Digital BW, The Print

We are in the b&w portrait business and have been selling siver
gelatin prints for the last twenty years. Last Xmas we decided to go
digital. Not because we wanted to but because the Agfa film and papers
that we had for years used with beatiful results went out of business.
 I had previously tried the Epson 2100/2200 using the ImagePrint rip.
This produced pretty good results but still with considerable
metermerism and bronzing. 
 We have now bought an Epson 4800 and after many teething problems
(including the fact that the Mac OSX cannot drive the printer without
subtle banding) we are getting stunning results.  
 We now work on the Mac and print from a PC. Good professional
profiles are a must but we have not found it necessary tp use
ImagePrint on the PC but Print straight from the (horrible) PS/Epson
print interface.
 So, in conclusion, I cannot talk for printers I have not tried but
the 4800 will give you very good results. but you have to work at it.
Tweaking in PhotoShop is important. Conversion methods from Colour to
B&W are important. A steady workflow is as well. When printing a lot 
I get the best results as one 'keeps one's hand in' and continually
check what is happening. Doing the od print is more difficult.
  Jules


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "David Whistance"
<david.whistance@...> wrote:
>
> Hi, I am looking for advice to help me choose between two A4
printers.  I
> have previously used an Epson 3000 with MIS QT inks for B&W and then
when
> this died (paper feed problems) switched to OPM with an Epson 2100
using the
> standard UC inkset.
> 
> I am now looking for a dedicated B&W printer again, albeit starting on a
> smaller scale than before.  My choice is between an Epson R220, which I
> would have to purchase, with either the MIS UT-R2 or UT-3D inks or a
spare,
> unused, R800 I have in my loft, probably with MIS UT-3D inks.  I will be
> printing on both matt and the newer fibre based gloss papers.
> 
> Common sense suggests the R220 as I will be properly up and running much
> faster, however the possibilities offered by the additional inks of
the R800
> are appealing.  Any suggestions?
>