HP DJ130

[Willem Wiersma]

I am considering a HP 130 too. I asked Neil Snape to send me a few testprints and he kindly did so. I send him a colour and B&W test image. Neil made color and B&W prints on HP premium plus satin and Hahnemuhle PhotoRag using his own profiles ( 4 prints in total). I compared them with my own prints on a Epson 2200 with custom profiles for colors and with ImagePrint for B&W. Previously I owned a Epson 1270 which I did relate to also. I will give some of my observations with Neil's comments.

My comment: IQ on the HP satin (color) is very good, I like the skintones and the smooth yet sharp image a lot. Nice soft gloss with this paper, softer than Epson semigloss on the 2100. No bronzing at all, just as with my previous Epson dye printers. Still one really needs to soft proof I guess, since some colors don't match my (calibrated LaCie) monitor that good. Generally speaking the image as seen on screen matches the print better when I apply an adjustment layer, selective color, choose neutrals and set the magenta slider to (about) -4. Would soft proofing make a difference?

Neil: Not sure as I had worked on development of the LaCie Color Eye with Sequel years back. I had a definite greener than should be grey balance on my monitors. I use ColorEyes now and even though I have worked with Gretag for years still find it top notch. You might want to try a demo of Integrated Color’s ColorEyes display. You can run up to three calibrations. Worth a try.

My comment: B&W on satin gloss is quite nice, much better than the Epson 2100/1270 with its own driver&profiled. Only a hint of color shifts througout the greyscale and not much metamerism. Nice blacks. The lack of waterresistance is there, although it is not a dealbreaker. Do you have favourable experience with sprays?

Neil: Yes I spray but not for reasons of water resistance but for putting glossy into portfolio sleeves. I tested water fastness up to waterproofing and both are easily had with various sprays. Henry Wilhelm likes Premier Art Shield and that recommendation is what I respect the most.

My comment: PhotoRag colour actually comes closer to the images as seen on screen, except for the light and bright orange-reds/yellows which are clearly too saturated. Maybe a softproofed image would show this on screen? Futher comparable quality as the Epson 2100, although the blacks are not as deep.

Neil: To me they seem rich too on the PR. The DJ printers have a very extended red that pigments are not capable of. The older Epson’s had a red that was volatile as the yellow disappears after 20 minutes leaving a blue mist over the once deep red. Do you find the same on the 1280?

My comment: B&W on matte isn't bad, but I am spoiled. Epson 2100 with ImagePrint is a lot better. I would not like to sell a B&W 130 print on matte.

Neil: Agreed. The 130 is good but the Epson UC and K3 are going to touch the PM and grey on PR. The 9180 HP does well in that regard.

My comment: 70% of my printing is color, the rest is B&W. I can't afford to buy two large format printers. For the time being I will stay with my printing shop and will wait for the results and price of the new Pigment printers of HP. Then I will choose: the 130 (and do large B&W in the printing shop) or the 24 inch version of the 9180. That will take another 6 months at least I guess.

Neil: I don’t think there will be a 24” Photsmart but maybe a 24” DJ pigment is a logical path. I am told that the 130 will be continued much to my liking, as pigments have their own advantages and disadvantages too.

 

[Mark simms]

Henry Wilhelm likes Premier Art Shield and that recommendation is what I
respect the most.

Well, Willem, you seem to be quite the color guru. Can you tell me where you got the above information ? Do you have inside information regarding the Wilhelm research ?

 

[colourgeek]

Might not be Willem that said that, it might have been me.

I know Henry personally and surprisingly he is genuinely concerned about preserving photography. I consider the number no more than a metric with control conditions, yet it is the only relative metric we have.

I would have preferred XX guaduples as years are a simple metric of time that no matter how hard I try don't speed up or slow down. The median of density loss though do change with variables so attaching years to such variables can easily be contested.

IT has always had too many numbers games without reference. Like MHz myths , optical density with scanners, like resolution in drops per inch> they have all led astray users. I don't know that lightfast years though to be misleading, it's just the appellation that is tied to an invariable that seems to be often in question.
--
Neil Snape photographer Paris http://www.neilsnape.com

 

[JLK]

Deep breath again...

Seriously, I'm not against your right to rag on the printer. It's your right to send yourself to an early grave that I'd like you to reconsider.

I have had very good interactions with HP tech support on 4 of 5 occasions. The other occasion made me sound like a raving lunatic---I was really pi$$ed.

Driver problems can be difficult to diagnose, especially if your on the windows side of things. On the Mac, I have had no major driver issues, although during migration of my machine from one mac to another I lost the ability to use the printer diagnostics---I probably just need to reinstall from the CD. If you're having consistant problems with driver interactions, try to isolate to the driver (versus a combination of driver and software you're printing from), and get the problem to reproduce. If you go to technical support with clear information and they can repeat it---you may get the resolution you're looking for. However, it appears that at least some of your issues are unique to your system, and while it may be convenient to blame HP, they're not likely to be able to anticipate and solve every problem.

How long have you had the printer? Have you asked them to buy it back from you?

Jim

 

[BigPixel]

True Mark, but you have to start somewhere. Controlled independent lab testing seems a little more viable to me than either my or your 'guesstimates'.

As to high humidity, you ought to live in Hawaii brudda! I know PA gets a heavy dose in the summer but we have it year round. In fact, ambient humidity and 130 prints on PP paper was my only concern actually. But after a year I'd have to say its a non-issue.
--
BigPixel / Hawaii

 

[george37]

I too am considering large format printers and am quite confused by the lack of solid information or consistent opinion to refer to.

I have the HP 130 samples -- the glossy portrait looks fabulous, the satin studio shot pretty good but still some over-saturated areas and not quite super-detailed (ink spread?), and the tiger photo just plain bad (must have an Epson infiltrator working in the mail department, LOL).

What does HP expect the potential customer to make of these variable samples? If it were my company I'd be darn sure my promo dept was sending out top notch prints that reflected the machine's best capabilties.
Doesn't appear that HP is a truly well-managed operation.

Just my opinion. I'm going to wait a bit longer before deciding.

 

[colourgeek]

I have the HP 130 samples -- the glossy portrait looks fabulous,
the satin studio shot pretty good but still some over-saturated
areas and not quite super-detailed (ink spread?), and the tiger
photo just plain bad (must have an Epson infiltrator working in the
mail department, LOL).

I did laugh!
Now if I just repost this to HP> > > >
Hopefully some btter photographs are instore, including yours truly.

What does HP expect the potential customer to make of these
variable samples? If it were my company I'd be darn sure my promo
dept was sending out top notch prints that reflected the machine's
best capabilties.
Doesn't appear that HP is a truly well-managed operation.

Hmmm the truth is going to hurt some at HP.

Just my opinion. I'm going to wait a bit longer before deciding.

Luckily there is me doing a better job for free than anyone at HP , send me some images and I'll post you back some prints. That is exactly what they should do, and leave the cheetah in the jungle.

--
Neil Snape photographer Paris http://www.neilsnape.com

 

[Willem Wiersma]

Mark, thanks for the compliment but I thought I made it clear I included some comments of Neil Snape. I have never experimented with sprays and have no knowledge about it.

 

[ltrainer]

I've owned the 130 for 7 or 8 months. I thought I would chime in on this discussion and to other discussions on this forum concerning this printer. I've been more than pleased with my purchase. The quality of prints is outstanding as is its ease of use. Being as frugal on the wallet as it is, is an added bonus.

I print on HP premium plus satin and soft gloss exclusively. I didnt buy it to print on another media. I didnt buy it to print wider than 24 inch. The canned profiles are very good but I had custom profiles made as well. Depending on the image I will use the canned or the custom as each has it strengths. I may have another party do a custom profile as a comparison.

Most of my printing is color. The printer does good B&W but I find the metamerism on satin to be quite heavy. If you know the light source that the print will be viewed in then it will work. I use an Epson 2200 with a rip to do my b&w.

I use a homemade roll paper holder. I had trouble in the beginning getting the roll paper to load properly. I asked in the forum about the problem and got the answers I needed and now loading roll paper is easy. The tray has never been a problem with letter size sheets. The front maual feed is fine too.

The printer has never missed a beat even after sitting for several weeks..no clogs, no leaking heads, no banding etc.

I use Qimage with the 130. It works like a dream. I have no problems with layout, print orientation etc.

The quality of the prints is stunning. I currently have an exhibit and the gallery owner informed me that so many people are amazed that these are inkjet prints. Transitions are smooth, detail is good and the color reaches deep. I've made steps wedges and with the canned profile I can differentiate all the way up to 254, 254, 254 and in the shadows from 5,5,5 upwards. Pretty impressive.

I used customer service once when I first got it and they were very helpful and knowledgeable.

If I wasnt familiar with this printer, after reading some of the threads in here, I'm not sure I would buy it. So just thought I would throw my 2 cents worth into the mix.

I dont own stock in HP. ,nor any of my family, work or have ever worked for HP. I'm not a brand loyalist. I just like making great prints.

To add a little perpective(which is always a good thing to do once in a while), when I think back to 5 years ago, I would never have dreamed that I would own such great technology as the cameras, computers, printers, and software that I have and use now and which enriches my life as a photographer and artist.

Thanks

--
LT

 

[baladev]

You're right, but I've got a right to "rag" about this printer. If
it were a $200 item, I wouldn't care, but it's not..it's a $2000
device when you throw in the paper.
Also, what's really has set me off is simply the "corporate
culture" at HP (No, I never worked there !) and the attitude. Last
night I made 2 copies of a 23x36 image from PS7 using the roller
and again, there were problems. After the first image printed and
was cut, the printer was showing one of those stupid icons on the
LED again. So I ran downstairs to the studio (I use a network),
push the OK button and the next copy begins to print....no problem.
Then at the workstation that began the job the printer driver
indicates the first print job failed ! There were no jams, no paper
feed problems, nothing. The first print rendered perfectly.
So for these people to keep trying to ignore the fact there are
driver/firmware problems with this printer is pretty unforgiveable
in my book.

Mark, I agree with you partially.

I resell and repair s/h printers as my hobby. From my experience I can tell you that it's very rare when I come across a used DJ 10-20-70-100-110-120 that doesn't have some serious issues with it. They are actually quite rare on the s/h market, but the impression that I have is that they are not very strong mechanically. They also not build to be repaired on site, that's why if something goes wrong with your DJ, HP will replace it under warranty and not try to repair on site (unless it's a failed power supply or something obvious, like happened to me).

This is my biggest concern about my DJ - finicky construction. Epson printers are built much stronger and better and they last forever. I've come across many Epson 1520 or 3000 printers that are 10 years old and still work just fine. However, and this is big however for me, in Australia DJ 130 retails for ~$2600, Epson 7600 ~$5400, Canon W6200 ~$5200. Combine this relatively low cost with the amazing quality output it produces and you get a real bargain.

I understand that when HP was designing this series of DJ printers their goal was to make a cheaper printer and it's obvious to any experienced printer - just look under the hood of it. It's also buggy and behaves irrationally. When HP tech came to me to replace the faulty power supply, he could not switch the printer on, when he finished! He told me that they will replace it. After half an hour I decided to give it a try, since I 'know' my unit well by now with all his weird personality ;-). After 3 or 4 tries I managed to turn it on and it was working just fine. I learned that when my DJ doesn't want to turn on, I need to unplug the power cord from the back, plug it back in a minute or two and then press the power button.

To sum up. Yes, my DJ130 has a finicky construction and behaves irrationally sometimes, and it gave me a bloody fright when I came into my office that night and felt the smell of melting plastic (when the fan on power supply fell and it started to overheat, since then I always turn the printer off, when I don't print on it for a week or so) but I've learnt what he likes and what he doesn't like and now I know how to approach him in order to get a great result. Maybe sounds to complicated, but it's not really for me - I don't mine 'some' challenges, and also understand that there is NO perfect printer (I also have two wide format Epson printers with their clogging heads, bad drivers and wasting huge amounts of ink (well, I actually stopped that by modifying the printer)). However, I can see how some people can be put off and go the Epson way instead. I DO NOT regret buying the printer, in fact, I absolutely love it for its great printing quality, low ink consumption (hardly wastes any ink), great driver (no overinking - easy to profile) and I want to see him around for a lot longer. For that very reason two days ago I paid $650 for three year extended warranty and this is the first time ever I bought an extended warranty for a printer.

 

[Mark simms]

Mark, I agree with you partially.

I resell and repair s/h printers as my hobby. From my experience I
can tell you that it's very rare when I come across a used DJ
10-20-70-100-110-120 that doesn't have some serious issues with it.
It's also buggy and behaves irrationally.

Thanks....at least now I know I am not going crazy. Those who have endorsed the printer appear to have NOT tried many of the "tricks" that I have which have obviously triggered many undocumented and illogical "surprises".

Nonetheless I stand my ground that HP can do much, much better in testing their own machines, in documenting them, and finally in supporting them after-the-fact.

 

[BigPixel]

Baladev & Mark.

This is good information to share. I will take Baladev's experience as factual as I don't delve into printer repair myself.

But for me the equation is different from a hobbyist's point of view and so I can feel your pain. I print for a living. My DJ130 paid for itself after a month. If it were to melt down tomorrow, I'd just buy another as I like it's output so well.

A part time printer or hobbyist is probably looking for something more substantial over time to justify his expense. So it goes.
--
BigPixel / Hawaii

 

[baladev]

I really hope that my post above would not give people impression that the DJ 130 is a bad printer! Probably the best way to describe this printer as temperamental. But for the money you pay for it you would expect that the manufacturer has taken some shortcuts in its design in order to bring the price down - I think it's obvious. Each printer has its own collection of issues and annoyances.

If I were you, BigPixel, I would instead get an extended warranty for the printer and if something happens to it, you will get it replaced next day. The closed loop calibration that this printer has will make sure that the replacement unit will print exactly as the original one and so all your profiles (if you use custom profiles) will still be usable. So far I've been impressed by warranty service from HP. Within 48 hours of me reporting the problem to them my printer was repaired.

Baladev & Mark.

This is good information to share. I will take Baladev's experience
as factual as I don't delve into printer repair myself.

But for me the equation is different from a hobbyist's point of
view and so I can feel your pain. I print for a living. My DJ130
paid for itself after a month. If it were to melt down tomorrow,
I'd just buy another as I like it's output so well.

A part time printer or hobbyist is probably looking for something
more substantial over time to justify his expense. So it goes.
--
BigPixel / Hawaii

 

[James Beaman112407]

After lurking here, and on other forums, and reading Neil Snape's enthusiastic reviiews, I bought a DJ-130NR. I've just spent a pleasant afternoon burning though a box of 11 x 17 print paper. The color quality is simply fantastic. Next I'll install the roll feed mechanism and move up to the next size of prints.

I have an aerial photography service, which was my excuse to buy the printer, as I have been having my large prints (24 x 36) done at a digital printing service. But my real motivation was to be able to print my personal work, which is my creative outlet. The printer is well on its way to paying for itself, as my clients love the prints. I've only had it up and running for about a week, but the first day I printed some shots as I went out the door to a meeting and garnered a couple more contracts for my aerials.

I find digital photography has accelerated my learning by providing the instant feedback on what I've done. Having the freedom to be able to output a large print at my workstation, and see the results and then make corrections or variations to the image immediately, has enormous value and satisfaction for me.

I'm sure the large format Epsons would be great, as that's what my printing service(s) all use, but the 130 came my way at a good price. Its always a balance between what one wants and what one can afford, but in this case I don't feel I've compromised for quality.

What a great printer! Thank you, Neil. Great website, btw.

--
James

 

[LVPG]

Been a really busy week and couldn't post all that often.

Just wanted to post that I appreciate all the input. Though I haven't made the purchase yet, the HP is back on the consideration table.

Thanks again.
--
Rick

We all know what it can't do. Show me what you can do with it.

 

[gary brook]

Hi all,

I still get a lot of benefit from reading through these DJ exchanges, despite having owned mine for 7 months. Like many, I was strongly influenced by Neil Snape's knowledge, assurances and outright enthusiasm for the DJ series printers. It turns out he was right to be as positive as he has always been even though I have to admit I was rather cynical about his posts at first. I truly hope HP know how much he has done for their product and its reputation around the world through posts made here.

I use Epson 1270, 2100 and R800 printers for years, and suffered their blockages, ink costs and high ink usage rates like many others did. The R800 is still here but only because I need a CD printer (and I don't think the 9180 will print CDs - aghhhh!). I also now have a Photosoamrt 7960 so i could test the HP gray inks. More about that later. The DJ130 has been absolutely wonderful. I've calibrated it to use PPP Satin and Gloss, as well as Hahnemuhle 308 Photo Rag (HPR) and a Canson Canvas. I build my own profiles using GM i1 Photo, a product that continues to improve with each software upgrade. The DJ130 sips ink, the HP papers are all I want in general purpose satin and gloss finishes and I have found the driver and diagnostic software to be excellent and trouble free (PC).

The lack of water resistance is an issue for me so I have bought in bulk quantities of PremierArt Print Shield. If I did large volumes of printing, it would be a major hassle. My volumes are fairly small so it's a only minor hassle that the print quality makes worthwhile. The spray provides the protection I need with two medium coats.

I am also an enthusiastic user of Qimage for my printing. It's the best money I ever spent on software and I sympathise with all the Mac users who can't get it to work on their machines. I use the colour management facilities it provides to print using my own profiles. I have found I get very neutral b&w prints with very little metamerism. In fact, I completed a series of tests of b&w prints using both the 7960 and the DJ130 with grayscale, sRGB and aRGB source files, variously using HP & custom profiles with application controlled or greyscale printer driver settings.

The long and short of this process was that I found that the aRGB source files, converted to b&w in Photoshop using Channel Mixer and printed in Quimage using my custom profiles produced the 'best' b&w prints on PPP Satin. I have to say I was surprised, but then again this may simply reflect the quality of the HP driver and the value of the closed loop calibration facility. Even the gray inks on the 7960 didn't produce the same level of shadow detail, although they too were very good, but their cost was always going to be too high for series work.

As far as adverse points are concerned, the printer struggles to feed the 308gsm HPR and the Canson Canvas. They are well above the recommended maximum thickness so I didn't expect any different a result anyway. The b&w on the HPR seems very good to me, although the density is clearly not in the same league as the HP PPP gloss or satin. Then again, the shadows haven't blocked up as they did with the Epson 2100. Quad Tone Rip certainly helps there for those willing to persist with the Epson. The latter canvas hasn't profiled very well either, so I will need to try another, perhaps the new HP I recall reading about somewhere here.

Lastly, I had a black ink head failure mid-print last week. The printer ejected the half finished 18"x24" print and flashed a warning on the control panel. I tried all the cleaning steps recommended in the owner's manual, both with water and then with windex, to no avail. Rang HP and had a case # issued and later the same day received a call from an Australian tech support member. I explained what I had done and he arranged for a new print head to be sent out. I installed it myself but it made no difference, so I began making arrangements for a technician to come out and for a loan printer (they offered).

Across this last weekend I turned the printer on to check the diagnsotics report to see what it said about the failure, and the printer went straight into a head alignment process. The printer then worked fine again so I recalibrated the colour for the HP papers and started printing. If anything, the colour prints are better than before (could just be my relief at getting it working again - I had a big job only half finished) and my existing profiles work just fine because of the closed loop calibration.

So, despite this failure I am still very much an enthusiastic owner. From what I have read of the problems of others, the head failure is something of a one-off. You are far more likely to encounter paper feed or roller marking problems, but even these seem to be less common in recent months. Overall, the quality is just terrific and the value for money in terms of both purchase price and running cost is better than any other 24" carriage printer currently available.

If, however, your print volume is high and you need the waterfastness without the hassle of spray coating, and your budget can afford it of course, the Epson 7800 is an obvious choice, possibly with ImagePrint and the Phatte Black feature, and is a big improvement on the 7600.

Good luck with your choice,

Gary Brook
Canberra

 

[RJ7]

I had a 130nr (and used Neil's profiles with good results). The reason I switched to the Epson 7800 was basically 2 reasons. I wanted good quality B&W and different media.

I tried various profiles and even a copy of ImagePrint (IP) for the HP 130, but B&W never came out well. I don't like glossy prints and that meant everything was on satin if I wanted archival quality.

With IP v6.1 and Phatte black, B&W with the 7800 is vastly superior to the HP130. I also like being able to print on heavier fine art type stock. And there are no marks on any paper from the 7800. I also do appreciate the water safe prints; I had several prints that were ruined by water (if you can believe it, someone sneezed on one print and messed it up---too funny).

And as for the blacks and dynamic range, I've now had a chance to reprint some common images and directly compare them. To my eyes, the 7800 has very similar blacks (again with Phatte black via IP) and the colors from the 7800 better match my monitor (greens were never quite right on the HP as compared to my monitor; now they're spot on).

The feature I miss most from the 130nr is not having a sheet feed drawer. The 7800 is basically a roll printer with only single sheet capability.

 

[enduser]

What a great post, Gary. I too am in Oz, (Melbourne) and have a DJ90 and I concurr with all your enthusiasm.

People sometimes point out the longevity issues, but with 80 years on gloss and satin from HP, and 30 years on Photo Matte, where's the problem?

The only remaining issue is water fastness. Well it always was with wet chemistry too, many a gloss print was ruined when rained on etc. I've not had an issue with water since I bought the unit last August and dozens and dozens of large matted and framed prints etc.

Which brings me to the supplies question.. I can't find anyone who has paper over the counter in Melbourne, it always has to be ordered and couriered, and then you have to be at your address waiting for the courier, at quite an extra cost, of course. Do you know of an over the counter supplier?

 

[Bob Walters]

I am also an enthusiastic user of Qimage for my printing.

I am enthusiastic about my new HP 130 as well as QImage; however, I'm not pleased with the apparent inability to print centered images.

My first few images came out off center and I thought I could simply review a couple of settings in Qimage and/or the HP driver and solve the problem. I eventually gave up and have been manually tweaking the margins in an attempt to shift things closer to center, but I long for the simple way my Epson printers seem to be able to do this with a click of the mouse.

A number of others complain of the same problem here and in the HP and QI Yahoo groups. Curiously, a handful of people claim they simply click on the option to center the image on the physical page and get perfect results.

However, others (like me) swear that doesn't work.

Printing in the center seems, to me, a simple and fundimantal task that any printer should be able to accomplish. I certainly don't know how to write driver software, but if my product couldn't center an image, I think I'd keep writing, resign my job, or kill myself. Is there no pride in workmanship anymore?

You have lots more experience with the 130 than I. Any suggestions?

Bob

--

 

[ltrainer]

WIth the 130 I just click on center the image (page formatting> page margins) in the qimage menu and never have a problem whether roll or cut sheets.

As a side note when I use 24" roll paper and print a 24x36 image, and I use custom> fit to page, I get a nice .2 inch border on all four sides.
--
LT