Canon Pro 1100 Banding Follow-Up (Continued #2)

Once again we have reached 149 posts on the previous thread on the dreaded Canon Pro 1100 banding issues, so it’s time to start a new one.

@bjtaylor asked these questions on the previous thread:

Member said:

Can I ask - what, specifically, is (or might be) the disadvantage of turning off vacuum?

why is it one of the strongest features of the printer?

Click to expand...

The Pro 1000/1100 vacuum system is a strong feature of those printers because it helps keep paper flat when it goes through the printer, so it helps with pre-cut sheets of roll paper or curled sheets of paper that are fed to the printer, thus reducing the risk of head strikes.

Having to turn this feature off in the hope of getting an image properly printed on the 1100 is not only unacceptable but it is like gutting the paper transportation system of those printers.

9ck wrote:

Gryphon69 said:

It just not suited / featured for high volume work (FYI @nfotos is looking for a printer for a photo print business). It’s not about the print quality. Print quality is another story obviusly with 12 Lucia inks. I’m pretty sure his view on this is spot on.

Click to expand...

Okay, but that's saying something quite different from it being semi-pro and in a different category from the rest of the Pro-series.

It's a 17" sheet-fed photo printer that should last for years of heavy use. Everything you read is that it's designed to be used all the time, and you'll get more mileage out of it if you do print a lot than if you use it occasionally. And it has a replaceable printhead.

Now, are any sheet-fed 17" printers suitable for high-volume work? They're not very fast.

nickbatz said:

9ck wrote:

nickbatz said:

It just not suited / featured for high volume work (FYI @nfotos is looking for a printer for a photo print business). It’s not about the print quality. Print quality is another story obviusly with 12 Lucia inks. I’m pretty sure his view on this is spot on.

Click to expand...

Okay, but that's saying something quite different from it being semi-pro and in a different category from the rest of the Pro-series.

It's a 17" sheet-fed photo printer that should last for years of heavy use. Everything you read is that it's designed to be used all the time, and you'll get more mileage out of it if you do print a lot than if you use it occasionally. And it has a replaceable printhead.

Now, are any sheet-fed 17" printers suitable for high-volume work? They're not very fast.

Click to expand...

I’m not saying anything differently. My reply was to @nfoto and if you read his question and the other post he posted on this forum, you’ll see that he is asking for a printer suitable for a business print service. In this context, the PRO-1000/1100 isn’t in the same “category” as the larger printers in the PRO-series, call it what you wan’t – the obvious being the 80 ml cartridges, no roll support and the 17” paper size limitation (look at how many 17” rolls of paper Canon has to offer). I’m pretty sure he also mentioned the feed system not being designed for a large volume professional print service (it’s more prone to wear and tear – not saying it will break). I don’t know what your definition of “heavy use” is – but it is not recommended for “heavy use” at a professional print service – which to a Canon technician puts in a different “user category/segment”.

As an example of where he found the PRO-1000/1100 to be unsuited, he mentioned a professional school photographer who periodically prints a very large amount of photo-packs for several schools and high-schools – letting the printer run non-stop for several days maybe up to a week or more. This is not only due to the “quality” of the printer (be it build or print quality), but also the running costs. Canon does not have or use any categories so I’m sorry if my use of the term “pro-sumer” was misleading or provoking you.

Here in DK (and maybe EU) they even distinguish the PRO-1000/1100 from the PRO-300/310 in that way that the PRO-1000/1100 comes with EU-warranty, the PRO-300/310 comes with national warranty. Canon has on site support for the PRO-1000/1100, not the PRO-300/310. So, as you may see there is a lot more to this “categorising” than just the “print quality”.

Yes, the PRO-1000/1100 shouldn’t be left collecting dust and you’ll get better "milage” out of it printing regularly but that does not mean it is as suitable for “heavy use” in the term a Canon technician would understand "heavy use". I’m sure he doesn’t consider a professional photographer selling a handful (or two) of prints on a weekly basis as “heavy use”.

--
Kind regards 9ck

I have once again reached out to the Canon USA tech support rep who has been my point of contact for most of my 8-month long odyssey with the Pro 1100. This is the gist of what I was told:

• The banding is widespread among Pro 1100 customers (they are finally saying it plainly)
• There is still no resolution available
• The Canon research team is working on it but so far has been unable to isolate the cause of the issue
• Canon USA has shipped multiple Pro 1100’s affected by the issue as well as print samples showing banding to Canon’s international engineer department for more testing
• At this time there is no indication in terms of how long it will be until they fix the issue

I guess it is good that Canon is finally admitting that this is a widespread issue among Pro 1100 owners and that their engineers in Japan are trying to identify the root cause of the issue.

However, the fact that they have not been able to understand what causes the banding yet and there still is no end in sight for so many affected customers is just depressing.

nickbatz said:

It's a 17" sheet-fed photo printer that should last for years of heavy use.

Click to expand...

This level of output quantity is not available for US$1200.

IMO, they should last for years of occasional use. Using my memories of observing a real commercial lab on occasional visits back in the film days, I'm gonna define 'heavy use' as 2000-3000 4x6" (on a roll to be cut later) plus maybe 40-60 8.5x11" plus 20 17x22" prints, every day, five or six days a week.

These printers sit right on the line between high-end consumer and bottom-end pro. The manufacturers chose to brand them as 'pro'...and they are, print quality-wise.

9ck said:

As an example of where he found the PRO-1000/1100 to be unsuited, he mentioned a professional school photographer who periodically prints a very large amount of photo-packs for several schools and high-schools – letting the printer run non-stop for several days maybe up to a week or more. This is not only due to the “quality” of the printer (be it build or print quality), but also the running costs. Canon does not have or use any categories so I’m sorry if my use of the term “pro-sumer” was misleading or provoking you.

Click to expand...

I can't even imagine using a 24-inch Canon imagePROGRAF or Epson P-series to do this either. They're not production printers.

Honestly, the tech is probably just crapping on the PRO-1000/1100 because he doesn't think it's worth his time to deal with something that only costs $1300.

bitsponge said:

9ck said:

As an example of where he found the PRO-1000/1100 to be unsuited, he mentioned a professional school photographer who periodically prints a very large amount of photo-packs for several schools and high-schools – letting the printer run non-stop for several days maybe up to a week or more. This is not only due to the “quality” of the printer (be it build or print quality), but also the running costs. Canon does not have or use any categories so I’m sorry if my use of the term “pro-sumer” was misleading or provoking you.

Click to expand...

I can't even imagine using a 24-inch Canon imagePROGRAF or Epson P-series to do this either. They're not production printers.

Honestly, the tech is probably just crapping on the PRO-1000/1100 because he doesn't think it's worth his time to deal with something that only costs $1300.

Click to expand...

He wasn't crapping on anything. He was just being honest and informative. He told me how great he thinks the PRO-1000 is in terms of print quality and reliability (for the correct use case). Canon DK (and Canon in general) has had very few service issues with the PRO-1000, so he was surprised to see that we now have two cases with the PRO-1100 in DK.

He was very thorough and took his time. I believe his visit lasted 3 or 4 hours. Remember this was the 2nd time he came around. First time was also several hours. He was just as critical about inspecting the test prints as I was. He will be taking my printer with him back to his "test-lab" to do further tests and raise the issue with Canon Europe. Very professional. I have only praise for the service Canon has provided so far. Something I do not experience every day, but I do appreciate it when it happens.

--
Kind regards 9ck

Gryphon69 said:

However, the fact that they have not been able to understand what causes the banding yet and there still is no end in sight for so many affected customers is just depressing.

Click to expand...

Again I can only refer to the dialogue I have with "my" technician. His initial response to the banding I now see is that this is not the same issue. So maybe/probably there are several issues.

If you remember I startet out having selective banding in the darker greys. With the new print head I now have banding in the first inches of the paper.

I feel for you, Gryphon. Must have been extremely frustrating all this time. Now there is progress although they might not share it with us.

--
Kind regards 9ck

9ck said:

nickbatz said:

9ck wrote:

Okay, but that's saying something quite different

Click to expand...

I’m not saying anything differently.

Click to expand...

Even though your English is flawless, this sounds like a somewhat subtle language issue.

I wrote that it was saying something different - an adjective. Different*ly* is an adverb. That's the difference.

"Semi-professional" implies "less than professional" to a native English speaker, at least an American one.

And someone who owns and really likes his Pro-1000 - even though he also owns a Pro-4100 - will get raised hackles at the insinuation. That's why it sounds like your tech was crapping on it!

It's not a production printer, but it is professional in that it's the same printer as the larger ones, just scaled down. Pro-1100 banding issues aside, the build quality is just as high.

Gryphon69 said:

I have once again reached out to the Canon USA tech support rep who has been my point of contact for most of my 8-month long odyssey with the Pro 1100. This is the gist of what I was told:

• The banding is widespread among Pro 1100 customers (they are finally saying it plainly)
• There is still no resolution available
• The Canon research team is working on it but so far has been unable to isolate the cause of the issue
• Canon USA has shipped multiple Pro 1100’s affected by the issue as well as print samples showing banding to Canon’s international engineer department for more testing
• At this time there is no indication in terms of how long it will be until they fix the issue

I guess it is good that Canon is finally admitting that this is a widespread issue among Pro 1100 owners and that their engineers in Japan are trying to identify the root cause of the issue.

However, the fact that they have not been able to understand what causes the banding yet and there still is no end in sight for so many affected customers is just depressing.

Click to expand...

Thank you for the update..

It has been about a week since I heard from customer relations, who communicates with the Canon USA/Japan engineers.

I have lost confidence that it will be resolved. Eight months is absolutely ridiculous. They might as well scrap the Pro-1100 and just work on the Pro-1200 to replace it ASAP. If fixing it was a priority, they should have a firmware update by now. I am a few days away from buying an Epson P-900. I hate to do it, but I am losing so much money not being able to replace inventory at my gallery. The weird thing is that it will print many photos with no issue whatsoever!

wmphoto said:

I am losing so much money not being able to replace inventory at my gallery.

Click to expand...

That's unacceptable. Sorry to hear it.

I'd be looking for an immediate solution, even if it's temporary - like a used Pro-1000.

nickbatz said:

wmphoto said:

I am losing so much money not being able to replace inventory at my gallery.

Click to expand...

That's unacceptable. Sorry to hear it.

I'd be looking for an immediate solution, even if it's temporary - like a used Pro-1000.

Click to expand...

Its hard becuse used Pro-1000's are super risky. I might consider one if it was local, but theres none around my area. I am not sure they can be shipped. Theres a ton of ink withen the resvoirs of the printer. The printhead needs to be properly secured. I dont think the printer can be flipped around in shipping like most companies will.

If you find a new Pro-1000 and its for whatever reason fails under its warranty period, Canon is going to replace it with a Pro-1100. Then yo are right back to where you started. Thats why i am looking at getting an Epson.

Earlier in the week Canon agreed to ship me a replacement printer even through they acknowledged that the banding issue may likely not get addressed with a replacement. Canon is very much aware of the issue... Got an email today saying it was being shipped.

Knowing that my replacement printer was on the way I decided to run a bunch of prints tonight (might as well burn through the remaining ink) and see what I can learn ahead of the new printer.

Tonight I focused on mat prints and ran ~10 9x13" prints on RR Polar Matte. Printer was loaded with .IP1X profiles and printed within LRC using the highest print setting and unidirectional printing; otherwise, the settings were rather normal.

All prints tonight on the RR Polar Matte paper came out perfectly without so much as a hint of banding. They really were perfect.

I then switched over to RR UltraPro Satin and ran a couple 9x13" prints (same as 2 of the matte prints). Both prints on the UltraPro Satin had banding in exactly the same place as I've experienced previously. Specifically, banding in the last 3" of the print, and only on the right side of the image and disappearing near the middle of the print.

I believe (in my case) this must be a paper feed issue that is largely dependent on the paper being used. Perhaps the texture of backing or print surface on the Satin paper just isn't working well with the rollers in the printer and that causes the paper to consistently twist (ever so slightly) near the end of the print (when the paper is not as well controlled).

I have experienced this banding on both RR and ILFORD Satin/Pearl papers from 5x7, 8x10, and now 9x13 sized prints.

If the issue I'm experiencing is similar to what others are struggling with (and I believe there are a few out there based on comments I've read), then I'm not sure how a firmware update would address this as it seems to be primarily a mechanical feed issue that has crept into the product when they transitioned from the 1000 to the 1100.

Gryphon69 said:

I have once again reached out to the Canon USA tech support rep who has been my point of contact for most of my 8-month long odyssey with the Pro 1100. This is the gist of what I was told:

• The banding is widespread among Pro 1100 customers (they are finally saying it plainly)
• There is still no resolution available
• The Canon research team is working on it but so far has been unable to isolate the cause of the issue
• Canon USA has shipped multiple Pro 1100’s affected by the issue as well as print samples showing banding to Canon’s international engineer department for more testing
• At this time there is no indication in terms of how long it will be until they fix the issue

I guess it is good that Canon is finally admitting that this is a widespread issue among Pro 1100 owners and that their engineers in Japan are trying to identify the root cause of the issue.

However, the fact that they have not been able to understand what causes the banding yet and there still is no end in sight for so many affected customers is just depressing.

Click to expand...

nickbatz said:

9ck said:

nickbatz said:

9ck wrote:

Okay, but that's saying something quite different

Click to expand...

I’m not saying anything differently.

Click to expand...

Even though your English is flawless, this sounds like a somewhat subtle language issue.

I wrote that it was saying something different - an adjective. Different*ly* is an adverb. That's the difference.

Click to expand...

Yes, you will have to accept that English is my 2nd language. Still, I wasn’t saying something different or saying it differently. In the first post I just didn’t comment or relate to the print quality of the PRO-1100, because it was not relevant.

nickbatz said:

"Semi-professional" implies "less than professional" to a native English speaker, at least an American one.

Click to expand...

“Professional” is a stupid term to use if you ask me. Because what is “professional”. If you do not have a definition, it's pointless. To a photographer it is one thing. To a print service it is another thing.

nickbatz said:

And someone who owns and really likes his Pro-1000 - even though he also owns a Pro-4100 - will get raised hackles at the insinuation. That's why it sounds like your tech was crapping on it!

Click to expand...

Please read my reply to @bitsponge. The Canon technician was professional ;-) in every way.

It’s best to keep emotions out of things if you want to stay objective. The PRO-1100 is my first photo printer and I absolutely love it and the prints it can produce, but I don't let that "romance" clutter my objective view.

nickbatz said:

It's not a production printer, but it is professional in that it's the same printer as the larger ones, just scaled down. Pro-1100 banding issues aside, the build quality is just as high.

Click to expand...

I’m sorry, but what you’re saying here just doesn’t make sense from an engineering POV. You’re saying that the build quality is the same and at the same time you’re saying that it’s scaled down… As far as I know, the only similarity is the print head and the type of inks it uses – and that’s basically it. That’s why it has the “pro” designation. It's more about marketing than it is about print and build quality.

For one - I suspect that the feed system in the PRO-1000/1100 is not on par with the larger models (this from how I perceived the small talk I had with the Canon technician) - and again I'm not saying it's bad, just designed for a different use case.

--
Kind regards 9ck

Gryphon69 said:

I have once again reached out to the Canon USA tech support rep who has been my point of contact for most of my 8-month long odyssey with the Pro 1100. This is the gist of what I was told:

• The banding is widespread among Pro 1100 customers (they are finally saying it plainly)
• There is still no resolution available
• The Canon research team is working on it but so far has been unable to isolate the cause of the issue
• Canon USA has shipped multiple Pro 1100’s affected by the issue as well as print samples showing banding to Canon’s international engineer department for more testing
• At this time there is no indication in terms of how long it will be until they fix the issue

I guess it is good that Canon is finally admitting that this is a widespread issue among Pro 1100 owners and that their engineers in Japan are trying to identify the root cause of the issue.

However, the fact that they have not been able to understand what causes the banding yet and there still is no end in sight for so many affected customers is just depressing.

Click to expand...

Thank you so much for sharing this. Even though it's quite depressing to hear I feel relief that is not my madness...

PS Guys discussing whether canon pro 1100 is a pro printer, could you please discuss this in a separate thread? Much appreciated.

doug_babynsx said:

Earlier in the week Canon agreed to ship me a replacement printer even through they acknowledged that the banding issue may likely not get addressed with a replacement. Canon is very much aware of the issue... Got an email today saying it was being shipped.

Knowing that my replacement printer was on the way I decided to run a bunch of prints tonight (might as well burn through the remaining ink) and see what I can learn ahead of the new printer.

Tonight I focused on mat prints and ran ~10 9x13" prints on RR Polar Matte. Printer was loaded with .IP1X profiles and printed within LRC using the highest print setting and unidirectional printing; otherwise, the settings were rather normal.
All prints tonight on the RR Polar Matte paper came out perfectly without so much as a hint of banding. They really were perfect.

I then switched over to RR UltraPro Satin and ran a couple 9x13" prints (same as 2 of the matte prints). Both prints on the UltraPro Satin had banding in exactly the same place as I've experienced previously. Specifically, banding in the last 3" of the print, and only on the right side of the image and disappearing near the middle of the print.

I believe (in my case) this must be a paper feed issue that is largely dependent on the paper being used. Perhaps the texture of backing or print surface on the Satin paper just isn't working well with the rollers in the printer and that causes the paper to consistently twist (ever so slightly) near the end of the print (when the paper is not as well controlled).

I have experienced this banding on both RR and ILFORD Satin/Pearl papers from 5x7, 8x10, and now 9x13 sized prints.

If the issue I'm experiencing is similar to what others are struggling with (and I believe there are a few out there based on comments I've read), then I'm not sure how a firmware update would address this as it seems to be primarily a mechanical feed issue that has crept into the product when they transitioned from the 1000 to the 1100.

Click to expand...

Thank you for sharing these additional tests that you ran and your observations about their outcome.

I am starting to think that there are 1100’s out there with at least two different banding issues: some that display banding only in the last 2-3” of the affected prints and others where banding occurs wherever there is the “right” tonal range (which can be anywhere in the print).

The experiences shared by those who have weighed in during the various iterations of this thread seem to support this theory. I am not sure if the two variants of the issue are related, meaning if they are the effect of the same root cause, or not. In a way I am kind of hoping that they are, because otherwise the problem could be even more complex to resolve, having to identify and address two different causes for the two types of banding.

At any rate, best of luck with your replacement 1100: may you win the lottery and receive one that works as it should. It would be a nice break in the pattern.

Gryphon69 said:

doug_babynsx said:

I have experienced this banding on both RR and ILFORD Satin/Pearl papers from 5x7, 8x10, and now 9x13 sized prints.

If the issue I'm experiencing is similar to what others are struggling with (and I believe there are a few out there based on comments I've read), then I'm not sure how a firmware update would address this as it seems to be primarily a mechanical feed issue that has crept into the product when they transitioned from the 1000 to the 1100.

Click to expand...

Thank you for sharing these additional tests that you ran and your observations about their outcome.

I am starting to think that there are 1100’s out there with at least two different banding issues: some that display banding only in the last 2-3” of the affected prints and others where banding occurs wherever there is the “right” tonal range (which can be anywhere in the print).

The experiences shared by those who have weighed in during the various iterations of this thread seem to support this theory. I am not sure if the two variants of the issue are related, meaning if they are the effect of the same root cause, or not. In a way I am kind of hoping that they are, because otherwise the problem could be even more complex to resolve, having to identify and address two different causes for the two types of banding.

At any rate, best of luck with your replacement 1100: may you win the lottery and receive one that works as it should. It would be a nice break in the pattern.

Click to expand...

The comment about winning the lottery is appropriate. Throughout this months long reporting of banding, I cannot understand why people continue to go through the trouble of sending back their flawed printers for a replacement Canon 1100.. It sounds as well like beating a dead horse. The only answer to this is get your money back and put it into an Epson 5370 printer. My Canon Pro 10 finally gave up the ghost and I am wondering whether to purchase a et 8550 or a Canon pro 310.

Philip Eihuyar said:

Gryphon69 said:

doug_babynsx said:

I have experienced this banding on both RR and ILFORD Satin/Pearl papers from 5x7, 8x10, and now 9x13 sized prints.

If the issue I'm experiencing is similar to what others are struggling with (and I believe there are a few out there based on comments I've read), then I'm not sure how a firmware update would address this as it seems to be primarily a mechanical feed issue that has crept into the product when they transitioned from the 1000 to the 1100.

Click to expand...

Thank you for sharing these additional tests that you ran and your observations about their outcome.

I am starting to think that there are 1100’s out there with at least two different banding issues: some that display banding only in the last 2-3” of the affected prints and others where banding occurs wherever there is the “right” tonal range (which can be anywhere in the print).

The experiences shared by those who have weighed in during the various iterations of this thread seem to support this theory. I am not sure if the two variants of the issue are related, meaning if they are the effect of the same root cause, or not. In a way I am kind of hoping that they are, because otherwise the problem could be even more complex to resolve, having to identify and address two different causes for the two types of banding.

At any rate, best of luck with your replacement 1100: may you win the lottery and receive one that works as it should. It would be a nice break in the pattern.

Click to expand...

The comment about winning the lottery is appropriate. Throughout this months long reporting of banding, I cannot understand why people continue to go through the trouble of sending back their flawed printers for a replacement Canon 1100.. It sounds as well like beating a dead horse. The only answer to this is get your money back and put it into an Epson 5370 printer. My Canon Pro 10 finally gave up the ghost and I am wondering whether to purchase a et 8550 or a Canon pro 310.

Click to expand...

Philip, I think you are right, unfortunately. I for one said multiple times that I regret not going for the 5370, but that’s vision in hindsight.

Two of the reasons why I have not done so already are the 5370’s larger footprint compared to the 1100 (despite the obvious benefit of coming with a roll holder) and the considerable amount of ink that I still have left for the 1100.

My ideal scenario would be for the 1100’s issues to be finally fixed (considering that the 1100’s prints that come out right are just gorgeous, so no complaints there), but obviously time is a factor and an 8-month wait for a product to perform as it should (and it still doesn’t) is a loooong time.

To your point, considering that the 1100 that I bought has been replaced twice and all units displayed the same issues, I am not going to ask for yet another replacement until the problem is fixed.

At the same time, I do understand those who just bought a defective 1100 wanting to get a replacement hoping that they will get a good copy that works as it is supposed to: despite the low probability, it would certainly the easiest way to resolve the issue.

YOMV but the Epson P5370 is hands down the best 17" printer on the market, by far! Built like a tank with ink cost 50% less than the Canons it just stands out as the best.

wmphoto said:

Gryphon69 said:

I have once again reached out to the Canon USA tech support rep who has been my point of contact for most of my 8-month long odyssey with the Pro 1100. This is the gist of what I was told:

• The banding is widespread among Pro 1100 customers (they are finally saying it plainly)
• There is still no resolution available
• The Canon research team is working on it but so far has been unable to isolate the cause of the issue
• Canon USA has shipped multiple Pro 1100’s affected by the issue as well as print samples showing banding to Canon’s international engineer department for more testing
• At this time there is no indication in terms of how long it will be until they fix the issue

I guess it is good that Canon is finally admitting that this is a widespread issue among Pro 1100 owners and that their engineers in Japan are trying to identify the root cause of the issue.

However, the fact that they have not been able to understand what causes the banding yet and there still is no end in sight for so many affected customers is just depressing.

Click to expand...

Thank you for the update..

It has been about a week since I heard from customer relations, who communicates with the Canon USA/Japan engineers.

I have lost confidence that it will be resolved. Eight months is absolutely ridiculous. They might as well scrap the Pro-1100 and just work on the Pro-1200 to replace it ASAP. If fixing it was a priority, they should have a firmware update by now. I am a few days away from buying an Epson P-900. I hate to do it, but I am losing so much money not being able to replace inventory at my gallery. The weird thing is that it will print many photos with no issue whatsoever!

Click to expand...

Do not buy the P900 I say again do not buy the P900. Mostly plastic, poor build quality. The P5370 is the buy. Hands down the best 17" roll printer on the market all for less than $2000.