Printer dies, any suggestions

R

Richard Marks

Rexel
Local time
9:37 PM
Joined
Dec 27, 2006
Messages
852
Location
Sheffield UK
View My Gallery
Well my trusty Epsom 1290 looks like it has packed up after at least 6 years of hard work. Excepting the fact that its not pigment ink, I have got it working very nicely via a number of profiles.
I suppose I could repair it, but a lot has changed in 6 years.
reviews go on about how good the new 2880 is, but it looks like an expensive trip for ink usage (and no chance of 3rd party consumables).

I just wonder if anyone has any comparisons with the Hp9180 or canon 9500
I have found a number on the web, but always like to discus with fellow M8 users.

Oh and things are bad, my NOVA processor has sprung a leak so no darkroom either this weekend😡

Best wishes

Richard
 
unfortunately, printers are like digital cameras, getting cheaper and better all the time, and the only sensible thing is to sling it and buy a new one to take advantage of all the new stuff. Its a sorry comment on our consumer led society, I know, but what can you do....?

I just recently bought an Epson 1400, its a mid-price A3 printer that, using Epson inks and Premium Glossy photo paper, produces prints you just would not believe, rich, vibrant, sharp as a pin.
 
This one's a bit of a toughie: my favorite printer over the last three years, HP's 8750, was recently discontinued (I like mine so much I'm considering getting a second one as a backup...new ones are still floating around, though I'm also up for grabbing a nice used one). I've been cool on Epson for a while because of (1) issues with their permanent head design, and (2) their new 2880 utilizes smaller ink carts than the 2800...and i somehow doubt there will be a reflection of this difference in price. The HP B9180 is good in terms of color, but proceed with caution with b/w: using the black/grey inks only can apparently result in fairly obvious bronzing/gloss differential with certain glossy/satin papers and profiles (a general problem with pigment inks that hasn't disappeared just yet, which is another reason I've stuck with my 8750). Canon might be worth checking out, though I haven't much experience with their printers.


- Barrett
 
Have not used Canon printers for a few years because their non-pigment inks faded miserably, dramatic fading in just 6 months, even on prints kept in the dark. They had good phone support, and the new products might be better, esp. the ones that use pigment inks
 
Many thanks
Quite a few good vibes about the 1900 Epsom. According to them its not as good for black and white, but the changing the blacks cartridge thing sounds like a pain.

Richard
 
I bought a nice Epson 2000P used for $75. The store didn't want to get new cartridges for it. Found some third party cartridges and purged it out. Then went to inksupply.com and got the CFS cartridge, since I had inks left from when my 1280 died. Got it all running again for hextone black and white. Very nice on Ilfords baryta paper with a spray varnish for the bronzing, but I have been searching for that "double weight glassy dried matte" look from the black and white inkjet. This is very close in my opionion. It's slower than my 1400, but the inks are cheap and the quality is excellent.

So I would recommend searching the used Epson if you can find a good buy. There are more ink options especially from inksupply.com who I recommend.
 
The HP dye based printers give superb b&w results if that is a factor to you. In Epson you have to shell out for R2400+ to get these results. HP color is good too. (I am currently using HP 8750).
 
Thank you one and all. Is the new HP an improvement on the 8750? I am attracted to the fact that Hp do not need to change the black cartridge from mat to gloss media, also cartridge sizes are 2x Epsom, but do they really cut it compared to a 2880 Epsom?

Richard
 
Yeah, all the HP printers that take the gray cartridge are excellent... the heads go with the cartridges so it isn't so model dependant as Epson... and if you ever dealt with Epson clogs you will aprreciate that worsecase HP you just chuck your carts. (I live is Arizona... and Epsons hate dry climates... head clogs from hell!) It should be noted that to get the super high Wilhelm archival numbers you have to use HP Premium Plus papers, but the Satin is very beautiful IMO, so this just simplified my life... with Epson pigments you get to play with endless paper choices (HP looks like "real photo" papers though).
 
mh2000 said:
Yeah, all the HP printers that take the gray cartridge are excellent... the heads go with the cartridges so it isn't so model dependant as Epson... and if you ever dealt with Epson clogs you will aprreciate that worsecase HP you just chuck your carts. (I live is Arizona... and Epsons hate dry climates... head clogs from hell!) It should be noted that to get the super high Wilhelm archival numbers you have to use HP Premium Plus papers, but the Satin is very beautiful IMO, so this just simplified my life... with Epson pigments you get to play with endless paper choices (HP looks like "real photo" papers though).
Click to expand...

Epsom insist that they have solved the head clogging with the latest range, and the UK has little in common with Arizona's climate, but I do like the thought of the removeable print heads.

The only other thought which is probably overkill is Epsom are offering a £150 loyalty voucher to purchaseres of the 3800 if pre existing epsom owners. This becomes almost within reach, but I really do not want to print above A3+ very often. The attraction would be lower running costs.

Many thanks

Richard
 
I've been using canon 9500 for about 6 months and like it alot. The config i use is:
-Mac OS X 10.5
-Canon CUPS drivers
-Ilford Gallerie papers with printer profiles downloaded from ilford.com (really awesome - saves a bunch of work)

Print quality is great.

J
 
Richard Marks said:
Thank you one and all. Is the new HP an improvement on the 8750? I am attracted to the fact that Hp do not need to change the black cartridge from mat to gloss media, also cartridge sizes are 2x Epsom, but do they really cut it compared to a 2880 Epsom?

Richard
Click to expand...
It's six-of-one, half-dozen-of-t'other. The 8750 excels in both black-and-white and color printing because it used archival dye-based inks (no, that is not an oxymoron, at least if you're using HP's papers), which, unlike pigment-based inks, do not suffer issues such as bronzing, gloss differential or metamerism. The one fly in the ointment here is that, while this combination is about as lightfast as printers using pigs, it isn't as waterfast. That's a trade-off I can deal with.

As far as comparing, say, an Epson 2880 versus an HP B9180, I'd take the HP, in spite of a few misgivings: the Epson is potentially better at b/w because of its ABW profile mode, allowing one to print with only the black/grey inks, of which there are three, whereas with the HP, while there are also three black/grey inks, only two of them are used at any given time, since one of the black inks is formulated for matte paper, while the other is for glossy/satin papers, and are in the printer full-time. (The Epson 2880, contrary to what I previously thought, still makes you swap black carts if you want to switch from glossy to matte or vice-versa...ugh). Printing on the B9180 with only black/grey inks is potentially problematic unless you choose your paper carefully. The more reliable way to b/w with this printer is via "composite" mode: essentially, printing with all colors in use. The results, according to those who've worked with the printer, are quite dead-nuts neutral, but I can't corroborate this directly. Total cost of ownership, I feel, is solidly in HP's favor.

Richard Marks said:
Epsom insist that they have solved the head clogging with the latest range, and the UK has little in common with Arizona's climate, but I do like the thought of the removeable print heads.
Click to expand...
That's what they said about the 2200 when I bought it...

The only other thought which is probably overkill is Epsom are offering a £150 loyalty voucher to purchaseres of the 3800 if pre existing epsom owners. This becomes almost within reach, but I really do not want to print above A3+ very often. The attraction would be lower running costs.
Click to expand...
The 3800 is the lowest-end Epson I still have some respect for. If you can possibly stretch to one of those, I think you'd like it.


- Barrett
 
Last edited:
I use a Canon iPF5100, which is a 12 ink pigment printer. The large cartidges are expensive, but they last a very long time. It is great printer, with one exception. The exception applies to all pigment ink printers. They can't make great glossy prints because of gloss differential. Even Pictorico White Film Paper is not really glossy after going through a 5100. My old Canon iP4200 ($ 75) makes gives a better gloss. I know they say dye inks fade. But I have not experienced that. I wish I had simply bought a Canon iP9000.
 
I'm not entirely certain Barrett is correct regarding the HP only using two inks for b&w printing, not that it really matters how they get the results they get with them. Side by side with a P3800 I still prefer 8750 prints in general, they just have a deeper depth of tonality IMO, the Epson pigments come into their own when you print them on fineart rag papers, but then it is kind of a different medium than traditional photography IMO... though I appreciate both. The ink cartridges for the P3800 are huge and expensive and have to be replaced rather often... so if you aren't making hundreds of prints the ink cost will be very high, if you are making hundreds and hundreds of prints the P3800 will save you a lot of mony.
 
mh2000 said:
I'm not entirely certain Barrett is correct regarding the HP only using two inks for b&w printing, not that it really matters how they get the results they get with them. Side by side with a P3800 I still prefer 8750 prints in general, they just have a deeper depth of tonality IMO, the Epson pigments come into their own when you print them on fineart rag papers, but then it is kind of a different medium than traditional photography IMO... though I appreciate both. The ink cartridges for the P3800 are huge and expensive and have to be replaced rather often... so if you aren't making hundreds of prints the ink cost will be very high, if you are making hundreds and hundreds of prints the P3800 will save you a lot of mony.
Click to expand...
Whoops...I need to clarify: the HP 8750 uses ALL three black/grey inks at once, with any paper type, and is the only 13x19" HP printer that does this. By contrast, the HP B9180 (and somewhat-cheaper B8850) use only two, since the gloss-black and matte-black inks are loaded at the same time; HP did this to obviate the need to swap ink carts when you want to switch from gloss/semi-gloss paper to matte (and vice-versa). The downside of this is that you get only one black and one grey channel to use at the same time. If only they'd put in one more ink cart...but, hey, maybe the next time 'round?

The 8750, according to HP's manual, doesn't care if you you use HP Premium Plus Glossy or Satin, or matte papers like William Turner (haven't tried the latter...I'm just reading what they're saying, guys). But, frankly, I've been so bowled-over with the results with Glossy and Satin (All my exhibition prints were made with PP Satin) that I don't care about matte. I've long felt that "fine-art" digital printers have claimed to "prefer" matte because that's the only finish that prints decently without the "artist" going postal. Intercourse that, I say. 🙂


- Barrett
 
i'm hoping hp will make a 17'' desktop printer to compete with the epson 3800. gloss enhancer and built-in spectrophotometer, anyone?
 
amateriat said:
It's six-of-one, half-dozen-of-t'other. The 8750 excels in both black-and-white and color printing because it used archival dye-based inks (no, that is not an oxymoron, at least if you're using HP's papers), which, unlike pigment-based inks, do not suffer issues such as bronzing, gloss differential or metamerism. THe one fly in the ointment here is that, while this combination is about as lightfast as printers using pigs, it isn't as waterfast. That's a trade-off I can deal with.

As far as comparing, say, an Epson 2880 versus an HP B9180, I'd take the HP, in spite of a few misgivings: the Epson is potentially better at b/w because of its ABW profile mode, allowing one to print with only the black/grey inks, of which there are three, whereas with the HP, while there are also three black/grey inks, only two of them are used at any given time, since one of the black inks is formulated for matte paper, while the other is for glossy/satin papers, and are in the printer full-time. (The Epson 2880, contrary to what I previously thought, still makes you swap black carts if you want to switch from glossy to matte or vice-versa...ugh). Printing on the B9180 with only black/grey inks is potentially problematic unless you choose your paper carefully. The more reliable way to b/w with this printer is via "composite" mode: essentially, printing with all colors in use. The results, according to those who've worked with the printer, is quite dead-nuts neutral, but I can't corroborate this directly.Total cost of ownership, I feel, is solidly in HP's favor.


That's what they said about the 2200 when I bought it...

The 3800 is the lowest-end Epson I still have some respect for. If you can possibly stretch to one of those, I think you'd like it.


- Barrett
Click to expand...
Hugely helpful Barret and others
I am very tempted to go with HP. I even wonder of its worth looking about for an 8750 if there are any around. The black and white issue is certainly a factor for me. The attraction of "pigment based" is I suppose for selling prints, but clearly i do not like the sound of bronzing etc. Thats not all that saleable either. I am certainly not personally that worried about print longevity for personnal images. we may well have blown the plannet up severaltimes before these fade any way!

Best wishes

Richard
 
Richard: the 8750's output has been rated by Henry Wilhelm Labs as being archivally stable in excess of 100 years (black-and-white prints using only the black/grey inks tested in excess of 110 years). This is, of course, using the standard HP Vivera inkset and Epson Premium and Premium Plus papers, though this level of stability might be achievable with certain other high-quality, swellable-surface papers.

Last time I checked (about thee weeks ago), I saw some NIB 8750s on the 'Bay, so they're still out there. Someone had a lightly-used one locally on Craigslist (with extra carts!) for about $150, but I think I missed that one by a whisker. Would've been a perfect backup, even though my current 8750's been running trouble-free since taking it out of the box.


- Barrett
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

J
  • Article Article
My Bout With Bronicas: One man's adventures in the mysterious Land of Zenza
2 3 4
Replies
74
Views
14K
wes loder
wes loder
C
Leica M4-P vs. Canon 7
Replies
6
Views
4K
Nokton48
Nokton48
Back
Top Bottom