$1000 rebate on a Epson P 7570 printer

[soharaus]

Hello:
Epson is offering a $1000 rebate on a Epson 7570 24" printer; now it around $3055 after the rebate. There has been a lot of discussion and problem solving on this message board about the printer. With the latest driver updates etc. is the 7570 ready for prime time or is Epson trying to sell the printer and clear the shelves to introduce a new one? Any thoughts?
Thanks.

[John Hollenberg]

Hello:
Epson is offering a $1000 rebate on a Epson 7570 24" printer; now it around $3055 after the rebate. There has been a lot of discussion and problem solving on this message board about the printer. With the latest driver updates etc. is the 7570 ready for prime time or is Epson trying to sell the printer and clear the shelves to introduce a new one? Any thoughts?
Thanks.

If you only plan to print on Epson Premium Luster, probably a good deal as few if any problems have been reported with that paper.  For thicker papers and especially those that are not Epson branded, I would run from this "deal" as fast as I could.  It may not be that a new printer is set to be released. It could just mean that Epson is having trouble selling this lemon due to the bad press and inability to fix the myriad problems with firmware updates over the last several years.

Edit: PS Here is a quote from Scott Moore on 3/24/23 on the EpsonWideFormat@groups.io:

"I've lost over a full 44" roll of Moab Entrada this week alone due to the paper coming off the cores again. That's well over $300 in misprints this week"

[Rand47]

RUN…. screaming into the night…. from this “deal.”

I’ve owned a 7570 since the instant it was released.  It is the best and WORST printer I’ve ever owned.  I have mine mostly “tamed” - which means I have a long list of work-arounds written down to keep this thing from destroying itself in various ways.  The output is beautiful but the hassles and wastage of paper / ink is HUGE. 

It has been a HATE/LOVE relationship.  I’m a very boutique, small, print shop and I can live with the 7570’s horrible design flaws w/o going broke.  If I was trying to have this thing work as a production printer… I’d probably have taken a sledge hammer to it long ago.  Many, many, driver / firmware updates have helped with usability, but cannot fix fundamental design flaws - like ripping the paper off the core (even Epson papers) and dragging tape into the innards of the printer.  Makes a horrible racket and takes hours to pick the little sticky bits out of the various rollers, etc.   I’ve had it happen twice and was surprised the printer continued to work at all, given the sounds coming from it.   So, now I just keep VERY precise track of paper used on rolls, and throw away the last 32” of a roll by unloading it before it can rip the tail off the core and jamming up the printer.  On thicker papers, it will often just “unspool” the paper by jerking it around in it’s back and forth “adjustments.” It will just start feeding paper like a ticker-tape machine.   This necessitates unloading the roll, rolling out the paper, re-attaching it to the core, rewinding the paper snugly and re-loading - all the while hoping the print receiver coating hasn’t been damaged with all this handling.

Extreme care must be taken to avoid head strikes.  Messing around with ink density is necessary to keep the printer from over-inking and dragging the head through ink making mouse tracks…   

It does have the nicest sheet-feed mechanism I’ve ever used, though. 

As has been said above, a couple of fellows who only print on Epson Premium Luster rolls seem to be “OK.”  But why would someone buy a printer like this to do that?

It’s really too bad Epson is in total denial “officially” about this series of printers.  It will make it very hard for me to be interested in any subsequent updates to this model.  Let me also say that I love Epson in general.  I’ve owned many of their printers over the years, starting way back w/ the 1280 that sorta started it all.  None of them has been this kind of disaster-in-design as are the 7570 and 9570.

Rand

[MfAlab]

I hope that is the sign of new printers coming. P75x0/P95x0 is a disaster for consistency printing. And I also hope Epson uses P10000/P20000 as a base, the mechanics are much more reliable than P75x0/P95x0. Just add the missing 2 ink channels (the head is almost the same) and bring in the capping/head user-cleaning function from P75x0/P95x0.

[hubell]

I hope that is the sign of new printers coming. P75x0/P95x0 is a disaster for consistency printing. And I also hope Epson uses P10000/P20000 as a base, the mechanics are much more reliable than P75x0/P95x0. Just add the missing 2 ink channels (the head is almost the same) and bring in the capping/head user-cleaning function from P75x0/P95x0.

You mean just release a printer that is essentially identical to the 7570/9570 except that it works reliably? I think Epson would be very reluctant to do that, as it would be an acknowledgement  that the 9570/7570 printers are inherently defective, and an invitation for a lawsuit by all those who purchased 9570/7570 printers.

[hubell]

As has been said above, a couple of fellows who only print on Epson Premium Luster rolls seem to be “OK.”  But why would someone buy a printer like this to do that?

To make money! There are hundreds of print shops with larger format Epson printers in the US churning out prints for consumers who have no idea about and would never spend the money for fine art papers. Epson Premium Luster Paper is a terrific choice for them. Superb gamut and DMax, and a surprisingly favorable Wilhelm rating they can point to. And, therein lies the problem as to why Epson is stonewalling the fine art print market who purchase these printers. Today, I think they are a minor part of the revenue base.

[deanwork]

The Wilhelm rating for these Epson rc papers  is a freaking joke. He doesn’t even measure the graying out of white paper base due to the huge amount of cheap dye brighteners in the coating.

  If you read the super fine print at the bottom of his postings he always says to stay away from papers that utilize oba content because they can burn out. Then he posts these crazy figures that completely ignore that. This is a very old story.

 Another paper he misrepresents is the Epson “Exhibition “ Fiber paper that  also has his published joke longevity rating, that even surpasses some of the finest non oba papers from the finest manufacturers we all use that don’t have dye brighteners.

If you read the real tests from Aardenburg Imaging that DO measure dye brightener discoloration, it’s a totally different story. Aardenburg is not paid by Epson to do these tests.

If you want to see if a paper is loaded with cheap brighteners just look at it under a black light , like a uv aquarium light. It will glow like it’s radioactive. Then look at a paper with pigment whiteners or no brighteners and you will see none of that.

To make money! There are hundreds of print shops with larger format Epson printers in the US churning out prints for consumers who have no idea about and would never spend the money for fine art papers. Epson Premium Luster Paper is a terrific choice for them. Superb gamut and DMax, and a surprisingly favorable Wilhelm rating they can point to. And, therein lies the problem as to why Epson is stonewalling the fine art print market who purchase these printers. Today, I think they are a minor part of the revenue base.

[hubell]

The Wilhelm rating for these Epson rc papers  is a freaking joke. He doesn’t even measure the graying out of white paper base due to the huge amount of cheap dye brighteners in the coating.

  If you read the super fine print at the bottom of his postings he always says to stay away from papers that utilize oba content because they can burn out. Then he posts these crazy figures that completely ignore that. This is a very old story.

 Another paper he misrepresents is the Epson “Exhibition “ Fiber paper that  also has his published joke longevity rating, that even surpasses some of the finest non oba papers from the finest manufacturers we all use that don’t have dye brighteners.

If you read the real tests from Aardenburg Imaging that DO measure dye brightener discoloration, it’s a totally different story. Aardenburg is not paid by Epson to do these tests.

If you want to see if a paper is loaded with cheap brighteners just look at it under a black light , like a uv aquarium light. It will glow like it’s radioactive. Then look at a paper with pigment whiteners or no brighteners and you will see none of that.

You have completely missed the point I made here that, contrary to the view expressed by another poster expressing disbelief why anyone would buy a 9570 or 7570 to print with Premium Luster paper, there are good reasons from an economic standpoint for the huge target consumer and business market. Perhaps you are not aware that there are thousands of businesses using Epson wide format printers that print for cost sensitive consumers and businesses, NOT for fine art print photographers who care about artisinal paper. For that target market, Epson Premium Luster is a cost effective medium with a great DMax and color gamut. I go into the local Walgreens drugstore down the street, and they are running a wide format Epson printer. A half mile away, there is a UPS Store with the same setup. A bit further away, there is a Staples with the same setup. What media is in the printer. Epson Premium Luster roll paper. You may look down your nose at these shops and their customers and their lack of sophistication about OBAs and WIR v. Aardenburg (yes, two As) ratings, but I gather they are very pleased with the output.

[deanwork]

No, I didn’t miss the point. This printer was marketed as a production fine art printer, and now that  the P9000/P 10k, P 7000 units are not being made they are without a usable large format fine art printer.

If longevity is not a factor there are plenty of fast options in this market from Canon, HP, etc.
I understand that people might want to knockout a huge volume of rc prints for hotels, hospitals, etc and that’s cool, I do it too sometimes. But putting these great inks in a system that is limited to that is nuts, and not being marketed as limited to thin media .  Now if you only do work on rc papers and canvas you might survive this printer. I know a lot of really angry printers out there and this story is not over.

You have completely missed the point I made here that, contrary to the view expressed by another poster expressing disbelief why anyone would buy a 9570 or 7570 to print with Premium Luster paper, there are good reasons from an economic standpoint for the huge target consumer and business market. Perhaps you are not aware that there are thousands of businesses using Epson wide format printers that print for cost sensitive consumers and businesses, NOT for fine art print photographers who care about artisinal paper. For that target market, Epson Premium Luster is a cost effective medium with a great DMax and color gamut. I go into the local Walgreens drugstore down the street, and they are running a wide format Epson printer. A half mile away, there is a UPS Store with the same setup. A bit further away, there is a Staples with the same setup. What media is in the printer. Epson Premium Luster roll paper. You may look down your nose at these shops and their customers and their lack of sophistication about OBAs and WIR v. Aardenburg (yes, two As) ratings, but I gather they are very pleased with the output.

[Rand47]

To make money! There are hundreds of print shops with larger format Epson printers in the US churning out prints for consumers who have no idea about and would never spend the money for fine art papers. Epson Premium Luster Paper is a terrific choice for them. Superb gamut and DMax, and a surprisingly favorable Wilhelm rating they can point to. And, therein lies the problem as to why Epson is stonewalling the fine art print market who purchase these printers. Today, I think they are a minor part of the revenue base.

I would not disagree with this in its essence.  My problem with it is that, that’s not how Epson has marketed this printer.  There’s a post in this section where a fellow could not get his 9570 to print on Epson’s own Cold Press paper.  They gave him his money back, and he bought a P9000 and is happy.  “That,” I think is the point. 

Rand

[hubell]

I would not disagree with this in its essence.  My problem with it is that, that’s not how Epson has marketed this printer.  There’s a post in this section where a fellow could not get his 9570 to print on Epson’s own Cold Press paper.  They gave him his money back, and he bought a P9000 and is happy.  “That,” I think is the point. 

Rand

I am very well aware of the litany of unacceptable issues that exist with the 9570 printers. I own one and experienced a number of them when I ran my first roll of Canson Baryta Prestige paper through it. Multiple head strikes and the paper detached from the roll However, even though these printers may be marketed as state of the art printers to the photo market, the photo market is a big and varied market. In contrast to 10-15 years ago, the fine art market is likely a small percentage of the purchasers of the 9570/7570 printers, and for their use, the printers work very well with Premium Luster paper. Great Dmax, great color gamut, great WIR rating to point to (WIR even states that EPL has no OBAs!), great price, fast speed. That is why thousands of print shops would be buyers of  these printers. And that may also be why Epson isn’t rushing to resolve the issues for the fine art market. I also expect that Epson doesn’t have a solution. What’s mystifying is why they provided a 9570 to LULA to review when they had to know what the outcome would be. I expect that the initial report of 30% of the prints being ruined will be whitewashed in due course, and we won’t hear about the roll paper ripping off the core or the skew errors. You just have to wonder how clueless Epson may be about the issues that have been identified over 2-3 years now.

[deanwork]

That has to be a typo on Wilhelm's site. Premium Luster has not been changed since his last tests as far as I’ve heard. Never been promoted. If any company was using pigment whiteners in rc media it would be Canson  Photo Satin Premium  and it has oba too. Both of these are bluish white point media for that reason. His tests for PL have always been way off.

http://www.wilhelm-research.com/epson/WIR_Epson_SureColor_P10000_and_P20000_Printers_2019-02-15.pdf

The real crying shame of this whole situation is besides the head being so close to the paper rolls, everything else can be pretty much worked around. And it’s a 90% amazing piece of tech which could have been the best of all time. The inks and permanence and image quality are otherwise the best there has ever been. But as usual, they would rather have their reputation wrecked and give back market share to Canon than admit they made a mistake. I still hope they wake up and do a recall, or at the very least offer an updated version that works.

John

[MfAlab]

You mean just release a printer that is essentially identical to the 7570/9570 except that it works reliably? I think Epson would be very reluctant to do that, as it would be an acknowledgement  that the 9570/7570 printers are inherently defective, and an invitation for a lawsuit by all those who purchased 9570/7570 printers.

Don't know what Epson think. But they did announce similar (almost the same) printers with minor ink changes. 9800 → 9880, 9000 → P9000 If that happens on next model, P76x0/P96x0 maybe, I won't be surprised. And the Cyan ink is the most possible choice. Just like 7880/9880 use new VM/VLM than 7800/9800, that would be VC/VLC.

But my wish is Epson to launch a P10000 with 12 channels head, P10000's head is almost the same with P9570's. Although this is unlikely to happen.