Pages: [1] 2   Go Down

Author Topic: Questions on Canon Pro 4000 chroma optimizer  (Read 921 times)

Dan Berg

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 2020
    • http://bergscanvasgallery.com http://bergscustomfurniture.com
Questions on Canon Pro 4000 chroma optimizer
« on: October 03, 2018, 12:12:44 PM »

I have a clog that cannot be cleared on my Epson 9890. With 7 Epson's it is a big stretch for me to leave the Epson fold.
This is my second wide format Epson that had a head go with less then 4000 prints. (One 3100 and 3900 prints on this one)
I am looking at the Canon Pro 4000 for several reasons. The replaceable head #1 and the chroma optimizer #2.
Question on the co. What is the chemical composition? Is it a uv and moisture protectant as well.
We do a fair amount of black and white that is mounted on gator board and framed with no glass.
I topcoat all those prints with an assortment of solvent sprays I have here.
Can we eliminate the spray topcoat with the use of the gloss optimizer? How many ml does it take for 1 sq. ft. of print coverage?
If I can eliminate the solvent spray that would be great and may push me into a Canon buy.
« Last Edit: October 03, 2018, 12:29:47 PM by Dan Berg »
Logged

Stephen Ray

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 150
Re: Questions on Canon Pro 4000 chroma optimizer
« Reply #1 on: October 03, 2018, 01:01:32 PM »

This is my second wide format Epson that had a head go with less then 4000 prints. (One 3100 and 3900 prints on this one)

Are we talking 4000 4x6 prints or 4000 40x60 prints?

Your link says you're a canvas gallery. Are you mainly printing canvas and with these Epsons and then coating?
Logged

Mark D Segal

  • Contributor
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11995
    • http://www.markdsegal.com
Re: Questions on Canon Pro 4000 chroma optimizer
« Reply #2 on: October 03, 2018, 01:39:28 PM »

CO is not a gloss optimizer, it is a chroma optimizer meant to improve colour saturation. Canon has not revealed the chemical content of this product and they are not likely to. The best you can do is ask them what kinds of sprays are compatible with it.
Logged
Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....."

Dan Berg

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 2020
    • http://bergscanvasgallery.com http://bergscustomfurniture.com
Re: Questions on Canon Pro 4000 chroma optimizer
« Reply #3 on: October 03, 2018, 02:00:18 PM »

What you saying then Mark is that you get no protection from it?
 No scratch or moisture resistance.

Mark D Segal

  • Contributor
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11995
    • http://www.markdsegal.com
Re: Questions on Canon Pro 4000 chroma optimizer
« Reply #4 on: October 03, 2018, 02:02:22 PM »

Perhaps as a secondary benefit, you would have to ask them; but that isn't its main purpose.
Logged
Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....."

Dan Berg

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 2020
    • http://bergscanvasgallery.com http://bergscustomfurniture.com
Re: Questions on Canon Pro 4000 chroma optimizer
« Reply #5 on: October 03, 2018, 02:06:34 PM »

Understand, thanks.

Dan Berg

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 2020
    • http://bergscanvasgallery.com http://bergscustomfurniture.com
Re: Questions on Canon Pro 4000 chroma optimizer
« Reply #6 on: October 03, 2018, 02:12:59 PM »

Are we talking 4000 4x6 prints or 4000 40x60 prints?

Your link says you're a canvas gallery. Are you mainly printing canvas and with these Epsons and then coating?
[/quote

Mostly canvas and mostly large. Website says it all.
The 9890 is 5 years old, the 9900 8 years old. We replaced the 9900 head 2 years ago.
We use one for matte papers and canvas,the other photo papers and gloss canvas.
No production house by any means but we still print quite a bit of canvas.
Speed is of little importance. Just getting a little tired of nozzle checks and head cleanings.

Mark D Segal

  • Contributor
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11995
    • http://www.markdsegal.com
Re: Questions on Canon Pro 4000 chroma optimizer
« Reply #7 on: October 03, 2018, 02:22:00 PM »

You understand of course that the Canon printers do nozzle checks and head cleanings as well, the main optical difference being that they happen under the hood without fanfare or notifications, but they still take time and use ink.
Logged
Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....."

Dan Berg

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 2020
    • http://bergscanvasgallery.com http://bergscustomfurniture.com
Re: Questions on Canon Pro 4000 chroma optimizer
« Reply #8 on: October 03, 2018, 03:17:03 PM »

Well aware of the differences.
Just getting hard to take throwing away a $4000 +/- printer when the head goes.
I spent $3000 to change out the head on my 9900 and not again.


Mark D Segal

  • Contributor
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11995
    • http://www.markdsegal.com
Re: Questions on Canon Pro 4000 chroma optimizer
« Reply #9 on: October 03, 2018, 03:19:41 PM »

That's huge to change a print head. The Canon head costs something in the range of 500-600, and it's a do-it-yourself drop-in the opening operation. Very simple. I haven't seen any longevity records for them.
Logged
Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....."

Stephen Ray

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 150
Re: Questions on Canon Pro 4000 chroma optimizer
« Reply #10 on: October 03, 2018, 03:44:04 PM »

Mostly canvas and mostly large. Website says it all.
The 9890 is 5 years old, the 9900 8 years old. We replaced the 9900 head 2 years ago.
We use one for matte papers and canvas,the other photo papers and gloss canvas.
No production house by any means but we still print quite a bit of canvas.
Speed is of little importance. Just getting a little tired of nozzle checks and head cleanings.

When I glean some insight from your given products and numbers in these posts, unless you're not really selling these prints, you might rest easier if you just consider any outlay as part of the cost of doing business. It seems to me you should be doing fine with that aspect. Further, if it's any consolation, I know some production houses calculate these models as productive machines for far, far less than your apparent expectation.

My experience with fine art canvas is that it requires a more robust machine such as the older Epson GS6000 or the newer S80. A different budget, likely yes, but much more productive while providing a better product with more opportunity. Cost of materials could be reduced immensely also.

Logged

Dan Berg

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 2020
    • http://bergscanvasgallery.com http://bergscustomfurniture.com
Re: Questions on Canon Pro 4000 chroma optimizer
« Reply #11 on: October 03, 2018, 03:59:02 PM »

That's huge to change a print head. The Canon head costs something in the range of 500-600, and it's a do-it-yourself drop-in the opening operation. Very simple. I haven't seen any longevity records for them.
Besides the head they changed out the left ink bay. Decision One and it took two trips here.
I only did it because of the large amount of K3 ink I had in stock.

enduser

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 522
Re: Questions on Canon Pro 4000 chroma optimizer
« Reply #12 on: October 03, 2018, 07:34:38 PM »

Two new HP photo printers are just starting to appear. I here rumors, whispers etc., that they might, maybe, possibly in the near future, be able to lay down a final UV and protective coating as part of their ink laying routines.
It certainly might be worth waiting to see if they can do that.  Real world info is still not around but someone will surely get one to test soon.
Logged

Dan Berg

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 2020
    • http://bergscanvasgallery.com http://bergscustomfurniture.com
Re: Questions on Canon Pro 4000 chroma optimizer
« Reply #13 on: October 03, 2018, 08:09:24 PM »

That I would wait for.
Z9?

John Caldwell

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 680
Re: Questions on Canon Pro 4000 chroma optimizer
« Reply #14 on: October 05, 2018, 09:07:41 AM »

Dan. We replaced our 9900 with the Pro 4000 a few months ago. I am not a commercial printer, and lost the 9900 head after at most 1000 large prints. Our 9900 failed when a PK > MK ink swap produced irreconcilable black channel clogs. Our 4900, while having been replaced twice under warranty and extended warranty, and after having a post-warrant capping station replacement, is working well.

The Canon prints are really nice, and there is no doubt in my mind that the CO changes the look of the prints, with greatest impact in the blacks and shadows. I laminate all out large prints, regarding the CO as non-protective.

Canon's take-up roll accessory is, alone, worthy of choosing the Canon for my work.

Ink longevity enthusiasts will point to deficiencies in Canon's showing.

We had a 24" HP Z3200 before the Epson 9900. The HP Always worked, and the prints were beautiful. It was very slow.

I can't imagine buy an Epson printer again; I think we've had 5 Epsons.

Mark and others will challenge my rationale, and that's fine. They may well be right for a busy commercial house, which I am not.

PM me if you'd like me to make and send you a Pro 4000 print from one of your files, Dan.

John Caldwell
Logged

Dan Berg

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 2020
    • http://bergscanvasgallery.com http://bergscustomfurniture.com
Re: Questions on Canon Pro 4000 chroma optimizer
« Reply #15 on: October 05, 2018, 09:27:23 AM »

John
Thank you for that response. My biggest concern with staying with Epson is the head cost replacement and that they are non user replaceable.
Yes I spent the money to have a head changed on my 9900 so I know a good bit about the Epson's.
Most Epson printers are basically a throw away printer if the head goes.
To spend $7k on a new Epson P10000 and then your choices are to buy the expensive after market warranty or you are on your own after a year is not very encouraging.
With the new Canon and HP I love the idea of being able to load 2 paper types at once. That is huge. User replaceable print heads, huge.
That being said after being an Epson man for 10 years with 7 Epson's on site I am not excited at all about changing brands.
Starting from scratch profiling all my papers and canvases when everything is presently nailed so tightly.
Decisions, decisions.
Thanks for the offer, I may take you up on it.
« Last Edit: October 05, 2018, 09:39:24 AM by Dan Berg »
Logged

Mark D Segal

  • Contributor
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11995
    • http://www.markdsegal.com
Re: Questions on Canon Pro 4000 chroma optimizer
« Reply #16 on: October 05, 2018, 09:39:49 AM »

Dan. We replaced our 9900 with the Pro 4000 a few months ago. I am not a commercial printer, and lost the 9900 head after at most 1000 large prints. Our 9900 failed when a PK > MK ink swap produced irreconcilable black channel clogs. Our 4900, while having been replaced twice under warranty and extended warranty, and after having a post-warrant capping station replacement, is working well.

The Canon prints are really nice, and there is no doubt in my mind that the CO changes the look of the prints, with greatest impact in the blacks and shadows. I laminate all out large prints, regarding the CO as non-protective.

Canon's take-up roll accessory is, alone, worthy of choosing the Canon for my work.

Ink longevity enthusiasts will point to deficiencies in Canon's showing.

We had a 24" HP Z3200 before the Epson 9900. The HP Always worked, and the prints were beautiful. It was very slow.

I can't imagine buy an Epson printer again; I think we've had 5 Epsons.

Mark and others will challenge my rationale, and that's fine. They may well be right for a busy commercial house, which I am not.

PM me if you'd like me to make and send you a Pro 4000 print from one of your files, Dan.

John Caldwell

If the "Mark" you are referring to is me, no I would not challenge your rationale. All these printers make fine prints. The choice between them should largely depend on what bespoke features are more important to the user, and that varies from one user to another depending on a range of factors.
Logged
Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....."

John Caldwell

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 680
Re: Questions on Canon Pro 4000 chroma optimizer
« Reply #17 on: October 05, 2018, 09:58:53 AM »

Yes, I did refer to you Mark, but should have expressed it differently. Indeed, what I meant was what you say: Those aspects of the Canon are quite specific to my needs, and that its short comings fall out of my areas of concern. I meant no disrespect to you and should have been more articulate in my prior remarks.

John Caldwell
Logged

Mark D Segal

  • Contributor
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11995
    • http://www.markdsegal.com
Re: Questions on Canon Pro 4000 chroma optimizer
« Reply #18 on: October 05, 2018, 10:26:46 AM »

No issue, John. I just wanted to be clear, for avoidance of doubt, how I view these matters.

Cheers,

Mark
Logged
Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....."

Terry_Kennedy

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 20
Re: Questions on Canon Pro 4000 chroma optimizer
« Reply #19 on: October 05, 2018, 08:31:00 PM »

Most Epson printers are basically a throw away printer if the head goes.
To spend $7k on a new Epson P10000 and then your choices are to buy the expensive after market warranty or you are on your own after a year is not very encouraging.

As a single data point (which doesn't prove anything either way, but might be helpful) I took a chance earlier this year on a 2-owner SureColor P10000. It had a very low serial number and very little use (178 pages total printed). I took that chance based on a 100% good nozzle check and a good status sheet which showed no errors, ever. As you may know, these printers store their entire usage history "from birth" which can be retrieved with the regular Epson user utilities and there is a battery-backup calendar in the printer as well so the timestamps are correct. Here is a summary of the idle periods:

1/25/2017 -> 4/15/2017 - This printer got regular use through late January of 2017, then went idle
4/15/2017 -> 6/16/2017 - 3 jobs printed in the middle of June 2017
6/16/2017 -> 11/3/2017 - Printer idle until it was sold to 2nd owner in early November of 2017
11/3/2017 - Second owner prints a single job
11/3/2017 -> 6/17/2018 - Printer sits idle until 2nd owner sells it to me
6/17/2018 - Second owner prints nozzle check (100% good first time!) and status page and emails photographs of them to me, and I agree to purchase the printer
6/21/2018 - Printer arrives here and I confirm 100% good nozzle check and status sheet, and I place the printer into service

I have had a few auto nozzle checks say cleaning was required after jobs that printed on media that tends to shed. The problem cleared after a single pair cleaning. Most of my print work is > 10 feet long on 44" roll paper.

Quote
That being said after being an Epson man for 10 years with 7 Epson's on site I am not excited at all about changing brands.
Starting from scratch profiling all my papers and canvases when everything is presently nailed so tightly.
Decisions, decisions.

Either I got the only clog-free Epson or they have actually resolved almost all of the issues. I was quite concerned with the "8000 nozzles, all of which have to work perfectly" of the SC-P10000 but it seems to be a non-issue.

Having said that, if Epson offered second (and subsequent) owners the opportunity to purchase a support agreement in the US, I would probably have done so, just for peace of mind. It would be really great if Epson would harmonize their support policies worldwide - here in the US we only get the 1 year warranty included, plus an optional paid 1 or 2 additional years of parts and labor. In Australia, you can buy up to 5 years of coverage with either parts and labor or parts only coverage. From what someone else here posted, in parts of Latin America there is only the 1 year warranty and apparently no additional support agreements are available beyond that.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up