HP or Epson, Aperture or Lightroom, Calibration?

jsrockit

jsrockit

Moderator
Staff member
Local time
7:12 PM
Joined
Nov 5, 2009
Messages
22,662
Location
Santiago, Chile
View My Gallery
Hi all.

Just getting back into serious photography after about 10 years away. My current equipment is a Leica M8, a Ricoh GRD, and a Macbook Pro. I would like to print B&W and Color and would like results that would make a person who is used to wet darkroom results (C-prints, B&W, and Cibachrome) happy.

That said... I have a few questions.

It seems the Epson 3880 is the standard right now for home printing. How are the HP printers? Also, can I get away with a R2880? The 3880 is a little more than I want to spend right now since I have other things going on in my life. I could, but I don't want to.

What's a good paper to start with? I'm more of a matte / semi-gloss person... I hate really glossy photos.

Aperture 2 or Lightroom? What are the advantages of one over the other? Any glaring issues with either?

I need to calibrate my Macbook Pro screen. I know this isn't an ideal screen to use, but its what I have for now. What is the cheapest way to calibrate this as close to correct as possible?

Thanks for your time and effort.
 
Last edited:
Buy a 3800 refurbished from Epson if they have them in stock.

Get some Ilford Galerie Gold Fibre Silk, Fine Art Inkjet Paper.

No opinion on Aperture vs Lightroom, I scan film so I use Photoshop for editing and iView Media pro for asset management.

Try the eye-one display LT for calibration.
 
The refurbished 3800 is still about $450 more than the 2880 is right now with the $200 rebate. I just don't want to spend $900-1250 for a printer yet. Is the R2880 that bad?
 
Don't know anything about the 2880, just know that I printed a gallery show on the 3800 and my graphic designer friends were very impressed with the print quality. Also the 3800 does 17 inch wide prints which I needed. I'm sure the 2880 is similarly good. The 3800 really feels like a professional quality machine and I haven't had any of the problems that I was constantly contending with on an old Epson 1280.
 
The only reason to buy the 3880 is if you want to make prints larger than 13" in the wide dimension. Print quality should be reasonably identical, they're just made for different sizes. The 3880 may be able to take more wacky types of paper, and I don't think you have to swap out the matte and photo blacks when switching papers.

Buy what you can afford, cameras and lenses are better investments. 🙂
 
sper said:
The only reason to buy the 3880 is if you want to make prints larger than 13" in the wide dimension. Print quality should be reasonably identical, they're just made for different sizes. The 3880 may be able to take more wacky types of paper, and I don't think you have to swap out the matte and photo blacks when switching papers.

Buy what you can afford, cameras and lenses are better investments. 🙂
Click to expand...

I see... I was hoping size would be the only difference. I don't need huge prints these days. I enjoy small prints just as much as large ones. I can afford the 3880, but don't feel like spending the cash to be honest. I have other things I'm into as well besides photo.
 
-R2880 is a good (smart) printer, and your prints can be fantastic, with very little messing around (just limited in size)
-Epson Exhibition fibre paper is amazing
-I have lightroom and aperture, and prefer lightroom as it bogs down a tiny bit less on my 2 year old Macbook Pro... But to be honest, I only really use it for management of RAW files. A grease pencil and a contact sheet cut down the amount of scanned files I have floating around. Try a 30 day trial of lightroom from Adobe before you buy it... Or any adobe program for that matter.

-calibration is the most important thing I'd say. You can even go so far to calibrate your printer to your monitor, which I've done, however the new Epson's are so good it's hardly necessary unless your seriously seriously picky. If you live near a major city you might be able to rent a calibrator.
 
I would suggest that you get the 3880 instead of 2880. If you factor the cost of ink into the equation, 3880 is not that much more expensive than the 2880. In Hong Kong, the ink cartridge for 3880 (80 ml) goes for HK$450, while the cartridge for 2880 (14 ml) goes for HK$100. In the long run, the 3880 is a lot cheaper to operate.
 
andrewch said:
I would suggest that you get the 3880 instead of 2880. If you factor the cost of ink into the equation, 3880 is not that much more expensive than the 2880. In Hong Kong, the ink cartridge for 3880 (80 ml) goes for HK$450, while the cartridge for 2880 (14 ml) goes for HK$100. In the long run, the 3880 is a lot cheaper to operate.
Click to expand...

I'm not going to print that large and like the smaller / cheaper ink carts. When I'm feeling broke, I can still afford the carts for the 2880... possibly not the 3880. I just don't need the 3880. Unless someone comes up with a reason with regards to its output quality, I will buy the 2880 for $539 after rebate very soon.
 
Think I've decided to go for a HP B8850 for $399. I've read too many horror stories with the R2880 and am not ready to go for a 3880. Any reason to avoid the B8850?
 
Last edited:
I use Lightroom for managing all my photographs on a MacBook Pro 15".
I started with Nikon DSLR and went over to film after that.

Lightroom allows for 90% of my image processing before print, web or share. the rest is done in photoshop.
I love, how easy Lr makes archiving, key wording, finding, sorting, processing and output.

I suppose, Aperture would be similar, but decided for Lr after testing both trials in the beginning.
Lr seemed quicker and more logical back then for me.

Recently, I bought a 30% discounted Canon Pixma 9500 Pro (old model, not MKII) for 380,- EUR new with 2 year warranty.
The cheap Chinese glossy paper B&W prints have blown me away.

I am waiting for a bigger batch of EPSON photo semigloss 10mil 13x19 paper and similar Redriver paper.

I don't like gloss either. I bet the Canon 9500 will bring me great output after what I have seen on the cheap paper.

The Canon 9500 MKII is very often staged against the EPSON 3880 as the best buy within a lower budget (usually around 550,- to 650,- EUR).

Make sure, to have a good look at this printer too.

Be careful with with any demo model or second hand printer and the pricing!
With amateur or semi pro printers, the supplied ink with a new printer takes a substantial part in the initial price.

Buying a discounted used printer with half empty tanks at 60% of the price is often not considered a better deal than buying new, especially with more expensive pigment inks.
 
Can you scan directly into Lightroom using a TWAIN driver like you can with Photoshop? Or do you use separate scanning software and then bring the result into Lightroom?

Basically the twain driver lets me access the Epson Scanning software from the Import menu of Photoshop which saves a step.

menos said:
I use Lightroom for managing all my photographs on a MacBook Pro 15".
I started with Nikon DSLR and went over to film after that.

Lightroom allows for 90% of my image processing before print, web or share. the rest is done in photoshop.
I love, how easy Lr makes archiving, key wording, finding, sorting, processing and output.
Click to expand...
 
Aperture has a significantly better library organization and keywording structure. Personally I prefer it in every way to lightroom, EXCEPT that it has worse raw conversions (compared to lightroom 3 Beta, not 2.5) and it's slower.

As such, I use lightroom 3b but want to use an improved aperture. It's rumored to be out soon.
 
nightfly said:
Can you scan directly into Lightroom using a TWAIN driver like you can with Photoshop? Or do you use separate scanning software and then bring the result into Lightroom?

Basically the twain driver lets me access the Epson Scanning software from the Import menu of Photoshop which saves a step.
Click to expand...

I would love to see this integrated into a future Lr version.
I am forced, to use an external scan software and the treat the scan files like my digital files and import them into Lr.


I think Aperture vs Lr is very similar to the Mac vs PC or Nikon vs Canon debate.

I guess, they are both very capable packages of what they can do with other more specialized software around for a better quality data output than either is capable.

When people ask, I always tell them to try both in their respective trial periods and make a decision based on that. I personally work with Lr and would be hard pressed, to think about trying Aperture again, as I am very fluent now in processing with Lr with shortcuts and a comfortable workflow.

Very well could I have landed with Aperture as well back then.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom