New Epson P series Printers

[Lessbones]

Hi, the SpectroProofer can only be used if you have a rip, like EFI Fiery XF.

The "Epson SpectroProofer Utilities" can be used to create charts from generated targets from any profiling package (cgats format txt files iirc) and then spit out a txt file of the measurements.  Then you can plug this file into i1profiler etc.  It's certainly not the fastest method of profiling papers (and the patches are kind of huge, so it can use a bunch of paper if you want to measure a lot of values) but if it's all you've got, then it's a great tool to have.

The only way you'll be able to use the spectroproofer to automatically calibrate a paper on a schedule is with a RIP.

[Waker]

In the "Epson SureColor P10000/P20000 User's Guide" (March 2017 edition, P/N CPD-51065R2) it is on page 171 (section "Maintenance / Cleaning Around the Print Head").

There is also an un-documented (even in the service manuals) manual procedure which involves removing one of the small covers on the right side of the printer and using a long crosspoint screwdriver to manually rotate the carriage drive. This is normally used to move the print head off the capping station if an error with the capping station prevents normal printer start-up. If you're patient enough, you could crank the head all the way over to the access panel.

Very useful to have this pointed out Terry. Thank you. RTFM, indeed !

Odd how they didn't make the right side cover as easily removable as the left side one.
After cleaning around the printhead, the instructions go on to recommend you clean the capping station and wiper blades, on the other side of course, but you're supposed to reach into that area from the middle cover, which makes it all very awkward and hard to access/ see what you are doing.

Are people still using Windex on their cleaning sticks/swabs, or is that a no-no nowadays?

[Waker]

Basically it seems that they took the head from the Px0000 series and added another two channels so they could get rid of the option btwn violet/LLK and also have the matte black loaded up at all times-- basically this is where the P9000/P7000 should have been all along.  So versus the previous gen, you're only getting benefits.  That new head is fantastic and incredibly fast, but clogging has still been a consistent problem (at least on my p20000).  Hopefully they've reengineered the ink/ink delivery/head cleaning system to take care of that issue a bit.

If you don't care about speed, then sure, get the previous generation if it's much cheaper, but this is a significant upgrade-- the only thing the 10000/20000 have now that this doesn't have is the dark grey ink...

Another P20000 user here. I had very few head clogs, quite extraordinarily so, until 2 years when I had an MK blocked nozzle (I never print MK) that would not clear, so I got a head & cap station replacement whilst under warranty. But now I get clogs needing cleaning most days. My feeling is that they make them really well in the factory, to tight tolerances, but the service techs don't/can't install them with the same care or accuracy.  But then you say yours has clogged out the box, so...?

I'm intrigued by the new machines, the extra gamut is a nice selling pitch, but in real life I wonder if it's more useful for match-proofing Pantone colors than real world photo printing. That was the case before, you just had to buy more ink carts, many of which never go use in real world printing. 

[Waker]

Surely they could release a 64" version with this new inkset? I mean the machine is built, with the exact same heads, they just need to swap out the inks and activate that unused 12th channel in the current version - voila an extended gamut P20000 - no changes to hardware needed.

[Waker]

One thing nobody has mentioned here is the new heads (same as P10000 and P20000) now print at 300/600dpi
not 360/720dpi like the older machines/ heads.

If you have set up key image files at 360dpi, and you want to reprint with the new x-gamut machines, you may wish to downsize them to 300dpi for native head resolution. Or not.

[deanwork]

So nice Epson finally got around to having two ink lines for the Ks ( about 15 years late for a 24 or 44 inch machine.) ,  better late than never.

I’d be pissed if I just bought a 10k. From everything I’ve heard about waste Im so glad I didn’t. They look kinda confused with all these changes in various options. I’ll bet their techs are even more confused.

So they removed the LLG of the 10k set to give you a Violet? That sucks. They should definitely offer a firmware option to do quad bw for those that would greatly prefer a light light gray  over an orange or violet. But I betcha they won’t. Monochrome is always an after thought. Designers trump photographers.

Through qtr or an other rip it could be a killer black and white printer and fast.

John

One thing nobody has mentioned here is the new heads (same as P10000 and P20000) now print at 300/600dpi
not 360/720dpi like the older machines/ heads.

If you have set up key image files at 360dpi, and you want to reprint with the new x-gamut machines, you may wish to downsize them to 300dpi for native head resolution. Or not.

[MfAlab]

One thing nobody has mentioned here is the new heads (same as P10000 and P20000) now print at 300/600dpi
not 360/720dpi like the older machines/ heads.

If you have set up key image files at 360dpi, and you want to reprint with the new x-gamut machines, you may wish to downsize them to 300dpi for native head resolution. Or not.

Yes, I found that too.
Since the head has 400 nozzles in 1.32", it is about 300 dpi. And the highest resolution is 2400 x 1200 dpi, it's also a multiple of 300, 300 x8 & 300 x4. But if you use a RIP, it is no necessary to change the file setting.

In addition, I think the P10000 print head is designed for 12 color, you can see the area reserved for two channels on the right side of the head.


I wrote a review of P9570 specifications, but it's in Chinese traditional. Sorry for that, you must use google translation to read it.

[Terry_Kennedy]

Odd how they didn't make the right side cover as easily removable as the left side one.
After cleaning around the printhead, the instructions go on to recommend you clean the capping station and wiper blades, on the other side of course, but you're supposed to reach into that area from the middle cover, which makes it all very awkward and hard to access/ see what you are doing.

There isn't any good way into there without more disassembly than you're comfortable doing - there is metalwork on top of and in front of the capping station.

Are people still using Windex on their cleaning sticks/swabs, or is that a no-no nowadays?

Definitely a bad idea - the ammonia in there will attack the printhead. According to my D1 tech, Epson doesn't even supply them with cleaning fluid any more - if it can't be fixed with a dry wipe with the foam swabs, it is part replacement time.

[Terry_Kennedy]

Another P20000 user here. I had very few head clogs, quite extraordinarily so, until 2 years when I had an MK blocked nozzle (I never print MK) that would not clear, so I got a head & cap station replacement whilst under warranty. But now I get clogs needing cleaning most days. My feeling is that they make them really well in the factory, to tight tolerances, but the service techs don't/can't install them with the same care or accuracy.

To some extent, Epson / D1 encourage a "swap and run" where a repair is supposed to take X amount of time and if it runs over, the tech gets questioned (if a warranty call) or the user gets billed (for out-of-warranty). So there's a big push to complete the repair in the time allotted.

This means that "optional" (as in the printer will mostly-work without doing them) adjustment procedures can get skipped. One of them is the pump cap station calibration, which adjusts the sealing between the head and caps. If that isn't done, you don't get a good seal and the part of the head exposed to air will dry out and get clogs.

There is also another issue I haven't seen being addressed, which is that as parts are improved they may not work with other older parts. This also shows up in the pump cap, where the service procedure is to move the old capping station onto the new pump cap. But there have been at least 4 different part numbers for the pump cap, and the old capping station may not be compatible. Plus, the procedure to install the replacement absorber pad is a bit fiddly and can lead to the pump cap not bring perfectly flat.

[deanwork]

There are still Way too many problems happening with the Epson head/cap assembly ink waste and pressure issues. I wish they had spent the last decade resolving these frustrating expensive things and less time thinking up and marketing  all these multiple versions of machines with slightly different inks. It’s still kind of scary to buy an Epson, and you are right, half of them are poorly serviced by poorly trained techs from decision 1. Every once in a while if you are in a big city you can find a really good tech that really cares, and that can make a big difference.

John

To some extent, Epson / D1 encourage a "swap and run" where a repair is supposed to take X amount of time and if it runs over, the tech gets questioned (if a warranty call) or the user gets billed (for out-of-warranty). So there's a big push to complete the repair in the time allotted.

This means that "optional" (as in the printer will mostly-work without doing them) adjustment procedures can get skipped. One of them is the pump cap station calibration, which adjusts the sealing between the head and caps. If that isn't done, you don't get a good seal and the part of the head exposed to air will dry out and get clogs.

There is also another issue I haven't seen being addressed, which is that as parts are improved they may not work with other older parts. This also shows up in the pump cap, where the service procedure is to move the old capping station onto the new pump cap. But there have been at least 4 different part numbers for the pump cap, and the old capping station may not be compatible. Plus, the procedure to install the replacement absorber pad is a bit fiddly and can lead to the pump cap not bring perfectly flat.

[Terry_Kennedy]

There are still Way too many problems happening with the Epson head/cap assembly ink waste and pressure issues. I wish they had spent the last decade resolving these frustrating expensive things and less time thinking up and marketing  all these multiple versions of machines with slightly different inks.

This seems to be a function of piezo vs. thermal print heads. Regardless of any relative merits of the technology (there are things to be said for both), Epson has 20 years invested in piezo and they aren't about to change to thermal technology. HP started with consumer units where the printhead was part of the ink cartridge, and likely decided to keep the head(s) as a customer-replaceable part even when they designed pro printers with separate ink cartridges and head(s). I don't know what Canon's reasoning was, as I've never owned a Canon.

To a large degree, we're not the main market for these printers - that seems to be large commercial print (signage, etc.) shops who run the printers hard for the length of the warranty period (plus extensions, usually) and then at the first fault after the service agreement is up, dump the printer and buy a new one. As an example, I got a P10K from a commercial print shop that had 3 others of the same model. This was their oldest one, 38 months from its first in-service date, had never been color calibrated and had a mostly-full set of ink cartridges - it wasn't worth the bother to them to even pull the ink cartridges for use in one of their other printers - they just dumped it in the back of their warehouse and bought another one of the same model. Compare that to most of the folks here, who profile each printer and want to keep them running forever, but aren't printing non-stop for 14 hours each day. So Epson does what they need to, to keep their primary market happy.

[deanwork]

Canon and hp came out with inkjet designs first. Epson / Seiko was using these piezo heads to print numbers on digital watches and stumbled into using them for office then photo dye printers.

Yea I agree, photographers are small potatoes, but if  I were doing signage I would be doing dye sub or uv curable not long lasting expensive pigments, so I don’t understand why they are changing things constantly.

However I don’t agree that piezo heads necessarily have to have all these pressure issues and wasted ink clearing nozzles, and quickly worn out heads, that’s what their sales guys are told to say.

I owned a 44 inch Epson 10k, Epsons very first pigment machine, that had a very large super well made head design with a big durable cap assembly that always fit snugly, and it never clogged with their archival pigments, ever. In a decade of running the hell out of it I never even came close to filling up the big waste tank that came in it. And I could let it sit there for weeks unused. After 10 years I turned into a piezo k6 black and white printer for 2 more years, still didn’t have missing nozzles or have to do nozzle checks. It had a different pressurized cart and the same heads were used in the Roland Hi Fi wide format machines that used two of those heads and rebranded Epson pigments and these didn’t clog either. This was like 18 years ago!

This seems to be a function of piezo vs. thermal print heads. Regardless of any relative merits of the technology (there are things to be said for both), Epson has 20 years invested in piezo and they aren't about to change to thermal technology. HP started with consumer units where the printhead was part of the ink cartridge, and likely decided to keep the head(s) as a customer-replaceable part even when they designed pro printers with separate ink cartridges and head(s). I don't know what Canon's reasoning was, as I've never owned a Canon.

To a large degree, we're not the main market for these printers - that seems to be large commercial print (signage, etc.) shops who run the printers hard for the length of the warranty period (plus extensions, usually) and then at the first fault after the service agreement is up, dump the printer and buy a new one. As an example, I got a P10K from a commercial print shop that had 3 others of the same model. This was their oldest one, 38 months from its first in-service date, had never been color calibrated and had a mostly-full set of ink cartridges - it wasn't worth the bother to them to even pull the ink cartridges for use in one of their other printers - they just dumped it in the back of their warehouse and bought another one of the same model. Compare that to most of the folks here, who profile each printer and want to keep them running forever, but aren't printing non-stop for 14 hours each day. So Epson does what they need to, to keep their primary market happy.

[Terry_Kennedy]

I owned a 44 inch Epson 10k, Epsons very first pigment machine, that had a very large super well made head design with a big durable cap assembly that always fit snugly, and it never clogged with their archival pigments, ever. In a decade of running the hell out of it I never even came close to filling up the big waste tank that came in it. And I could let it sit there for weeks unused. After 10 years I turned into a piezo k6 black and white printer for 2 more years, still didn’t have missing nozzles or have to do nozzle checks. It had a different pressurized cart and the same heads were used in the Roland Hi Fi wide format machines that used two of those heads and rebranded Epson pigments and these didn’t clog either. This was like 18 years ago!

I'm pretty sure Epson's first large-format units were the dye Stylus Pro 9000 in 1999 and the pigment Stylus Pro 9500 in 2000 (these were essentially the same machine, and you could run dye or pigment in either, and the firmware was interchangeable). Those heads were also used in various Roland and Mutoh products. I have run both of those Epson models as recently as a few years ago for signage and topo maps, only stopping when spares became unavailable (I still have loads of maintenance parts, pretty much everything except heads, if anyone wants them free for the shipping costs) and inks became more expensive due to being a rarity - there are only a few aftermarket manufacturers that still produce new cartridges if you ask them very nicely  (I have a few sets of unopened new inks for these as well). But those heads did clog and delaminate, just not as much as the newer pre-P10K/P20K heads. Those heads had way fewer nozzles compared to the newer models, and produced larger ink droplets. I've been very happy with the clog-resistance of my P10K units, including one that sat for 2 years in storage before I bought it - it fired right up and produced a good nozzle check after a few cleanings.

However I don’t agree that piezo heads necessarily have to have all these pressure issues and wasted ink clearing nozzles, and quickly worn out heads, that’s what their sales guys are told to say.

I have a different P10K that I bought with nearly 25000 B0+ equivalent prints and it is still on its original print head with a perfect nozzle check. The print shop that had it dumped it at the aforementioned 38 months, after the extended service ran out, because there was a problem with the pump cap that caused it to do pointless cleaning cycles and report imaginary head clogs. $250 for a new pump cap assembly and it was working perfectly.

I'm sure there are some of these units that were bad from day 1 and others that never had a service call ever, with most falling somewhere in between. Mine were both mid-double-digit serial numbers, so very early production. It is possible that the factory took greater care with those early units.

[deanwork]

Right I forgot, the 9500 came out the year before the original 10k. Those were the same heads as the 9000/ 7000. I had a few of those too and they did clog with pigments. The head on the original 10K was big and  totally different, as was the cap station, that was the only really good cap station I ever had on an Epson. It was like the big Canons today that seal perfectly.

I ran the original 10 k through Studio Print and increased the resolution, which slowed it down some. Even though it was only 1440, the dot placement was very sharp. I rarely ever did a nozzle check because they were always clean. And that was a long time ago.

I'm pretty sure Epson's first large-format units were the dye Stylus Pro 9000 in 1999 and the pigment Stylus Pro 9500 in 2000 (these were essentially the same machine, and you could run dye or pigment in either, and the firmware was interchangeable). Those heads were also used in various Roland and Mutoh products. I have run both of those Epson models as recently as a few years ago for signage and topo maps, only stopping when spares became unavailable (I still have loads of maintenance parts, pretty much everything except heads, if anyone wants them free for the shipping costs) and inks became more expensive due to being a rarity - there are only a few aftermarket manufacturers that still produce new cartridges if you ask them very nicely  (I have a few sets of unopened new inks for these as well). But those heads did clog and delaminate, just not as much as the newer pre-P10K/P20K heads. Those heads had way fewer nozzles compared to the newer models, and produced larger ink droplets. I've been very happy with the clog-resistance of my P10K units, including one that sat for 2 years in storage before I bought it - it fired right up and produced a good nozzle check after a few cleanings.

I have a different P10K that I bought with nearly 25000 B0+ equivalent prints and it is still on its original print head with a perfect nozzle check. The print shop that had it dumped it at the aforementioned 38 months, after the extended service ran out, because there was a problem with the pump cap that caused it to do pointless cleaning cycles and report imaginary head clogs. $250 for a new pump cap assembly and it was working perfectly.

I'm sure there are some of these units that were bad from day 1 and others that never had a service call ever, with most falling somewhere in between. Mine were both mid-double-digit serial numbers, so very early production. It is possible that the factory took greater care with those early units.

[NeilPrintArt]

I'm a P10000 owner. The sheet feed system on the P10000 is terrible. Makes no sense. Seems like Epson have gone back to 'straight through media path' design allowing for easier sheet loading on the new P9570. the same design which worked so well on previous Epsons. Of course. 

[Paul Ozzello]

Does this mean that the current 9000 series is discontinued ?

[MfAlab]

Does this mean that the current 9000 series is discontinued ?

P10000 will be discontinued in the first quarter of 2020, maybe P9000 is in the same situation. P8000/P20000 have greater chance surviving to next generation.

[Waker]

P10000 will be discontinued in the first quarter of 2020, maybe P9000 is in the same situation. P8000/P20000 have greater chance surviving to next generation.

Interesting. The really should just release a 12color P20000, and be done with it.

Might even be a chance to offer an upgrade path for existing owners, as all the hardware is on the machine already? (11/12 channels, same heads, etc)

[MfAlab]

Interesting. The really should just release a 12color P20000, and be done with it.
Might even be a chance to offer an upgrade path for existing owners, as all the hardware is on the machine already? (11/12 channels, same heads, etc)

Unfortunately, Epson will tell everybody buying a new one. Even the P10000/P20000's 10 color print head has the same layout and dimensions with 12 color P9570's head. I believe Epson has no intent to provide head, firmware, cartridges, pipes as a upgrade pack for owners.

64" printers are always new print head experiment models for Epson. Just like 11880, it has a 360 nozzles/color head when 9880/7880 use 180 nozzles/color head. The new design was used on next generation 24"/44" printers, that is 7900/9900. The same thing on P20000, it has a new 800 nozzles/color head now used on P7570/P9570.

[MfAlab]

Yea, no kidding. Very strange what’s going on. It’s like these companies can’t decide what they want to do.  It’s confusing for people buying stockpiles of ink and all, or making limited editions.

P7000/P9000 is in regular Tick-Tock, a little bit change on ink set but the same mechanical structure with 7900/9900. Just like 7880/9880 are 7800/9800 with new Vivid Magenta ink. But P10000/P20000 are strange. It's in transition from Stylus Pro to SureColor (the series name from Epson commercial printers). Epson cannot be sure is water-base fine art market still a good market to work on it. Commercial solvent printer is a much bigger market. Epson wants copy commercial market path, focus on fast production rather highest performance. P20000 is to show next generation print head specification, but didn't have O/G inks. According to the history, there should not be a P10000 model. I think P10000 is a experiment. If P10000 got success, maybe there will be a twin head new P10000 now. Fortunately, so many studios refuse to buy a new model. Now we have P7570/P9570.