Yahoo Groups archive

Digital BW, The Print

Index last updated: 2026-04-28 22:56 UTC

Thread

Two printer workflow: R1800 & R2400

Two printer workflow: R1800 & R2400

2007-06-09 by FRD

I just recently came to procure an R1800 at a price I was unable to resist.
I have been printing with the R2400 for both my color and and using ABW--BW
and toned prints on matte paper.

I'm looking to explore luster and glossy papers for color (to match that
c-print look) and plan to dedicate one of the printers to BW only.

I don't usually print large volumes...Maybe 2 large prints a week on
average. With my busy work/life I'm looking to implement something low
maintenance despite the cost. (UT3 carts?)

Looking for any advice on which printer to dedicate for this setup. It seems
from the outset at least that 2400=BW, 1800=color glossies

Re: Two printer workflow: R1800 & R2400

2007-06-11 by Keith Zimmerman

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, FRD <f.dz@...> 
wrote:
>
> I just recently came to procure an R1800 at a price I was unable 
to resist.
> I have been printing with the R2400 for both my color and and 
using ABW--BW
> and toned prints on matte paper.
> 
> I'm looking to explore luster and glossy papers for color (to 
match that
> c-print look) and plan to dedicate one of the printers to BW only.
> 
> I don't usually print large volumes...Maybe 2 large prints a week 
on
> average. With my busy work/life I'm looking to implement something 
low
> maintenance despite the cost. (UT3 carts?)
> 
> Looking for any advice on which printer to dedicate for this 
setup. It seems
> from the outset at least that 2400=BW, 1800=color glossies
>

In my opinion, I would them as you have listed.  The 1800 is the 
same as the 800 and I found it to be pretty poor for BW.  I sold my 
800 to a guy that prints nothing but color in it and he loves it.  I 
print my BW on my 2400 with ABW and am very happy with it.

keith

Re: [Digital BW] Re: Two printer workflow: R1800 & R2400

2007-06-11 by FRD

> 
> ³In my opinion, I would them as you have listed.  The 1800 is the
> same as the 800 and I found it to be pretty poor for BW.  I sold my
> 800 to a guy that prints nothing but color in it and he loves it.  I
> print my BW on my 2400 with ABW and am very happy with it.²
> 
> keith
> 
>  
Thank you. Since I would be dedicating the 2400 as a BW machine, it would
seem somewhat limiting to use it in ABW mode...Should I explore QTR with
UT-3D inkset or just replace the yellow cart as per Paul¹s
recommendations...

Any and all advice is very much appreciated.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

RE: [Digital BW] Re: Two printer workflow: R1800 & R2400

2007-06-11 by David Whistance

I must say that I would do it the other way around, 2400 for colour (and ABW
B&W) and 1800 for dedicated B&W.  In the 1800, with its 8 cartridges, you
could use Paul Roark's latest 3K Eboni workflow as well as a full set of
UT-3D inks giving you a variety of B&W choices for both matt and glossy.
Alternatively you could use one of the Cone K7 inksets in the 1800.  With
this approach you would have lots of B&W options with the only downside
being the loss of gloss optimiser for your glossy colour prints.

David Whistance
Show quoted textHide quoted text
  -----Original Message-----
  From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of FRD
  Sent: 11 June 2007 18:13
  To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
  Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Re: Two printer workflow: R1800 & R2400


  >
  > ³In my opinion, I would them as you have listed. The 1800 is the
  > same as the 800 and I found it to be pretty poor for BW. I sold my
  > 800 to a guy that prints nothing but color in it and he loves it. I
  > print my BW on my 2400 with ABW and am very happy with it.²
  >
  > keith
  >
  >
  Thank you. Since I would be dedicating the 2400 as a BW machine, it would
  seem somewhat limiting to use it in ABW mode...Should I explore QTR with
  UT-3D inkset or just replace the yellow cart as per Paul¹s
  recommendations...

  Any and all advice is very much appreciated.

  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



  


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Re: [Digital BW] Re: Two printer workflow: R1800 & R2400

2007-06-12 by FRD

> With the intention of printing BW on matte and color on glossy, what would be
> your recommendation, Paul?
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> >... In the 1800 ... you could use Paul Roark's latest 3K Eboni workflow
> 
> For matte paper printing only ...
> 
>> > as well as a full set of UT-3D inks giving you a variety of
>> > B&W choices for both matt and glossy.
> 
> I have not tested the UT-3D inkset in the 1800.  If you try it, be sure to
> use a rip and be comfortable making your own profiles.  There are no UT-3D
> inks that are appropriate for the Red and Blue ink positions.  The 3D inkset
> is best in hextone printers, with the k2 machines also quite nice.  When the
> Epson driver starts to throw in more crossovers it's more than PS curves and
> the 3D inkset can deal with effectively.
> 
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com
> 
>  
>     


-- 
Francis Diaz
617.549.3476




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

RE: [Digital BW] Re: Two printer workflow: R1800 & R2400

2007-06-12 by Paul Roark

>... In the 1800 ... you could use Paul Roark's latest 3K Eboni workflow

For matte paper printing only ...

> as well as a full set of UT-3D inks giving you a variety of 
> B&W choices for both matt and glossy.

I have not tested the UT-3D inkset in the 1800.  If you try it, be sure to
use a rip and be comfortable making your own profiles.  There are no UT-3D
inks that are appropriate for the Red and Blue ink positions.  The 3D inkset
is best in hextone printers, with the k2 machines also quite nice.  When the
Epson driver starts to throw in more crossovers it's more than PS curves and
the 3D inkset can deal with effectively.    


Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

RE: [Digital BW] Re: Two printer workflow: R1800 & R2400

2007-06-12 by Paul Roark

> With the intention of printing BW on matte and color on glossy, 
> what would be your recommendation, Paul?

If you already have an 1800 and 2400, then given my current B&W preference
for the 100% carbon approach with a 1.5 pl dot printer like the 1800, I'd
set up the 1800 for matte printing with the 3-MK (Eboni) for B&W.

If I had a 2400 and needed glossy color, I'd use the 2400 for that.

Of course, the 1800 has a great reputation for high gloss color.  So, if you
need that type of glossy solution, this setup would not work for you.

There are a lot of variables here in terms of personal preferences.  So,
it's impossible to make a recommendation that is the best compromise for
everyone.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com 


______________

 
>> >... In the 1800 ... you could use Paul Roark's latest 3K Eboni workflow
> 
> For matte paper printing only ...
> 
>> > as well as a full set of UT-3D inks giving you a variety of
>> > B&W choices for both matt and glossy.
> 
> I have not tested the UT-3D inkset in the 1800. If you try it, be sure to
> use a rip and be comfortable making your own profiles. There are no UT-3D
> inks that are appropriate for the Red and Blue ink positions. The 3D
inkset
> is best in hextone printers, with the k2 machines also quite nice. When
the
> Epson driver starts to throw in more crossovers it's more than PS curves
and
> the 3D inkset can deal with effectively.
> 
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com
> 
> 
> 

-- 
Francis Diaz
617.549.3476

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Re: [Digital BW] Re: Two printer workflow: R1800 & R2400

2007-06-13 by Bob Frost

> If I had a 2400 and needed glossy color, I'd use the 2400 for that.
> Of course, the 1800 has a great reputation for high gloss color.

I have both, and the R2400 is best for color and B&W. The color on the R1800 
might look great, but it is not as accurate as the R2400, even with a custom 
profile. Anyone want a little-used R1800 in the UK?

Bob Frost.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Paul Roark" <paul.roark@...>

RE: [Digital BW] Re: Two printer workflow: R1800 & R2400

2007-06-13 by David Whistance

How much do you want for it?

David Whistance
Show quoted textHide quoted text
  -----Original Message-----
  From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Bob Frost
  Sent: 13 June 2007 12:17
  To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
  Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Re: Two printer workflow: R1800 & R2400


  > If I had a 2400 and needed glossy color, I'd use the 2400 for that.
  > Of course, the 1800 has a great reputation for high gloss color.

  I have both, and the R2400 is best for color and B&W. The color on the
R1800
  might look great, but it is not as accurate as the R2400, even with a
custom
  profile. Anyone want a little-used R1800 in the UK?

  Bob Frost.

  ----- Original Message -----
  From: "Paul Roark" <paul.roark@...>



  


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Re: [Digital BW] Re: Two printer workflow: R1800 & R2400

2007-06-14 by FRD

> Thanks Paul,
> Are there any dedicated B&W solutions for the R1800 that utilizes all cart
> positions?
> 
> Is it necessary? Will the printer operate normally if there are no color carts
> in the non-K positions?
> 
> Any clogging issues (above and beyond the tolerances of the printer)?
> 
> Sorry, as you can all tell I¹m sorta new to this game.
> 
> 
> --------------
> 
> 
> If you already have an 1800 and 2400, then given my current B&W preference
> for the 100% carbon approach with a 1.5 pl dot printer like the 1800, I'd
> set up the 1800 for matte printing with the 3-MK (Eboni) for B&W.
> 
> If I had a 2400 and needed glossy color, I'd use the 2400 for that.
> 
> Of course, the 1800 has a great reputation for high gloss color.  So, if you
> need that type of glossy solution, this setup would not work for you.
> 
> There are a lot of variables here in terms of personal preferences.  So,
> it's impossible to make a recommendation that is the best compromise for
> everyone.
> 
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com
> 
> ______________
> 
>>>> >> >... In the 1800 ... you could use Paul Roark's latest 3K Eboni workflow
>> > 
>> > For matte paper printing only ...
>> > 
>>>> >> > as well as a full set of UT-3D inks giving you a variety of
>>>> >> > B&W choices for both matt and glossy.
>> > 
>> > I have not tested the UT-3D inkset in the 1800. If you try it, be sure to
>> > use a rip and be comfortable making your own profiles. There are no UT-3D
>> > inks that are appropriate for the Red and Blue ink positions. The 3D
> inkset
>> > is best in hextone printers, with the k2 machines also quite nice. When
> the
>> > Epson driver starts to throw in more crossovers it's more than PS curves
> and
>> > the 3D inkset can deal with effectively.
>> > 
>> > Paul
>> > www.PaulRoark.com
>> > 
>> > 
>> > 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

RE: [Digital BW] Re: Two printer workflow: R1800 & R2400

2007-06-14 by Paul Roark

FRD,

> Thanks Paul,
> Are there any dedicated B&W solutions for the R1800 that utilizes 
> all cart positions?

Not that I've used.  I don't know what Jon Cone has for the printer.

> Is it necessary?

It's not necessary for the 100% carbon.  However, that 3-MK core that I put
in the MK, PK and GL positions can be the carbon core for a toned inkset
just like the k3 printers.  For some things I prefer it because one can use
the Blue and Red as single-pigment toners, thus avoiding the green shift
over time.  I outline this starting at page 14 of
http://www.paulroark.com/BW-Info/R1800.pdf 

> Will the printer operate normally if there are no color carts
> in the non-K positions?

Yes, see my note, below.

> Any clogging issues (above and beyond the tolerances of the printer)?

My refurbished 1800 was clogged when it came from Epson.  MIS cleaning carts
installed for a week cleaned it out and I've had perfect nozzles ever since.
When I had to re-fill the Eboni carts for the first time last week, it took
one cleaning cycle to get back to perfect.

While I have full color in my 1800 now, a dedicated B&W printer might want
to pursue an interesting long term approach that simply leaves the cleaning
carts in the non-Eboni-MK positions.  With QTR and the way I've set up the
curves/profiles, it's very easy to just copy and paste the curve points from
one ink position to another.  As such, a B&W photographer could dedicate an
1800 to the 3-MK approach exclusively and probably keep it running for years
with virtually no down time.  If a channel does get clogged, simply swap
places with one of the cleaning carts and keep printing.  The clogged
channel will probably cure itself in a few weeks, but even if it does not,
it's not a big deal.  With only 3 of 8 channels really needed, the printer
ought to run for many years before it's totally dead.  I suspect this is
about the cheapest as well as most stable B&W printing option possible with
today's technology.  But, of course, it has its limitations, as discussed in
the PDF.  (Matte paper only, not quite as smooth in the midtones as the 2400
and newest dilute ink B&W systems, probably not as good for sepia unless one
adds more carbon, like LK and PK, and limited to 13" paper.)

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com 





 
> --------------
> 
> 
> If you already have an 1800 and 2400, then given my current B&W preference
> for the 100% carbon approach with a 1.5 pl dot printer like the 1800, I'd
> set up the 1800 for matte printing with the 3-MK (Eboni) for B&W.
> 
> If I had a 2400 and needed glossy color, I'd use the 2400 for that.
> 
> Of course, the 1800 has a great reputation for high gloss color. So, if
you
> need that type of glossy solution, this setup would not work for you.
> 
> There are a lot of variables here in terms of personal preferences. So,
> it's impossible to make a recommendation that is the best compromise for
> everyone.
> 
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com
> 
> ______________
> 
>>>> >> >... In the 1800 ... you could use Paul Roark's latest 3K Eboni
workflow
>> > 
>> > For matte paper printing only ...
>> > 
>>>> >> > as well as a full set of UT-3D inks giving you a variety of
>>>> >> > B&W choices for both matt and glossy.
>> > 
>> > I have not tested the UT-3D inkset in the 1800. If you try it, be sure
to
>> > use a rip and be comfortable making your own profiles. There are no
UT-3D
>> > inks that are appropriate for the Red and Blue ink positions. The 3D
> inkset
>> > is best in hextone printers, with the k2 machines also quite nice. When
> the
>> > Epson driver starts to throw in more crossovers it's more than PS
curves
> and
>> > the 3D inkset can deal with effectively.
>> > 
>> > Paul
>> > www.PaulRoark.com
>> > 
>> > 
>> > 

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Digital BW] Re: Two printer workflow: R1800 & R2400

2007-06-15 by mkirschner

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark"
<paul.roark@...> wrote:

Hi Paul,

> My refurbished 1800 was clogged when it came from Epson.  MIS
cleaning carts
> installed for a week cleaned it out and I've had perfect nozzles
ever since.
> When I had to re-fill the Eboni carts for the first time last week,
it took
> one cleaning cycle to get back to perfect.

I'm very close to purchasing an R1800 to use with your 3-MK Eboni
approach. I have my eye on a refurb purchased direct from Epson.

Here are a few last i-dotting, t-crossing questions, if I may:

(1) How come you didn't resolve the clogged-on-delivery issue by
exchanging the printer for another refurb? Would you have incurred the
return shipping cost?

(2) Can you give more specifics on what you did in the 1-week period
with the cleaning carts to clear the clog? Run the printer every day?

(3) Re: smoothness, is the output comparable to C86-EZ output on matte
paper (which seems very smooth to my eye and is my only point of
reference right now)? I've seen your dot output scans for the 50%
squares in your PDF document, but it's hard to infer how that
translates into midtone appearance in an actual print. Seems like the
C86 output might appear a tiny bit smoother, with more paper
filtering, versus 3-MK output being crisper, more vibrant, and
slightly less smooth? I realize I'm making a bit of an interpretation
just by looking at a high-res scan of dots. :-)

Thanks,
Mitch

[Digital BW] Re: Two printer workflow: R1800 & R2400

2007-06-15 by mkirschner

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark"
<paul.roark@...> wrote:

> The 3MK is smoother in the highlights, and the C86 is smoother at
50%.  At a
> reception with a half dozen excellent B&W darkroom printers, none of
them
> noticed the "grain."  Now these were old darkroom types that are
accustomed
> to film grain, so they may have seen it and just assumed it was the
usual
> film grain -- very fine grained at that.
> 
> Did you see the comparison with the film grain at
> http://www.paulroark.com/BW-Info/Grain.pdf?  There is, for sure, a
bit of an
> apples to oranges comparison problem there, but it might give you a
sense of
> why these darkroom workers didn't mention or even seem to notice the
grain
> at all.  Those on this list will definitely be able to see the
midtone grain
> in test strips.  I doubt anyone not looking for it will find it
> objectionable in an actual photo.
> 
> Hope this helps.  Let me know if you have more questions. 

Thanks, Paul. I hadn't seen the grain comparisons before (the link
wasn't working for me a week or two ago, but it does now). 

The comparison is actually very helpful. Most of my B&W is
film-captured, 35mm at that, so I like grain and don't object to the
printing technology itself adding a subtle amount of grain beyond the
film grain itself. Looks like I'll be more than happy with the results.

One last question: If I plan to rotate carts to maximize head life, I
assume I'll need two complete sets of carts and chips (one for Eboni,
one for cleaning fluid)?

Thanks again,
Mitch

RE: [Digital BW] Re: Two printer workflow: R1800 & R2400

2007-06-15 by Paul Roark

Hi Mitch,

>(1) How come you didn't resolve the clogged-on-delivery 
>issue by exchanging the printer for another refurb? 
>Would you have incurred the return shipping cost?

I could have just sent the printer back at their expense, but the printer
was working well enough to test my 100% carbon approach.  I'd already sent
back a R800 refurb that barely worked at all, but just well enough that I
thought I had a reasonable chance of success.  So, I upgraded the 800 to an
1800.  Then when the 1800 came and worked OK except for a few clogged
nozzles, I just stuck cleaning fluid in them and completed my testing of the
general approach.  By the time I was convinced the approach actually was
going to produce good prints, the clogs were all cleared up.  So, I just
kept the printer.

>(2) Can you give more specifics on what you did in the 1-week 
>period with the cleaning carts to clear the clog? Run the printer
> every day?

I was just testing it using other channels for the Eboni.  By the time I'd
completed enough testing to be convinced the approach would work, the clogs
were gone.  I did nothing more.

>(3) Re: smoothness, is the output comparable to C86-EZ output 
>on matte paper (which seems very smooth to my eye and is my 
>only point of reference right now)? I've seen your dot 
>output scans for the 50% squares in your PDF document,
> but it's hard to infer how that translates into midtone
> appearance in an actual print. Seems like the
> C86 output might appear a tiny bit smoother,

The 3MK is smoother in the highlights, and the C86 is smoother at 50%.  At a
reception with a half dozen excellent B&W darkroom printers, none of them
noticed the "grain."  Now these were old darkroom types that are accustomed
to film grain, so they may have seen it and just assumed it was the usual
film grain -- very fine grained at that.

Did you see the comparison with the film grain at
http://www.paulroark.com/BW-Info/Grain.pdf?  There is, for sure, a bit of an
apples to oranges comparison problem there, but it might give you a sense of
why these darkroom workers didn't mention or even seem to notice the grain
at all.  Those on this list will definitely be able to see the midtone grain
in test strips.  I doubt anyone not looking for it will find it
objectionable in an actual photo.

Hope this helps.  Let me know if you have more questions. 

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

[Digital BW] Re: Two printer workflow: R1800 & R2400

2007-06-15 by mkirschner

Thanks, Paul. I appreciate all the info and advice.

I'll report back on my experience when I have my R1800 in hand,
probably in the next month or so.

Mitch

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark"
<paul.roark@...> wrote:
>
> Hi Mitch,
> 
> > If I plan to rotate carts to maximize head life, I
> > assume I'll need two complete sets of carts and chips 
> > (one for Eboni, one for cleaning fluid)?
> 
> Or just swap the chips -- that's what I do.
> 
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com 
> 
> 
> (PS -- It appears Epson has changed the R260 firmware with the
effect that
> the initial sets of third party 260 chips no longer work with the latest
> 260s.  Hopefully the firmware change was for an unrelated purpose. 
If not,
> and if Epson has opened a new front in its war against third party
inks, the
Show quoted textHide quoted text
> game could change substantially.  If the latter is the case, I'll switch
> immediately to the Eboni + cleaning fluid long term strategy.)
>

RE: [Digital BW] Re: Two printer workflow: R1800 & R2400

2007-06-15 by Paul Roark

Hi Mitch,

> If I plan to rotate carts to maximize head life, I
> assume I'll need two complete sets of carts and chips 
> (one for Eboni, one for cleaning fluid)?

Or just swap the chips -- that's what I do.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com 


(PS -- It appears Epson has changed the R260 firmware with the effect that
the initial sets of third party 260 chips no longer work with the latest
260s.  Hopefully the firmware change was for an unrelated purpose.  If not,
and if Epson has opened a new front in its war against third party inks, the
game could change substantially.  If the latter is the case, I'll switch
immediately to the Eboni + cleaning fluid long term strategy.)

Move to quarantaine

This moves the raw source file on disk only. The archive index is not changed automatically, so you still need to run a manual refresh afterward.