HP 8750 depth

[wintoid]

I considered the 9180 carefully before choosing the 8750. There were a few horror stories on the net about the "NEDD" which rather put me off. In the end, as I am an infrequent printer, I fancied the 8750 because the carts contain the head built in as Barrett points out, and because dye inks clog less supposedly.

If I'd known about the drying, I might have gone for the 9180, but it sounds like I'm going to get a satisfactory result in the end, which is what matters.

Incidentally, I went for the "GP" version of the 8750 (there's a 9180GP as well) which came with an Eye One Display 2 calibration device. Very nice!

 

[amateriat]

I considered the 9180 carefully before choosing the 8750. There were a few horror stories on the net about the "NEDD" which rather put me off. In the end, as I am an infrequent printer, I fancied the 8750 because the carts contain the head built in as Barrett points out, and because dye inks clog less supposedly.

Yeah, the NEDD thing sounded a bit scary, although HP seemed to make good on replacing the heads on request without a hassle. The main things that bothered me about the B9180 were (1) HP's decision to utilize only two black/grey inks that could be used simultaneously, instead of three as with the 8750 (they sacrificed the third for the sake of having both gloss- and matte-compatible black inks loaded at the same time; I'd have put up with the hassle of swapping carts when switching paper types in order to have three full-time black/grey carts), (2) the fact that the carts, which feed the heads via hoses a la the big-boy HPs and Epsons, are stationary; if you print infrequently you'll discover that pigment inks sitting around will actually "settle", and the carts will need to be pulled and shaken periodically...I sometimes wonder if this could be responsible for at least some of the above-mentioned problems people had with print heads testing bad prematurely), and (3) I'd taken a quick look at b/w prints made with just the two black/grey inks, and, to be gentle, they weren't pretty; for decent output, you pretty much have to print in "composite" mode, using all eight inks.

Incidentally, I went for the "GP" version of the 8750 (there's a 9180GP as well) which came with an Eye One Display 2 calibration device. Very nice!

Damn...missed that one! But I went and got a Spyder 2 Pro. (Edit: Methinks that offer was only on that side of the Pond.)

Trust me on tthe matter of giving those prints adequate dry time. The final look is absolutely worth it, IMO.


- Barrett

 

[wintoid]

I sprayed a couple of 1 hour old prints with Ghiant tonight and there was no bleed. They're not watertight at all though, although they don't smudge with a dry finger.

I think I will trust you Barrett and let some prints dry for a week or so. Incidentally, is there any reason they shouldn't dry in a plastic sleeve (e.g. airflow?). Leaving them lying around is a risk, to an extent.

 

[amateriat]

wintoid: I wouldn't place freshly-made prints into a sleeve right away. In order to protect the prints while drying, I place them in a semi-open archival box (I mighe cut a few holes/slits in the sides to facilitate faster drying). In the case of HP's own Premium/Premium Plus papers, the back of the paper is designed to facilitate safely stacking prints with little chance of surface damage. I've stacked as many as 8-10 prints at a time with no adverse effects. There might be a difference with Ilford's papers, however.

(In fact, I need to print a portfolio of my mother's paintings and drawings to present to my sister when I'm in Florida this weekend. I archived virtually every work of hers shortly after her death (we had planned this beforehand, but there was too much going on at the time, including tending to her illness), and I literally have a day or two to get this done, meaning stacks of 8 x 10" prints drying in my compact atélier. My workspace is sort of like my fair City: you can't build out, so you build up.)


- Barrett