The definition of insanity

[TheAnimus]

I think the R3000 has replaced the R2880, as it is 4 years old. So I'm out of date when it comes to proper comparisons.

However the black n white is brilliant, it uses 3 key cartridges, they have a different one for gloss and standard too, so I guess that means 4 cartridges but only 3 get used at any one time. It has a really nice ability to avoid colour cast as a result.

Downside is that having 3 black inks to buy doesn't really help the economy side of things, hence why I normally use a different printer!

[Saracen]

....

Most people slagging off lasers are comparing their output on 80 gsm office grade paper with inkjet 'photo' paper. Stick some 120 gsm premium coated in a midrange laser and you'll get consistently good results. We used to get loads of 110 gsm A4 silk coated from a backstreet litho printer at a knockdown price - much cheaper than official laser paper and worked just as well. On a good day yes an inkjet will be better, but most times inkjets are so flakey it isn't worth the hassle IMO to get that one good print in 50. Not when you can get very nearly as good every time off a midrange laser.

I don't know what most people are comparing, but I'm not. You might get consistently "good" results on a laser, but if you've getting 1 good print in 50 out of photo inkjets, you've been doing something wrong. As photography has been my hobby for, oh, nearly 50 years, and having been into digital imaging since the days when in meant two grand for a film scanner (intro level) and scanning your own film, since the days when Photoshop was a Mac-only product, and having owned the original 'photo' inkjet, not to mention the first colour inkjet, and having used, and reviewed, dozens and dozens of printers, I've got some experience.

Currently, I've got several lasers, A2 inkjets, A3 inkjets, A4 inkjets, and yes, dye-sub too. And even 3 or 4 old Alps microdry printers. And, I think, 3 film scanners, and about half a dozen flatbeds, including one for auto-feed and duplex (I.e. for a document msnagement system), and an A3 flatbed for larger jobs. And this is all at home, not in some office or commercial premises.

Oh, and I've spent time in factories and development offices for most manufacturers, talking to everyone from product managers and developers to CEOs. That would include Epson, HP, Lexmark, Canon and others. The cartridge manufacturing plants in Hapan were especially interesting.

Anyway, my point is I'm not exactly a neophyte.

Everyone is, of course, entitled to their opinion. Mine is that, for print quality, a good inkjet print from a good photo printer knocks the spots off any laser printer, available at consumer pricing, every time, for photos.

It is, of course, somewgat dependent on the expectations of the user. A "photo" that is a 4x6 snap, handed round in the works canteen, is likely to be subject to less demanding quality than a serious amateur printing for exhibition or competition, let alone a pro photographer producing "art" for corporate boardrooms or reception areas.

So it's somewhat in the eye of the beholder.

That said, I'm certainly not basing my view on printing on 80 gram letter-grade paper. I just want to make that clear.

[Saracen]

Out of interest how is black and white printing on the newer Epsons?? Can you get dedicated greyscale cartridges for them??

Varies. Some machines, like the 3880, it's excellent out of the box.

Quite a lot of others, you can achieve impressive results with the (optional, 3rd party) Quadtone RIP, and either Epson or a couple of 3rd-party mono inks.

Out of the box, most Epson photo inkjets can give reasonable results, given proper setup and profiling, and especially paper choice, but I'd put it at no better than reasonable.

All IMHO, of course, and by my standards.

[Barakka]

They say the definition of insanity is doing the same action again and again, whilst every-time expecting a different result.

To them, I give you the inkjet printhead. Where you wince, press the clean button, watch the ink cartridges level drop, and pray that you get a different result.

I really don't want to have to try and flush by hand an Epson R2880 (expensive!) printer.....

This drove me potty with my wife's Epson 1500 when using a CISS it had blockages I couldn't shift with head cleaning.

What I found out from the supplier of the CISS (all they do is ink and cartridges) was; Epson printers like others head clean by forcing ink through the nozzles, if you can't clear it after 2-3 cleans, stop, it won't clear by forcing more ink through as it's a "persistent blockage" and will make it worse. Instead use a water based nozzle cleaning solution with syringe, squirt 5 ml through each of the blocked nozzles and leave for 12-24 hours, do a nozzle check, one clean, and print a few pages. I was dubious but it was very simple and worked exactly as he stated.

I asked how I prevent blockages like this once it's fixed, he said the main thing is print a full page colour image at least once a week to keep the ink flowing through the nozzles. Also don't use the plain paper setting when printing images/pictures, even if it is plain paper, use the matt paper setting instead, apparently the plain paper setting is like an eco mode, and starves the nozzles of ink so it can contribute to blockages.

Hope this is of some use.

[MrRockliffe]

HP have the worst customer service I have EVER dealt with. My laptop that died 2 days out of warranty was now my problem according to HP, and they just hung up. I'll never buy anything HP again.

[Saracen]

HP have the worst customer service I have EVER dealt with. My laptop that died 2 days out of warranty was now my problem according to HP, and they just hung up. I'll never buy anything HP again.

If you bought direct from HP, then they are wrong, though what liability they have depends on the nature of the problem.

If you bought from a retailer, well, it's not HP's problem but either yours or the retailer's depending, again, on the nature of the problem.

In either case, the response you got, as described, absolutely sucks and is disgraceful. But, you may simply have been unlucky with the customer service rep. It may have been worth trying again, and getting someone else, or at the least, writing a letter of complaint.

Many years ago, I got jerked around by Dell over a desktop machine. Tech support gave me a right run-around. Eventually, I complained (direct, as it happened, to the UK MD who, IIRC, was at that time Martin Slagter) and you wouldn't believe the speed with which tech support decided to stop jerking me about and sort it. Full marks to Mr Slagter for .... erm .... motivating them.

And no, it shouldn't be necessary to resort to that, but sometimes, unless the boss knows there's an issue, they don't know they need to sort it. That letter, instead of me getting steamed at them, just got the problem resolved .... with, by the way, a replacement, and upgraded, machine.

[TheAnimus]

This drove me potty with my wife's Epson 1500 when using a CISS it had blockages I couldn't shift with head cleaning.

I had endless issues with the ink in my CISS that I had a few years ago. It was really, really cheap, but a lot of pain. However I think my entire printing costs for a year, including the cost of the CISS and the printer, came to about £60. Could not possibly have such cheap printing with anything else. But it clogged if you didn't print for a few days.

As for my r2880 it is fed nothing but the finest of vendor inks, as I only do photo printing on normally pricey paper too, I want the prints to last. This makes it quite expensive at times, but the cost of making a A3+ print is so low, compared to using an on-line service or similar, it doesn't matter too much.

I did 8 cleaning cycles in the end. 5 had visible improvement, the 6th didn't so I left it for 4 hours, cleaned again, good improvement, but not perfect, left 2 hours cleaned again and blam perfect.

I could have probably saved some money giving it say 3 cleans, then waiting a few hours.

[Saracen]

I think the CIS option isn't ideal for occasional users, but then, they probably wouldn't do enough printing to justify it anyway. And, of course, the CIS itself varies in quality, but most especially so does the ink used in it.

Another approach is a machine like the 3880. Make no mustake, thus is not a cheap machine, but it's designed for relatively heavy users. And the ink mathematics is different. I don't have the calculations for the 3880 but I did have (may still have, somewhere) for it's predecessor. Because the cartridge capacity is a LOT higher, the cost/ml of the ink was a lot lower.

I don't remember the exact calculations, but I had exhaustion test figures (*) for the 3880 and a "consumer" A3 printer, which I think was the 2880, but wouldn't swear to it. The result was, erm, eye-opening. See below.

Anyway, it's an alternative to the CIS route, but not much help as you've already got the 2880.



(*) Pick a balanced print to use, load a set of brand new cartridges, print repeatedly until cartridges are exhausted, as determined by visible or measurable effects on the print. Measurement, in my case, was of colour test samples on the print with an XRite colour densitometer.

Then, repeat for the other printer.

You now know how many pages you get from a full set of cartridges, for each machine. As you know the cost of the cartridges, you have the cost per page of the ink.

It's then simple maths to work out how many prints you need to make to repay the difference in capital cost between printers.

Naturally, it's quite expensive to do, because it's a full set of cartridges for each machine, plus paper (which doesn't all need to be high quality), but fortunately, I wasn't paying for the inks, and was being paid to work up a report on the printers prior to a client buying a load of them. It wasn't just about ink cost, either, but that was a major factor.

Anyway, the upshot, IIRC, was that if you printed something like 1 or 2 A3 prints per week, you'd recovered the difference in cost in about a year. I was quite shocked at that. If I was buying today, and considering a 2880 class of machine, I'd be looking VERY hard at the 3880 instead. I'd be wondering, if I'm not doing 50 prints a year, do I need a 2880? If I am, why not pay the extra and go 3880?

Not that this helps you much, TA, and it WAS a while ago that I did it, so don't take these figures as exact. But they're in the ball-park.

[TheAnimus]

When I used a CIS I was doing a large amount of printing which wasn't for 'artistic' grade quality needed.

As a result I didn't really mind the fact the inks weren't good quality or would fade in a year of day light.

I don't really print enough to justify a R2880 let alone a 3 series. I think it is more just a case of laser isn't always the best option.

For many SMEs a low cost, low grade quality CIS would be a very good option too. Most developing nations go this route. Heck when I was getting a VISA in Myanmar a couple of years ago I though how practical they where using a CIS.

[Saracen]

Interesting, about Myanmar.

Agreed on laser not always being best. Though sometimes it is. For 'office' photo printing, like in a report, it's probably good enough. And the practicality has a lot to commend it.

For serious photo printing, though, like I said, for photo enthusiasts, exhibition, competion etc, well, I don't know anyone using lasers for that.

It's horses for courses. Which, of course, is why I have something of a house full of printers. And scanners.

[wasabi]

Interesting, about Myanmar.

Agreed on laser not always being best. Though sometimes it is. For 'office' photo printing, like in a report, it's probably good enough. And the practicality has a lot to commend it.

And for commercial contract proofing. While inkets with 8 or 9 tanks are great for one-offs, the vast majority of litho jobs are still CMYK so having something consistent and from the same 4 colour separation is important. Especially if the file for the platesetter can be held post-RIP. Horses for courses though.