The R1800 is newer. Unless you can get it for almost nothing it is notStaffbull said:Hi, I'm after buying a second hand A3 inkjet, looking like Epson as
inks are cheaper to source and CISS systems aplenty.
which ones are worth having?
I'm looking at either the 2100 or the 1800
any advice?
The R1800 is newer. Unless you can get it for almost nothing it is not
worth getting. I think the ink for that is $80.00.
Not it is NOT. There are more carts than ink channels. When you switchArthur said:Are you planning on printing color only, or some black and white, and
do you plan on going for high gloss surface or matte printing?
The reason I ask is because, the 1800 is great for high gamut brighter
color work which is printed on higher gloss surfaces, and it offers a
gloss optimizer to even out the gloss surface while using pigment
inks, but it has problems creating a neutral black and white image.
The 2100/2200 does a better job with matte prints and black and white.
Also, be aware the 2400 is soon to be replaced by the 2880, so it may
also enter the used market. The 2400 is the best of the bunch in the
Eposn line.
Not it is NOT. There are more carts than ink channels. When you switch
the photo black for the matte black you need to purge and reload the
printer. It costs many dollars to switch. I think there may be reviews
inwww.luminiouslandscape.com
I have to wade through the holee than thou many times before readingArthur said:I'm so glad I rarely see Meathead's posts unless they are quoted by
someone else, since I filter his nonsense.
You replace the black ink cart. There are more carts than channels.The 2400 does allow you to switch between a matte and a photo black,
so that with matte papers you can get a denser black.
Yes, it does require a purging process of all the inks when you switch
between the two black inks, That is what I said.
(which could have been designed better to avoid some of that) but
because the cartridges are directly attached to the head of the
printer, and since Epson heads hold very little ink internally, the
amount of ink lost is no greater than when the printer gets a new
cartridge installed after one runs out of ink.
I do not know who this jerk is referring to. I did not read a post fromWhat Meathead
Read luminous landscape and not trash.You do not compare a Canon Pro9000 with an Epson 2400. You compare ais probably referring to is some of the extra wide carriage printers
which use tube to feed the remote cartridge to the head. Some of
those units can waste a fair bit of ink when a black ink exchange
occurs. The newer models have changed this process, and some even
have both the black matte and photo inks installed at the same time.
Art
If you are interested in issues surrounding e-waste,
I invite you to enter the discussion at my blog:
http://e-trashtalk.spaces.live.com/
Are you planning on printing color only, or some black and white, and do
you plan on going for high gloss surface or matte printing?
The reason I ask is because, the 1800 is great for high gamut brighter
color work which is printed on higher gloss surfaces, and it offers a
gloss optimizer to even out the gloss surface while using pigment inks,
but it has problems creating a neutral black and white image.
The 2100/2200 does a better job with matte prints and black and white.
Also, be aware the 2400 is soon to be replaced by the 2880, so it may
also enter the used market. The 2400 is the best of the bunch in the
Eposn line. Still using pigment inks, it uses a three density black ink
set for very neutral B&W prints. It appears to be very reliable, as is
the 2100/2200.
Art
If you are interested in issues surrounding e-waste,
I invite you to enter the discussion at my blog:
http://e-trashtalk.spaces.live.com/
- Show quoted text -
You do not compare a Canon Pro9000 with an Epson 2400. You compare a
Canon Pro9500 with an Epson 2400. Dye printers produce a more vivid
colors and the results have more punch especially on glossy papers and
many matte papers. Pigment printers produce results that are claimed to
last longer and are more fade resistant but dye is catching up. I do
not know if they are there yet.
The Canon Pro9500 gets better ink mileage and prints faster. I have
read that the results are comparable.>> The only reason I still have
That is a stupid reason. Smart people buy a printer to produce great
results not to refill easier.
And the Canon Pro9000 with Canon ink does
produce great results. But without the benefit of Canon ink I am sure
the Epson 2400 with Epson ink is better.- Hide quoted text -
I have to wade through the holee than thou many times before reading
something useful. He even responds to many posts with the premise he
knows nothing about the subject.
You replace the black ink cart. There are more carts than channels.> Yes, it does require a purging process of all the inks when you switch
That is what I said.
I do not know who this jerk is referring to. I did not read a post from
any Meathead.
Read information from: http://luminous-landscape.com/
They are very knowledgeable on this subject. I do not think you will
get an argument on that subject.> is probably referring to is some of the extra wide carriage printers
Read luminous landscape and not trash.
You do not compare a Canon Pro9000 with an Epson 2400. You compare a
Canon Pro9500 with an Epson 2400. Dye printers produce a more vivid
colors and the results have more punch especially on glossy papers and
many matte papers. Pigment printers produce results that are claimed to
last longer and are more fade resistant but dye is catching up. I do
not know if they are there yet.
Hendo said:I don't see your point. PCMag compared the HP Photosmart Pro B8850
Photo Printer (pigment) to the Canon Pixma Pro9000 (Dye). They stated
that the HP B8850 prints a better quality image. They also made the HP
B8850 "new Editors' Choice for low-end prosumer photo printers" over
the Canon Pro9000.
See the article for yourself...
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2704,2320031,00.asp
If you want the best you should not care about after market ink. IArthur said:If you are looking at a CIS, I would suggest considering the 2200 or
2400 over the 1800. mainly because you will probably have difficulty
finding a 3rd party ink set for the 1800 which will be accurate,
without a lot of profiling.
The image stability of an ink jet ink depends first on the inherent
stability of the basic chemical structure of the colorant. Given
colorants of similar stability, then pigments are likely to have
greater stability than the corresponding soluble dyes. To make life
even more complicated, an additional question is "stable towards
what?". Most people focus on light stability, but over 95% of images
eventually end up in the dark and unless you're storing your images in
a freezer, thermal stability, along with stability towards polluting
gases (largely ozone) and humidity resistance, is important even as
your pictures are on display. The fact that an ink has good light
stability does not mean it's highly stable towards these other
factors. Finally, the paper you print on plays a role. Some papers let
ozone in more easily than others, for example.
While there are some high quality after-market inks out there, they
usually are not the ones selling for low prices, but those aimed at
the fine arts market.
Like Pantone
Pay attention to all four degredation factors and be suspicious of any
tests from anybody where all four are not listed. Don't fall for
advertising claims (and they are out there) where lifetimes are based
on light fade alone, pigments or no pigments.