Epson Ink Formulas

[dazedgonebye]

Some time ago, I had use of an Epson printer. I made digital negatives with it by printing on transparency paper. I cannot remember the model number of the printer, but I think it was a 2200.
I now have an R1800. It uses a different kind of ink. I have been unable to get good digital negatives with the R1800.

I'd like now to get another printer to make digital negatives, and I have to be sure I'm getting the type of ink the 2200 model used, instead of the type the R1800 uses.

Anyone know enough about Epson inks to be able to advise me on this?

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

The 2200 used the first generation Ultrachrome inks. The R1800 used Ultrachrome inks too, but they were reformulated to give longer life and a wider color gamut. The 1800 also uses different ink colors than the 2200 and most others. The 2200 used black, light black, cyan, Lt cyan, Magenta, Lt magenta, and yellow. The 1800 used no light black and added a red if I remember right. It was made more for color printing than black and white since the R2400, made alongside the R1800, used 3 black inks and was made for best BW printing.

Are you sure you used a 2200 though? The Ultrachrome inks are a pigment ink, and I had always read that dye inks worked better for making digital negs so most people used the Epson 1280 or some other model that used dye based inks.

 

[dazedgonebye]

The 2200 used the first generation Ultrachrome inks. The R1800 used Ultrachrome inks too, but they were reformulated to give longer life and a wider color gamut. The 1800 also uses different ink colors than the 2200 and most others. The 2200 used black, light black, cyan, Lt cyan, Magenta, Lt magenta, and yellow. The 1800 used no light black and added a red if I remember right. It was made more for color printing than black and white since the R2400, made alongside the R1800, used 3 black inks and was made for best BW printing.

Are you sure you used a 2200 though? The Ultrachrome inks are a pigment ink, and I had always read that dye inks worked better for making digital negs so most people used the Epson 1280 or some other model that used dye based inks.

I'm not absolutely sure about the model number I used (I need to check with the guy I borrowed it from). I am sure it was something in the 2000 series.

 

[shadowfox]

I now have an R1800. It uses a different kind of ink. I have been unable to get good digital negatives with the R1800.

In what way does it not print a good digital negative, does it smear?

 

[dazedgonebye]

In what way does it not print a good digital negative, does it smear?

It doesn't smear. I just don't think it blocks UV the way the older inks did. The negatives go from too contrasty to too dense with no in-between.
I use the ChartThrob program to create an exposure gradient page and I can see that the dynamic range is nowhere near as good as with the older inks.

Now I've gone to using 3mk carbon only inks for my black and white printing and they are not compatible with anything glossy, such as OHP. So, I really need a second printer.

 

[shadowfox]

It doesn't smear. I just don't think it blocks UV the way the older inks did. The negatives go from too contrasty to too dense with no in-between.
I use the ChartThrob program to create an exposure gradient page and I can see that the dynamic range is nowhere near as good as with the older inks.

Now I've gone to using 3mk carbon only inks for my black and white printing and they are not compatible with anything glossy, such as OHP. So, I really need a second printer.

Have you considered the 1400 with another yet newer Claria ink? on a related note, I'm about to try my first digital negative on an old R340 "consumer" grade Epson.

 

[dazedgonebye]

Have you considered the 1400 with another yet newer Claria ink? on a related note, I'm about to try my first digital negative on an old R340 "consumer" grade Epson.

I need to find someone with experience using any printer before I put money in to it. I'd hate to buy then find out it sucks for digital negatives.

I've gotten workable results from very cheap printers. Just about anything will work and you can make negatives from cheap overhead transparencies. (Don't know anything about that printer.)

 

[Margery]

Glad to find this exchange. I am going to try dig neg on OHP, using the Epson R260. Advice on settings? Does the use of dye-based ink require making colorized negs a la Burkholder? On another line: Has anyone tried making dig negs with QTR?
I found directions for Chartthrob hard to follow. Any hints?

 

[shadowfox]

Margery, I found out that there is nothing that beats a little bit of experimenting yourself. Because only you know how much contrast to detail ratio that you like for a particular image.

As I said above, I use R340 for my first digital negative tryout. Applied Mr. Burkholder's curve on an adjustment layer, and set the opacity of that layer to about 70% just because at 100% the negative looks too murky.

 

[Margery]

thanks

thanks

Thanks for your response, Will.
I re-read the Chartthrob instructions and might try it. Has anyone here had experience with this approach to making digital negs?

 

[dazedgonebye]

Thanks for your response, Will.
I re-read the Chartthrob instructions and might try it. Has anyone here had experience with this approach to making digital negs?

Chartthrob works like a charm. It gets you very close on the first try.