Epson 9890 going way south - better option printer?

[toddwms]

THANK YOU EVERYONE FOR YOUR INFORMED SUGGESTIONS! I'm settled now w/ how I'm going to proceed w/ all this and for my own sake this matter is resolved.

[JimGoshorn]

What was your final decision? I’m on the same fence 

[toddwms]

What was your final decision? I’m on the same fence 

Jim - I ran a second post asking which printer, Epson or Canon, produced the better B&W prints. Essentially, for my interest, the consensus was that it was a draw as I understood it. They are both equally strong in their ways of producing a fine B&W print.

I am in the market for printer replacement. From comments from a few people I know here in town, they favor Canon for a few different reasons, and I should mention they were previous Epson large format owners. I am weighing the advantages of the Canon over the known difficulties I've had w/ my Epsons. And I'm now in favor of the Canon Pro 4000. It's time to try it out (not that I'm any kind of a major player w/ money to burn, certainly not), but I'm curious to try a new thing.

The printers are so close quality wise that I don't think I can be disappointed really, in that respect. But the one thing that died (along w/ some other problems) that is forcing me to consider buying a new printer was the print head - and Canon just seems to have the better idea here. I shudder to request an Epson guy come out to hand me a $2000 bill, to start, repairing my 9890. That Canon/owner replaceable print head is gold for me. AND I'm getting pretty sick and tired of the clogs and air gaps. I acknowledge that Epson owners on this site have had better luck w/ clogging issues w/ the new large formats, I'm just going to try my luck w/ Canon.

So that's where my thinking has landed me. Also, that I might get a printer that starts off from day of purchase w/ almost twice the starter ink appeals to the skin flint in  me.

[JimGoshorn]

Thanks for the reply. Your points are well taken and I am definitely leaning towards Canon after reading comments here and on the EpsonWideFormat list on Groups.io.

[Dan Wells]

Good luck with the 4000! It's a great machine.

[I.T. Supplies]

At least with Canon, you'll get full set of ink ($2000 value with Pro-4000 and $1100 value with Pro-2000), plus Canon doesn't use as much ink during printing or cleanings like Epson.

I believe you'll like the Canon as well.

[deanwork]

I got an email from the people at True Black and White software and they are about to release this great solution for B&W for the new Canon printers. It’s really the same as qtr is for Epsons but a lot more intuitive to calibrate and you can easily make your own curves.

Oh yes! That would be choice. Sadly I do need to print color and B&W, and have no room for the second printer 

[gchappel]

I got an email from the people at True Black and White software and they are about to release this great solution for B&W for the new Canon printers. It’s really the same as qtr is for Epsons but a lot more intuitive to calibrate and you can easily make your own curves.

Now that is great news.  I have asked them several times if they are going to support canon, (as their blog suggested several years ago), but never got a response.
Can't wait.
Gary

[Alan Goldhammer]

I got an email from the people at True Black and White software and they are about to release this great solution for B&W for the new Canon printers. It’s really the same as qtr is for Epsons but a lot more intuitive to calibrate and you can easily make your own curves.

http://www.trueblackandwhite.com/ Unfortunately, it looks like the Pro-1000 is not supported and Windows OS users are out of luck.  It won't work for me.

[dgberg]

$200 isn't that a bit pricy? For maybe $50 I would give it a shot but I think they are shooting themselves in the foot with that price point.
Silver Efex Pro I believe is free and even Lightrooms conversions are top notch.

[Alan Goldhammer]

$200 isn't that a bit pricy? For maybe $50 I would give it a shot but I think they are shooting themselves in the foot with that price point.
Silver Efex Pro I believe is free and even Lightrooms conversions are top notch.

I don't think it's a conversion program but a B/W replacement for the print driver.  Even so the price point is high.

[Dan Wells]

Any RIP that replaces the print driver is expensive. I suspect it is because it's a ton of coding for a relatively small market (ImagePrint is massively expensive, for example- $695 for $13" printers on up to $2995 for 60" machines). Unlike printing addons that use the driver (e.g.. QImage), a RIP has to be coded for every specific printer family. Not only is Canon vs. Epson vs. HP completely different code, there are significant differences between generations (and ink configurations) of the same manufacturer's printer. The only case where a RIP supports two or more printer models wityh one effort is where the only difference is the width (Canon Pro 1000/2000/4000/6000, etc.).

The good news is that the modern printers are all good enough that they don't need RIPs under most circumstances. A B+W only RIP may be worth a try if you aren't satisfied with the other conversion options (and $200 is very cheap for a RIP).

[deanwork]

It’s well worth the minimal cost of $200.00 if you do a lot of precise bw on various media and want truly neutral results and more permanent results by turning off all the color inks then linearizing ( but you need a spectro to get the most out of it ).  The new version for the new printers has not been released yet. The guys who developed this software are museum quality digital printmakers for over 20 years their work such as the Herman Leonard jazz exhibitions done 18 years with their own set ups are outstanding. Actually I don’t think they care if anyone buys TBW or not. They mainly make it for themselves but Canon was smart enough to allow them to have the codes to work with and offer the software. You don’t have to take my word for it, you can try it for free with a watermark but otherwise fully functional.

Any RIP that replaces the print driver is expensive. I suspect it is because it's a ton of coding for a relatively small market (ImagePrint is massively expensive, for example- $695 for $13" printers on up to $2995 for 60" machines). Unlike printing addons that use the driver (e.g.. QImage), a RIP has to be coded for every specific printer family. Not only is Canon vs. Epson vs. HP completely different code, there are significant differences between generations (and ink configurations) of the same manufacturer's printer. The only case where a RIP supports two or more printer models wityh one effort is where the only difference is the width (Canon Pro 1000/2000/4000/6000, etc.).

The good news is that the modern printers are all good enough that they don't need RIPs under most circumstances. A B+W only RIP may be worth a try if you aren't satisfied with the other conversion options (and $200 is very cheap for a RIP).