Going Large (printing) (on the cheap)

HI There

Like many things around here, this is a bit OT. The subject is a tribute to our dear Quentin, who has always been large with respect to printing (with his 7600 and 4000 epson printers). He has been extremely helpful with advice while I've been thrashing around!

Some of this has been discussed at the bottom of other threads, but I thought it was worth a thread of it's own in case anyone was going through the same anguish.

I've been dithering about getting a larger printer for ages, focus on imaging clarified my decision when I realised that you couldn't sheet feed on a 7800 - and we decided to get an Epson 4800 . . . . . . then I actually read some bumph from a supplier, and they were selling off the Epson 4000 for £680+VAT, which was impossible to resist!

The printer arrived the other day, it's HUGE and weighs around 40kg, but it certainly seems to be professionally built - the image quality is just fine - obviously I would have liked the superior glossy printing and B&W of the 4800, but this does seem to do excellent black and white on Epson enhanced matt paper - and I very rarely print on glossy paper anyway.

The combination of the roll feed (for bigger prints) and the sheet feeder (for A4) works wonderfully well, A3 is using the roll sideways, and A2 longways - panoramics are suddenly very possible, and it's a real doddle changing the paper formats around.

I don't think I'll ever get over the joy of watching the thing carefully cutting the paper off at the right point!

For someone used to an Epson 2100, this is a huge step forward, and for the price, it seems pretty hard to beat.

Kind Regards
--
Jono Slack
http://www.slack.co.uk

Hi Jono,
Congrats on your new toy and finding it a civilized price.

Cutting paper at the right place would seem a novelty. My 2200 seems to chop it off wherever it feels like doing it, when it is not feeding the entire roll!

I've tried B&W on various surfaces. Matte does seem to work best. One other paper I experimented with was Kodak's professional lustre. That is good but has a touch of magenta in very light areas like skies; interesting effect sometimes!

So now I have to ask..., what is the largest you have printed from D200 files?
--
Pete Smith
http://www.photographsbypetersmith.com
http://www.pbase.com/petersmith/

Hi Petes

Petes said:

Hi Jono,
Congrats on your new toy and finding it a civilized price.

Click to expand...

I was pleased - it does seem to swallow an awful lot of ink filling up those tubes though!

Petes said:

Cutting paper at the right place would seem a novelty. My 2200
seems to chop it off wherever it feels like doing it, when it is
not feeding the entire roll!

Click to expand...

Exactly - this really does seem to do it right.

Petes said:

I've tried B&W on various surfaces. Matte does seem to work best.
One other paper I experimented with was Kodak's professional
lustre. That is good but has a touch of magenta in very light
areas like skies; interesting effect sometimes!

Click to expand...

I haven't tried anything glossy on this, I used to use Ilford galerie smooth gloss with some success on the 2100, I'll have to give it a try on the new toy.

Petes said:

So now I have to ask..., what is the largest you have printed from
D200 files?

Click to expand...

A2+ which is absolutely fine with a 'good' file (i.e. decent lens, no camera shake) Actually, I've printed a couple of the Seville shots that size, and most of those were shot with the humble (but lovely) 18-200, and they seem to be fine as well - I've got to refine my upsampling and sharpening routine a bit though.

Mostly I've been printing on their Enhanced Matte paper, which is cheap, and seems to produce great results. I'm slightly panicked by the ink costs, but it seems to be about £45.00 for 220ml, which is better than £10.00 for 12ml (2400).

Petes said:

--

Click to expand...

Kind Regards
--
Jono Slack
http://www.slack.co.uk

Typical of you to do this just when I have bought a new printer - always got to go one better haven't you! Glad you are happy with the Leviathan.

As we're talking printers, I'd like to add that for those who don't live in Buckingham Palace and don't have a spare wing available for their printer, I'm pleased with the output from the R2400. Colour prints are very similar to those from the R800 (i.e. they combine the pop of dye inks with the virtues of pigment inks) and black & white seems indisinguishable from the dedicated MIS ultratone inks I used previously. I've printed only glossy so far and I'm very happy with the finish.

Jono Slack said:

HI There
Like many things around here, this is a bit OT. The subject is a
tribute to our dear Quentin, who has always been large with respect
to printing (with his 7600 and 4000 epson printers). He has been
extremely helpful with advice while I've been thrashing around!

Some of this has been discussed at the bottom of other threads, but
I thought it was worth a thread of it's own in case anyone was
going through the same anguish.

I've been dithering about getting a larger printer for ages, focus
on imaging clarified my decision when I realised that you couldn't
sheet feed on a 7800 - and we decided to get an Epson 4800 . . . .
. . then I actually read some bumph from a supplier, and they were
selling off the Epson 4000 for £680+VAT, which was impossible to
resist!

The printer arrived the other day, it's HUGE and weighs around
40kg, but it certainly seems to be professionally built - the image
quality is just fine - obviously I would have liked the superior
glossy printing and B&W of the 4800, but this does seem to do
excellent black and white on Epson enhanced matt paper - and I very
rarely print on glossy paper anyway.

The combination of the roll feed (for bigger prints) and the sheet
feeder (for A4) works wonderfully well, A3 is using the roll
sideways, and A2 longways - panoramics are suddenly very possible,
and it's a real doddle changing the paper formats around.

I don't think I'll ever get over the joy of watching the thing
carefully cutting the paper off at the right point!

For someone used to an Epson 2100, this is a huge step forward, and
for the price, it seems pretty hard to beat.

Kind Regards
--
Jono Slack
http://www.slack.co.uk

Click to expand...

--
Galleries and website: http://www.whisperingcat.co.uk/mainindex.htm

Jono Slack said:

I've been dithering about getting a larger printer for ages, focus
on imaging clarified my decision when I realised that you couldn't
sheet feed on a 7800 - and we decided to get an Epson 4800 . . . .
. . then I actually read some bumph from a supplier, and they were
selling off the Epson 4000 for £680+VAT, which was impossible to
resist!

Click to expand...

Ah, that's the route I've been thinking about. However, my 2200 shows no signs of dying so its rather a hard call--and I do have access for large printing on a 9600 if I choose. And then--I haven't seen a 4000 around lately. What a great buy you got.

For b/w--have you considered a RIP? The Quadtone RIP is shareware with great support and just wonderful on all papers.

Diane
--
Diane B
http://www.pbase.com/picnic/galleries

Hi Jono,
You and Quentin going bigger, compensating for something are we ?
Only jealous. I would like to see some A2 prints.

Kevin.

DMillier said:

Typical of you to do this just when I have bought a new printer -
always got to go one better haven't you! Glad you are happy with
the Leviathan.

As we're talking printers, I'd like to add that for those who don't
live in Buckingham Palace and don't have a spare wing available for
their printer, I'm pleased with the output from the R2400. Colour
prints are very similar to those from the R800 (i.e. they combine
the pop of dye inks with the virtues of pigment inks) and black &
white seems indisinguishable from the dedicated MIS ultratone inks
I used previously. I've printed only glossy so far and I'm very
happy with the finish.

Click to expand...

LOL - still, I guess you saved £250, a table, quite a lot of space, and will get better results (at least on glossy paper). Sounds like quite a deal to me!

For me, it's nice to be able to print a little bigger, but really nice to have a (hopefully) more reliable bit of kit - there's nothing worse than setting the poor 2100 off to do 150 cards, and coming back an hour later to find the sheet feeder gave up after 2, and that a moth dropped in the back of the machine and is flattened over the next 10 sheets!

kind regards
--
Jono Slack
http://www.slack.co.uk

Hi Diane
I hope you're well

Diane B said:

Jono Slack said:

I've been dithering about getting a larger printer for ages, focus
on imaging clarified my decision when I realised that you couldn't
sheet feed on a 7800 - and we decided to get an Epson 4800 . . . .
. . then I actually read some bumph from a supplier, and they were
selling off the Epson 4000 for £680+VAT, which was impossible to
resist!

Click to expand...

Ah, that's the route I've been thinking about. However, my 2200
shows no signs of dying so its rather a hard call--and I do have
access for large printing on a 9600 if I choose. And then--I
haven't seen a 4000 around lately. What a great buy you got.

Click to expand...

I have 2 2100's, one with a Lyson CIS attached, and the other with a black and white kit - but I'm aware that they don't go on for ever (one has been replaced already). I'm not convinced that the print quality from the 4000 is that much better, but the ink is much cheaper, and it certainly feels like it should last (even if the table it's on doesn't!).

Diane B said:

For b/w--have you considered a RIP? The Quadtone RIP is shareware
with great support and just wonderful on all papers.

Click to expand...

No - does it work on Apple too?

Actually, Si printed some black and white this morning, and they've come out very nicely.

As for paper, after years of fiddling about, I've settled with two different types of paper - both matte, and both work pretty well:

Epson enhanced matte (for framing and large)
papermilldirect photo smooth cotton rag paper (for posh and cards)

Kind Regards
--
Jono Slack
http://www.slack.co.uk

HI Kevin
I suppose we must be!

At this price it seemed like a bit of a no-brainer - and it sounds like a pint coming on - are you over this way at any time in the near future?

You could pop in for a peep, and then we could go out for a pint somewhere nearby.

Kind Regards
jono

KAllen said:

Hi Jono,
You and Quentin going bigger, compensating for something are we ?
Only jealous. I would like to see some A2 prints.

Kevin.

Click to expand...

--
Jono Slack
http://www.slack.co.uk

Hey Jono,

Cool printer, is it not? I prefer our 4000 to our 7600 because is can sheet feed, and we get fewer clogs. 7600 is great for the right material though -I've had mine for years now, and its still going strong.

Yep, you should have a lot of fun with the 4000.

--
Quentin
http://www.brightnewlight.co.uk
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/micropayment/
--
'Where have I been all my life?'

Jono,
i can find myself your way anytime I like, just say when's a good time.

Cheers,

Kevin.

Jono Slack said:

Hi Diane
I hope you're well

Click to expand...

great--new camera of which we won't speak on this forum LOL.

Jono Slack said:

I have 2 2100's, one with a Lyson CIS attached, and the other with
a black and white kit - but I'm aware that they don't go on for
ever (one has been replaced already). I'm not convinced that the
print quality from the 4000 is that much better, but the ink is
much cheaper, and it certainly feels like it should last (even if
the table it's on doesn't!).

Click to expand...

I have a 'photo friend' here in the states and she says the same--one needs a REALLY sturdy table.

Jono Slack said:

Jono Slack said:

For b/w--have you considered a RIP? The Quadtone RIP is shareware
with great support and just wonderful on all papers.

Click to expand...

No - does it work on Apple too?

Click to expand...

Surely does--these b/w guys are 'serious'
http://www.quadtonerip.com/html/QTRoverview.html

Jono Slack said:

As for paper, after years of fiddling about, I've settled with two
different types of paper - both matte, and both work pretty well:

Epson enhanced matte (for framing and large)
papermilldirect photo smooth cotton rag paper (for posh and cards)

Click to expand...

My preference is matte also. I use EHM myself and like Epson Velvet and Hahnemuhl PR also for 'posh'. as you say.--I don't know the second one you mention.

--
Diane B
http://www.pbase.com/picnic/galleries

I have always loved large prints and finally bit the bullet and went big.

I have an HP Designjet 130nr 24" carriage. I don't want to start a dye/pigment epson/HP discussion. I use an Epson 2200 for my IR work.

The DJ makes spectacular prints and is incredibly frugal with ink.

I've found my Epson prints to have brittle surfaces so have been spraying them for some time for scuff resistance.

My HP is dye based therefore not waterproof, so i'm spraying them as well, just for waterproofing as the surface is quite sturdy.

I print spectacular 24x30 images from my SLR/c, using Qimage. It is addicting!

The hp has built in calibration so i have much more consistent color.

I've just ordered up Hahnemuhle rag to try, have only used the proofing gloss and the premium satin to date.

If you're inclined to go large you get a lot for your money with the HP and few people end up requiring ongoing profiling misery.

guess you can tell i like the HP.

bill

What are they giving for life expectancy of the prints on a HP?

Kevin.

Hi Jono,

You are going to love your Epson 4000. I have been using one for well over a year now.

Talking about going large, I bit the bullet about six weeks ago and got an Epson 9800. At over 200 pounds and almost six feet long, its big. I have been amazed at how well the SLR/n images have printed at 30x40 or even larger.

The beauty in the 4000 is the ability to have both mat and photo black loaded at the same time. This is a huge time and ink saver and a reason to go for the 4000. I found that the gloss differential, although certainly better on the 4800 and 9800 is not as much of an issue as talked about and can be eleminated if you over spray your prints. For critical work, I almost always overspray now to add permanence to the print but more so to reduce the risk of scuffs, scratches and finger prints. The over spraying also can slightly enhance dmax of the print.

If you can afford it I would strongly suggest that you look into Imageprint from Colorbyte Software as a Rip for your printer. You will pay as much for the software as the price you paid for the printer, but you will get much more out of the printer, in particular for Black and White. Not only is imageprint a fantastic RIP which will enhance your productivity, increase print control andl also produce beter tonality than you get from the epson drivers, but you also get free access to profiles for all the high quality papers out there. They also provide profiles for the different lighting conditions under which a print will be viewed. This service alone saves loads of money and will make a much bigger difference than you can image. Having good profiles will save you lots of money by avoiding wasted prints, trying to get it right.

Make sure you do a head cleaning periodically, especially if you have not used the printer for a while. You want to keep the print head open and clean. If you don't, a power cleaning will be required, which works, but uses a lot of ink. Also, make sure you have an extra waste cartrigdge handy. When it fills up the printer will stop and this is likely to happen when you need to print the most.

Regarding advantages of the 4800 and 9800. The K3 inks do have a wider color gamut and provide for deeper color. The K3 inks are denser, which means less ink is in fact used to produce a print of similar tonality to what it takes on the 4000 so this can save some money on ink over time. The Dmax from the inks is greater and will produce prints which "pop" a little more. There is less bronzing and gloss differential, but overspray reduces this advantage a bit. But a huge downside is the ability to only have the Gloss or Mat Black ink in at a time. Since I use Imageprint on both printers, I am considering using their "Phatte" black option which replaces the light-light-black with a mat black cartridge and essentially makes the machine act like the 4000. Not using the light-light-black reintroduces some additional gloss differential. Doing this will also limit me to now only being able to print using the imageprint drivers. Having said all this I use my 4000 just as much as I did before, the prints are beautiful and always will be.

Have fun and contratulations.

John

--
*********************
http://photos.johnfhill.com

Hi Diane

Diane B said:

Jono Slack said:

Hi Diane
I hope you're well

Click to expand...

great--new camera of which we won't speak on this forum LOL.

Click to expand...

several 5d users around here, notably Tim Ashley, who seems to have married his!

It's been generally agreed that if this (lovely) forum is to survive, then we need to broaden the user base - you should also enter the competition - check out the thread.

Diane B said:

Diane B said:

I have 2 2100's, one with a Lyson CIS attached, and the other with
a black and white kit - but I'm aware that they don't go on for
ever (one has been replaced already). I'm not convinced that the
print quality from the 4000 is that much better, but the ink is
much cheaper, and it certainly feels like it should last (even if
the table it's on doesn't!).

Click to expand...

I have a 'photo friend' here in the states and she says the
same--one needs a REALLY sturdy table.

Click to expand...

My whole office seems to shake!

Diane B said:

Diane B said:

Diane B said:

For b/w--have you considered a RIP? The Quadtone RIP is shareware
with great support and just wonderful on all papers.

Click to expand...

No - does it work on Apple too?

Click to expand...

Surely does--these b/w guys are 'serious'
http://www.quadtonerip.com/html/QTRoverview.html

Click to expand...

I've just downloaded it and will have a proper look.

Diane B said:

Diane B said:

As for paper, after years of fiddling about, I've settled with two
different types of paper - both matte, and both work pretty well:

Epson enhanced matte (for framing and large)
papermilldirect photo smooth cotton rag paper (for posh and cards)

Click to expand...

My preference is matte also. I use EHM myself and like Epson
Velvet and Hahnemuhl PR also for 'posh'. as you say.--I don't know
the second one you mention.

Click to expand...

The photo smooth is rather like the Hahnemuhl, but I found that to be so dusty that it caused problems with the printer - the photo smooth is made in the Lake district at a really old paper mill, we use it for cards, lovely stuff.
Kind regards
--
Jono Slack
http://www.slack.co.uk

per wilhelm research

gloss / satin (both premium) 82 years under glass

the hahnemuhle rag requires spraying and glass and while wilhelm doesn't rate it some folks on the HP board says 20 years or more sprayed and under glass.

bill

Jono Slack said:

Jono Slack said:

A2+ which is absolutely fine with a 'good' file (i.e. decent lens, no camera shake) Actually, I've printed a couple of the Seville shots that size, and most of those were shot with the humble (but lovely) 18-200, and they seem to be fine as well - I've got to refine my upsampling and sharpening routine a bit though.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

That's good to hear. You can probably tell that I haven't made a move yet regarding replacing the slr/n and so I'm interested in hearing that the D200 can produce in the 16x20 range. The 5D is also still on my maybe list. Or I just hold out to see what comes out of Photokina this fall. If it wasn't for the noise I'd be content with the slr/n, but, the noise/artifacts has ruined one to many images for me. It can be somewhat removed in PS but it's a destructive process that I'd rather not deal with at all.

Regarding ink costs, I think it was on Michaeal Reichmann's site that some contributor had figured out that the 4800 was cheaper to run even though the initial outlay for the 220 carts was a bit staggering. I'm not sure this whole K3 series will be around for very long. Already Epson is going on about a new print head scheme, something about LED vs. laser technology. If they would formulate a black ink that could print on both matte and gloss surfaces then they would have something.

At least by going the 4000 route you have both inks for now.
--
Pete Smith
http://www.photographsbypetersmith.com
http://www.pbase.com/petersmith/

Quentin (UK) said:

Cool printer, is it not? I prefer our 4000 to our 7600 because is
can sheet feed, and we get fewer clogs.

Click to expand...

You guys have mentioned you can't sheet feed the 7600. But I do it all the time, manually feeding anywhere from 8.5x11 on up. Works like a charm if you work sheet-by-sheet (and don't need a paper tray).

-- Dan

Jono Slack said:

Jono Slack said:

several 5d users around here, notably Tim Ashley, who seems to have

Click to expand...

married his!

Click to expand...

I may have too LOL.

Jono Slack said:

It's been generally agreed that if this (lovely) forum is to
survive, then we need to broaden the user base - you should also
enter the competition - check out the thread.

Click to expand...

I only read this forum generally but find it civil, entertaining and lovely folks (more like the 'old' Oly forum). I may try to do that--the competition.

Jono Slack said:

Jono Slack said:

The photo smooth is rather like the Hahnemuhl, but I found that to

Click to expand...

be so dusty that it caused problems with the printer - the photo
smooth is made in the Lake district at a really old paper mill, we
use it for cards, lovely stuff.
Kind regards

Click to expand...

It is a bit dusty---and I'll have to see if yours is found in the states.

Diane
--
Diane B
http://www.pbase.com/picnic/galleries