Is anybody still using Piezography? I used it years ago and then moved on to Epson k3 inks with the quadtone rip. At this time I don't have a printer but will start up again in Jan 17. Not sure whether to get an Epson P800 with the quadtone rip or a 3880 and put Jon Cone's inks in. All I do is black and white. I've read a lot of the threads but still can't make up my mind. Has Espon/quadtone equaled piezography yet?
Cirrus,
I own an Epson 3880 and a 7800. Both are rigged for Piezography using the Quadtone RIP and Print Tool because I use a Mac.
My friend John has the P600 and the word out on that printer is that Epson has increased the pump pressure and the P600 and P800 are great printers that are not prone to clogging. I know that Jon Cone is a stubborn man and there were difficulties in circumventing using non OEM inks. I believe JC figured out a workaround recently.
Vince, a photographer I deeply respect, says that he can see no difference between a Piezography print and one made with OEM K7 inks. I have seen impressive prints that I would agree are the equal to Piezography. Basically I would agree with Vince, but I do see some advantages if you are a dedicated B&W printer.
First off around 13x19 Epson OEM and Piezography will have around the same IQ, but say you are going to print crazy big, call it Salgado envey, and you print say 20x30 on 24x36. I doubt Epson OEM will scale up as good. I shoot a Monochrom which is an amazing camera, and I would be bold enough to say I'm getting in the range of near large format on some perfect files where everything was perfect.
If you do glossy like I do there is a huge advantage of durability. I had a Symposium at ICP where I allowed a dozen people to handle my prints. I can drool on my prints and wipe off my spit and the print is not damaged. I can stack my prints in archival boxes and feel they are safely stored. The Gloss Overcoat that gets printed effectively protects your prints, and they are not delicate like a regular inkjet print. My friend Joe makes a good point though, "I can always print another one," he says.
Piezography is carbon based inks, and I would expect any color inks to change over time and offer less permanance. To me Piezography is more archival since there are no color pigments and carbon is the most archival pigment.
I would not amplify the cost savings. While Piezography inks are a lot less expensive I do think that Piezography likely uses more ink per print so any cost savings kinda gets consumed. The tonality and detail have to come from somewhere.
Because I own a Monochrom I will share two observations; One is with Piezography there is more shadow detail than can be revealed on my 27 inch calibrated EIZO that I purposely dimmed down to only 80 Lux to kill the contrast and kinda resemble the amount of light reflected off ink and paper. Know that I darken the room, and I use a viewing hood. It was an epiphany that I can print more than I can see on the Eizo. Know that you can print what you can't see.
Secondly because of the Monochrom I found that the 3880 was too small a printer to exploit the full potential of the Monochrom.
Another difficulty I experienced with the 3880 was "pizzawheeling" when I tried Canson Platine Fibre which is a paper I favor. It seems the paper transport creates a very bad artifact with Canson papers. Also know that Canson paper reveals to me the most detail, but they are extremely thirsty so not only do you consume mucho ink, one also has to perform two Gloss Overcoats so effectively one is printing the same print three times. On a 20x30 on 24x36 (using my 7800) it is 41 minutes for laying down the seven shades of black, then two times 45 minutes for the two coats of GO.
The 7800 uses a vacuum for a paper transport and is superior. There is no pizzawheeling.
Anyways the Piezography I think is the premium product, but in my case to exploit the great Monochrom files the costs are high. I shot the Monochrome for two years without any regard to printing. I first bought the 3880 ($1000.00 with a $250.00 rebate); $2.3 for a 27 inch EIZO; and $3.2K worth of paper and ink to bulk up on supplies that quickly got depleted. Funny thing is that I bought the 7800 for only $100.00. LOL.
Know that if I had a 9800 or 9880 I would print bigger (24x26 with borders instead of 20x30 with borders). My most common print size (standard size and for proofing) is 13x19.5 on 17x23 1/2 paper.
I believe it pays to go with the large format printers. Currently my 3880 is in storage mode loaded with Piezoflush. One day I will load it with a Selenium inkset and use my 7800 for the application of GO to avoid the pizzawheeling with Canson papers. I created a warm neutral to selenium split-tone that is ideal for night shots. A three way split-tone: true black; warm shadows; and cool highlights. The prints are stunning. Best money I ever spent.
Cal
