously, it's just anecdotal, but I've been printing professionally for others with HP Z printers here in Hawaii for almost ten years, and I have never had a client ask for more vivid colors than I can deliver with my Z3200 (reds with the Z3100 were another story). This is not an environment that is known for its dull colors, either.
Logged

Mark Lindquist

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1370
  • itís not about the photos we take - itís the ones we leave
    • LINDQUIST STUDIOS
Re: Best 44" printer for fine art
« Reply #30 on: September 25, 2018, 11:56:30 PM »

Thank you John, this is very helpful.

I wonder how "poor" really is the gamut of Z3200 compared to HDX ink.
Color profiles for Z3200 are *.oms files and using Gamutvision I cannot compare them to ICC profiles which are available for the Epson printers.
Can .oms file be converted to icc, or can icc be extracted from oms?

Huh?  .oms files are Z3200 files that have been exported or imported, only.  "The .oms files are paper presets, as indicated in the name on each file. You can import these presets in the HP utility that has a function called Paper Preset Management." However, the Z3200 uses ICC profiles the same as all other printers.  When the spectrophotometer makes them they are installed in the library, same as all other printer profiles are. You can install icc profiles as per instructions here:

http://z3200.com/Making_Profiles_For_HP-Z3200_Printers.htm  (look for the image near the bottom of that page):



If you'd like to compare a Z3200 Hyper-Profile to whatever you want, try this 4357 patch target profile made for Innova Exhibit Baryta:

Best,

Mark
Logged

Ernst Dinkla

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3730
Re: Best 44" printer for fine art
« Reply #31 on: September 26, 2018, 03:57:18 AM »

If I recall a conversation correctly on HP Vivid versus Vivera inks, the first should have a somewhat better gloss by themselves (so sans GE applied) and a better scratch resistance. That was with the introduction of the Z5600 on the Photokina.

Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst

http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
March 2017 update, 750+ inkjet media white spectral plots

Logged

MichaelEzra

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1027
    • https://www.michaelezra.com
Re: Best 44" printer for fine art
« Reply #32 on: September 26, 2018, 07:50:03 AM »

Here is a quick gamut comparison.

The 1-st screenshot is with P9000/Ultrachome HDX with Silver Rag (notably a large gamut volume combination) vs Z3200/Vivera Innova Baryta IFA69.
Gamut volumes 1,011,383 vs 858,553.

The 2-nd screenshot is P6000/UltraChrome HD  vs Z3200/Vivera Innova Baryta ICC, both for IFA69 Innova Baryta.
Gamut volumes 883,416 vs 782,592.

Gamutvision changes the gamut volume of IFA69 in the second comparison, I suppose because the area of (858,553-782,592) lies outside the gamut of UltraChrome HD.
So one could say that Ultrachrome HD gamut volume is 883,416 and the Z3200/Vivera 858,553.

I could not find ICC for P9000/Ultrachome HDX for IFA69 Innova Baryta to compare with Z3200/Vivera, but the second attachment illustrates differences expected between the Ultrachrome HDX and Ultrachrome HD on example using Silver Rag paper - gamut volume 1,011,383 vs 850,695.

It appears that Ultrachmore HDX would lead to 15% larger gamut vs Vivera ink, and Ultrachrome HD and Vivera gamut volumes are more similar, although Ultrachrome HD and HDX inks allow a higher DMax.


« Last Edit: September 26, 2018, 07:55:50 AM by MichaelEzra »
Logged

Mark Lindquist

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1370
  • itís not about the photos we take - itís the ones we leave
    • LINDQUIST STUDIOS
Re: Best 44" printer for fine art
« Reply #33 on: September 26, 2018, 09:35:19 AM »

Here is a quick gamut comparison.

The 1-st screenshot is with P9000/Ultrachome HDX with Silver Rag (notably a large gamut volume combination) vs Z3200/Vivera Innova Baryta IFA69.
Gamut volumes 1,011,383 vs 858,553.

The 2-nd screenshot is P6000/UltraChrome HD  vs Z3200/Vivera Innova Baryta ICC, both for IFA69 Innova Baryta.
Gamut volumes 883,416 vs 782,592.

Gamutvision changes the gamut volume of IFA69 in the second comparison, I suppose because the area of (858,553-782,592) lies outside the gamut of UltraChrome HD.
So one could say that Ultrachrome HD gamut volume is 883,416 and the Z3200/Vivera 858,553.

I could not find ICC for P9000/Ultrachome HDX for IFA69 Innova Baryta to compare with Z3200/Vivera, but the second attachment illustrates differences expected between the Ultrachrome HDX and Ultrachrome HD on example using Silver Rag paper - gamut volume 1,011,383 vs 850,695.

It appears that Ultrachmore HDX would lead to 15% larger gamut vs Vivera ink, and Ultrachrome HD and Vivera gamut volumes are more similar, although Ultrachrome HD and HDX inks allow a higher DMax.

Given that you are asking which is the best 44" printer, and given that you are presumably interested in print longevity, etc., (the things museum curators look at carefully) there is much more to printers than gamut plots.
I refer to Mark McCormick's previous post:

Looks like Scott Martin used a 1728 patch color target to produce his color gamut comparisons in that report. From testing I've done with the Z3200PS in collaboration with Mark Linquist and John Dean over the past several months, we have all concluded that 1728 patch targets are merely the starting point for achieving optimal color reproduction on the the Z3200PS. Higher patch counts (4000+) bring out superior color and tone reproduction qualities and exceptionally smooth grayscale reproduction on the Z3200 that are subtle yet easily noticeable by discerning viewers. Hence, I'm honesty not sure how much emphasis one should place on color gamut volume plots in and of themselves. They describe the potential of a printer/ink/media combination to produce vivid colors, but they say nothing about the color and tone reproduction accuracy within that printable color gamut.

There's much more to subtle color and tone differentiation within a fine art print that simply doesn't get accounted for with gamut plots.  Moreover, unless one has an automated spectrophotometer like an Xrite iSis or the highly useful one directly built into the Z series printers, exploring the benefits of super high patch count color target profiling is not something I would ever been inclined to do ;)

cheers,
Mark
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com

"Different gamut volume apps scale things differently, and there are now ďinflatedĒ ICC profiles being produced by companies like Chromix where use of polarizing filters on the spectrophotometer produce pseudo saturated colors. The extended patch profiles arenít so much about extended gamut, rather they're are about precision and color differentiation within gamut. The gamut volume plots are largely of academic interest only. Other metrics need to be used to determine which printer is printing optimally, and that has a great deal to do with profile quality. Nothing like competently making oneís own profiles to extract more goodness out of the printer and the Zís facilitate this goodness."  (From conversations with MHMG)

If you think the Epson Ultrachrome HDX and HD will propel your prints farther into the future than HP's Vivera inks, then there's nothing more to be said other than basicly "jump on out there".  In my view there is far more than gamut plots that define the ethereal quality of fine art archival prints, particularly in the realm of longevity and fade curves.

Choosing a printer is similar to choosing a guitar.  A great musician can make any instrument perform well.  Then there is pairing that guitar with the right amp and finally composition that makes it art. The level of artistic merit hinges perhaps more on delineations and subtleties than gamut plots?  A printer/ink/paper combination is ultimately subject to live or real time perceptions of quality. But if a minor difference in a gamut plot that indicates a slight edge tips you over to a decision of which printer to invest in, then great, your problem is solved.  Good luck with it.  I have no doubt that Epson prints look awesome.

Best,

Mark



Logged

MHMG

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1142
Re: Best 44" printer for fine art
« Reply #34 on: September 26, 2018, 11:03:36 AM »

Hesitating a bit to wade further into the gamut volume discussion, but as I noted earlier, gamut volume plots describe the potential of a printer/ink/media combination to produce vivid colors but say nothing about the tone reproduction curves (TRC) or the gray scale neutrality of the system, or the precision and accuracy of the printed colors and tones within the printable gamut. This is where printer linearization and custom ICC profiling really comes into play. Attached are two graph sets showing actual tone curve and gray scale neutrality achieved on a Canon Pro-1000 and with an Epson SC P600 using the respective OEM premium RC luster photo papers (which IMHO, print so darn close to one another that one can interchange those two media between the two printers without bothering to reprofile).

I made a custom profile using BasicColor RGB drop using a "meager" 918 patch color target for the Pro-1000/Lucia Pro ink/Canon Pro luster paper, and the graphs show how the 30 patch Aardenburg Color target was printed on that system. I also printed the Aardenburg 30 patch Color target on my Epson P600/UCHD ink/Epson Premium Luster paper, but in that situation I simply used the Epson supplied generic profile.

The plots show that the generic Epson profile caused the P600 to print the image tonality scaled linearly relative to the Paper white media even though I had chosen Perceptual rather than relative w/BPC rendering, and because the profile was a generic one, the grayscale neutrality is no where near as good as it could be (as shown by the lumpiness/lack of smoothness in the plot). In comparison, the custom built profile I made for the Canon Pro-1000 caused the printer to print with a much more perceptually linear response with the tone curve hugging the ideal1:1 L* input/output objective much more closely and the gray scale neutrality performing significantly better than that achieved on the P600. Note that higher patch count profiling like I routinely do with my Z3200 smoothes the grayscale neutrality response even better than the results shown here, and IT IS NOTICEABLE to discerning viewers).

Two points should also be noted: 1) had I custom profiled the P600/luster combination with same 918 color patch target, same profiling software, I have no doubt (based on a lot of printing and profiling experience) that the TRC and the grayscale neutrality response of the of the P600 would then have closely matched that of the custom profiled PRO-1000. I would then have two well behaved printers with essentially interchangeable printing characteristics, whereas in current state as shown in the graphs, any necessary image edits to achieve one's own preferred tone and color print quality on  the Canon need to be different than those used on the P600. 2). These differences are system wide differences affecting every image I would print on these two printers in their current state, whereas any differences in total printable color gamut volume would only show on a much smaller subset of printed images, i.e., images that just happen to have important out-of-gamut colors in select hues within the color space. That means it's much more difficult to rely on color gamut plot differences to assign or ascertain any fundamental amount of printmaking goodness to the printed outcome. It becomes a probability game where the accuracy of the vivid colors has to make a subtle but key difference to the viewer. What I learned from my I* metric research is that viewers weight the importance of neutral and low chroma color accuracy with much greater importance than the accuracy of vivid colors. Indeed, if this weren't the case, no one could ever make a nice looking color print on matte media due to the huge color and tone translations that need to take place from digital image file to print on limited gamut media!

Lastly, the topic of color and tone reproduction is decidedly complex/geeky, however, if you are following the discussion here and understand the visually perceivable significance of the TRC and grayscale neutrality results, you can then understand that the chosen printer linearization and ICC profiling process makes a huge difference as to how any printer/ink/paper combo is going to perform across a wide range of different image content. Custom profiles routinely invoke better outcomes than generic ones, IMHO, not in every case, but more often than not. Hence, and as Mark L. noted earlier, the advantage of the HP Z series printers is that they have this custom profiling ability baked in to both the linearization and profiling step on board the printer. Admittedly, HP's documentation is very poor on to how to do high patch count profiling by taking advantage of the on board automated spectrophotometer, but for those that know how to use it, I consider the built-in spectro to be a tremendous advantage that frees the HP Z owner from the "tyranny" of generic profiles which often introduce a lot of "mystery meat" into the tone and color reproduction cycle. Ironically, HP marketing is greatly playing down the fact that the new Zs even have the on board spectro, perhaps because HP marketing thinks it might scare away buyers in the poster printing market where digital files are much more likely to be printed in a "printer manages color" Econo print mode type of approach as opposed to the fine art print studios whose customers typically demand only the very highest output quality.

cheers,
Mark M.
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com
« Last Edit: September 26, 2018, 11:15:24 AM by MHMG »
Logged

MichaelEzra

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1027
    • https://www.michaelezra.com
Re: Best 44" printer for fine art
« Reply #35 on: September 26, 2018, 01:01:16 PM »

Thanks again for the replies. I haven't decided Epson/HP either way yet, as there are numerous factors involved, besides fading and icc profiles.

Other things I am looking at are dot pattern, paper loading & handling, availability of ink in the long term, scratch resistance, budget, etc.
E.g. I may have to install the printer against the wall with limited access from the back.
I mount prints on aluminum using cold laminator and find scratch resistance of PK K3 ink on thick rag paper sufficient. I am not sure how would Vivera ink behave in comparison.
I print on a glossy rag paper, so bronzing & gloss differential are important to me.

In terms of archival qualities, 150 yeas vs 200 years, I think its a pipe dream (useful for marketing). Realistically, there are so many factors that could influence integrity of the print within 150 years, that lightfastness alone is likely the least of the concern. So, practically, a good archivability is sufficient.

While doing some reproduction prints from acrylic paintings with some vivid colors I did hit a gamut limit of the K3 inkset and had to resort to significant massaging of the file to make an adequate reproduction print. So, having additional gamut cannot hurt!:)

Frankly, I am *extremely* happy with the appearance of both color and black and white prints I am able to make with Epson 7800/K3 ink.
If this printer was not wasting ink and lightfastness was on par with Vivera ink, I'd get 44" without any hesitation, thus P9000 may be closer to what I am looking for.

I do have a 40"x40" color print from Z3200 in my studio and it looks spectacular. So, I certainly see that Z3200 clearly has a significant value, especially considering archival qualities of Vivera inks and the included spectrophotometer. Accuracy of a profile, however, is not an inherent characteristic of a printer. One could certainly get an extremely accurate custom profile for any printer as long as it is stable (repeatable).
Z3200 makes it just more easily accessible, having the spectrophotometer built in.

I've read somewhere that the reason Z3200 has spectro is because this printer must be calibrated frequently due to its drift.
I am curious, how frequently does Z3200 require calibration? What does the process entail - time, ink, paper?
Do the ICC profiles have to be regenerated with new printer calibration?
« Last Edit: September 26, 2018, 01:55:06 PM by MichaelEzra »
Logged

Doug Gray

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1474
Re: Best 44" printer for fine art
« Reply #36 on: September 26, 2018, 01:47:07 PM »

Hesitating a bit to wade further into the gamut volume discussion, but as I noted earlier, gamut volume plots describe the potential of a printer/ink/media combination to produce vivid colors but say nothing about the tone reproduction curves (TRC) or the gray scale neutrality of the system, or the precision and accuracy of the printed colors and tones within the printable gamut. This is where printer linearization and custom ICC profiling really comes into play.cheers,
....
Mark M.
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com

I largely ignore gamut size and consider it a marketing number and subject to massaging. It's also much less meaningful than the numbers would lead one to expect.

Specifically, gamut size is a 3D number but gamut clipping is a 1D phenomena. A gamut that is 15% larger actually represents, on average, only a 5% difference in the locations where gamut clipping occurs. Further, human perception of color differences is markedly lower for high saturation colors and typically is 50% to 80% lower. So the real effect of a 15% gamut volume difference is typically only 2% or so and only occurs when printed colors are touching up on that.

That said, there are important variations between printers and gamut differences can be quite large in some areas. If those areas are being printed then they can matter. A lot.  Rendering strong acrylic colors for instance. Another area is deep shadows where gamut differences can matter a lot. Images often contain fairly saturated colors in shadows even when they aren't viewed as particularly saturated. Printers vary in this regard but gamut volume numbers don't say much about this.

And, yes, linearity and especially the ability to render near neutral tone curves smoothly is really important. Gamut volume numbers are worthless here.

As an example, my Canon 9500II is much more linear intrinsically than my 9800. However, the 9800 is much more repeatable while the Canon 9500 II exhibits significant drift. The 9800 profiled with a large patch set with added near neutrals produces excellent and repeatable results. But it didn't until I was able to profile with large patch sets.
Logged

Mark Lindquist

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1370
  • itís not about the photos we take - itís the ones we leave
    • LINDQUIST STUDIOS
Re: Best 44" printer for fine art
« Reply #37 on: September 26, 2018, 02:34:04 PM »

A lot of questions/comments, Michael.

To begin with, the Z3200 is the lightest of all the available printers, so just swinging one side forward away from the wall for loading is easy.  Not so much with other printers capable of 44Ē wide.

Youíve got about 5 years (perhaps more) after EOL of the printer for ink availability. Who knows when the do the end of life - could be soon.

HP has a gloss enhancer cartridge built in - the GE cartridge is 1 of the 12 ink cartridges and it works beautifully.

Re: archival qualities, itís the fade curve that matters in your (and everyoneís) case - how gracefully will your print age.

In this regard, Vivera is king.

Gamut is as gamut does, hence soft proofing with any file, any ink, any paper.

If you like what you are getting with Epson, maybe you should stick with it.

You could order prints made with the Z3200 and the Hyper-Profile (6000 patch target profile) from John Dean (Dean Imaging) and see what the Z is capable of in the hands of a master printer.  There is a steep learning curve to running the z on nitrous, (Hyper-Profiles) and I canít even imagine what any profile making service would charge for an ICC profile of that enormity for papers for other printers.  You could, however, make your own if youíve got the temperment to get through the learning curve.  And, you can even make your own profiles for other printers, as the Z is capable of generating a tif file to be printed on any other printer then that printed target can be fed back into the Z, scanned, then a custom profile can be had for any paper for any Canon or Epson printer.

What you may hear about the ESP from others, is probably from those who have never had a Z, and/or didnít understand it. The ability of the Z to recalibrate according to climate variations and new rolls of paper is its strength, and no, you donít have to remake your profiles, as recalibrating puts everything back to square 1 based on the point the paper was defined and profiled.  The slippage you are thinking about occurs with other printers that donít have the capabilities the Z has with its ESP.

The Z is an extraordinary printer.  Many users run it like a go-cart- they get in and run it around the track for a while, then come back in a few weeks and run it around again.  Then there are users who find they have a formula 1 racer and they run the crap out of the printer striving to set new track records.

In comparison, the big Epsons and the big Canons are like stock car racers.  They go round and round the track at high speeds and they compete with each other.  They jockey with one another for position and they use special brands of tires and fuel (papers and inks). Not run hard and fast enough, they clog.

You asked what is the best printer for fine art, not what is the best printer for fine art for you.

After looking at your questions, comments and concerns, Iíd say youíre better suited to the Epsons and the Canons - probably best to steer clear of the Z3200 series printers.  You could jump out there and get the new Z9+ at $8-9K, but at this point thatís a pig in a poke - no one knows how it will perform yet. Currently the 44Ē Z3200ps is like $2700 delivered.  Probably clearing out stock to make way for the Z6/Z9. It would pay for itself in a very few runs of prints, but thatís just one way of looking at it.

If you like what you get with Epson, stay with it - save yourself the pain of the learning curve of the Z.  And to work with Hyper Profiles, that curve is indeed steep. Particularly if the subtlties of quality arenít that important to you. And then there is the fact that the Z3200ps for all its grace and flaws, is one quirky printer.  Amen to that.

Best,

Mark
Logged

MichaelEzra

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1027
    • https://www.michaelezra.com
Re: Best 44" printer for fine art
« Reply #38 on: September 26, 2018, 03:37:57 PM »

Particularly if the subtlties of quality arenít that important to you. And then there is the fact that the Z3200ps for all its grace and flaws, is one quirky printer.  Amen to that.

Quite the contrary, actually.

But having the best printer being subject to ink availability, running it on hacked larger sized cartridges may not be the best business decision in the long term.

For my purposes, as you said, I might solve it with Epson, as it may turn out be the to best fine art printer for my needs. I tend to use a single paper mostly, so I don't really need a facility to generate ICC profiles all the time, instead I could get a high quality custom ICC profile for my paper/ink/printer combo and be done with it. I found 7800 very stable and haven't noticed variation in its output over the past 12 years. Would need to see if new Epsons are similar.

 - I'd be curious to know how easily do Vivera prints scratch on glossy baryta-like paper.
 - Do the paper and canvas prints from the Z come out basically dry, like with the Epsons?
 - In terms of clogging, based on replies and info from around the net, it appears that new Epsons solved the clogging and it is somewhere on par with the Z.
 - New Epsons still dump ink to the waste tank, supposedly in smaller quantities than 78xx / 99xx, Z seems to win here.
 - As many testify, Z3200 can deliver excellent tonal qualities. What about its dot pattern? How does that compare to the new Epsons?
Logged

Mark Lindquist

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1370
  • itís not about the photos we take - itís the ones we leave
    • LINDQUIST STUDIOS
Re: Best 44" printer for fine art
« Reply #39 on: September 26, 2018, 03:43:21 PM »

Quite the contrary, actually.

But having the best printer being subject to ink availability, running it on hacked larger sized cartridges may not be the best business decision in the long term.

For my purposes, as you said, I might solve it with Epson, as it may turn out be the to best fine art printer for my needs. I tend to use a single paper mostly, so I don't really need a facility to generate ICC profiles all the time, instead I could get a high quality custom ICC profile for my paper/ink/printer combo and be done with it. I found 7800 very stable and haven't noticed variation in its output over the past 12 years. Would need to see if new Epsons are similar.


Let it be brother, let it be.

Get the Epson and be done with it - get back to work.

-M

Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5   Go Up