Digital BW, The Print

I'll be firing up my 2200 for the first time this weekend. Since I print exclusively in BW should I exercise the option to go with an alternative ink set?

I have a 2200 which I've used almost exclusively for b/w for many years. I suppose the answer depends on your appetite for fiddling with your setup. 

Suggestions:

Definitely don't waste time trying b/w with the Epson printer driver. Recipe for frustration.

Instead download Quadtonerip and use it as the printer driver. First give QTR a try using the stock Epson inks. I found it to do a surprisingly good job and  printed this way for several years. Was quite satisfied.  

 That said, a few months ago I switched the 2200 to the Piezography K7 neutral inks and refillable carts, in order to see what I was missing. Downside: Refilling carts is a hassle because it involves hypodermic needles, some guesswork as to when the carts are actually empty, blah blah blah. Upside: I consider the prints much better. Mind you I was never unhappy with the prints made the other way. It's all subjective of course.






--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Lew" <lew1716@...> wrote:

>
> I'll be firing up my 2200 for the first time this weekend. Since I print exclusively in BW should I exercise the option to go with an alternative ink set?
>

Why not try out Epson matte and Photo black first. It will save a lot of techie hassle.

-- Alan Scharf


Alan Scharf
Saskatoon
ascharf@...

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Lew 
  To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2010 10:54 AM
  Subject: [Digital BW] Ink selection for 2200


    
  I'll be firing up my 2200 for the first time this weekend. Since I print exclusively in BW should I exercise the option to go with an alternative ink set?


  


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

This will sound ridiculously simple but I get great results printing
Black-only with my 2200 using the Epson driver.  Try it.  Without a
magnifying glass and at regular viewing distance they are quite nice
prints.  "Temparature" is surprisingly affected by paper choice too allowing
warm, neutral to slightly cool results by paper alone.  There are more
"advanced" techniques but you have what it takes to try BO so why not?

-- 
Richard S.
Albany, CA (San Francisco bay area)

My Photography Website
http://www.lightshadowandtone.com

My Flickr River
http://flickriver.com/photos/rich8155/popular-interesting/

On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 9:19 AM, Alan Scharf <ascharf@sasktel.net> wrote:

>
>
> Why not try out Epson matte and Photo black first. It will save a lot of
> techie hassle.
>
> -- Alan Scharf
>
> Alan Scharf
> Saskatoon
> ascharf@... <ascharf%40sasktel.net>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Lew
> To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com<DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint%40yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2010 10:54 AM
> Subject: [Digital BW] Ink selection for 2200
>
> I'll be firing up my 2200 for the first time this weekend. Since I print
> exclusively in BW should I exercise the option to go with an alternative ink
> set?
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>  
>


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

Are these in the ink set that ships with the printer?

-----Original Message-----
From: Alan Scharf <ascharf@...>
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2010 11:19:49 
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Ink selection for 2200

Why not try out Epson matte and Photo black first. It will save a lot of techie hassle.

-- Alan Scharf


Alan Scharf
Saskatoon
ascharf@...
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Lew 
  To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2010 10:54 AM
  Subject: [Digital BW] Ink selection for 2200


    
  I'll be firing up my 2200 for the first time this weekend. Since I print exclusively in BW should I exercise the option to go with an alternative ink set?


  


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




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

Yep
  
  Are these in the ink set that ships with the printer?

  Why not try out Epson matte and Photo black first. It will save a lot of techie hassle.

  -- Alan Scharf




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

I wouldn't. The Epson inks aren't terribly expensive for this machine. I professionally print on a 4800 and the carts as you probably know, are about three times expensive. i still run my 2200 but only as a letter, email or internet stuff printer. Sadly it was faulted as a decent photographic image printer with it's bronzing and metermerism.
But having said that mine has given me, and still is, years of service without hardly ever blocking.
Jules
 
--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Lew" <lew1716@...> wrote:

>
> I'll be firing up my 2200 for the first time this weekend. Since I print exclusively in BW should I exercise the option to go with an alternative ink set?
>

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Jules" <jules50uk@...> wrote:
>
> 
>  Sadly (the 2200) was faulted as a decent photographic image printer with it's bronzing and metermerism.
>
>

That sounds scary. So let me describe my experience in more detail, in case it helps put Jules's important observations in context.

Re bronzing: It's my impression -- others will correct me if I'm wrong -- that bronzing with the 2200 could happen with glossy paper. Printing on matte paper (which is all I use), I saw no bronzing.

Re metamerism: I saw metamerism when using the stock Epson driver to print b/w. This is why I recommended in my earlier note to skip Epson driver, and instead install the Quadtonerip. With QTR and stock Epson inks, I see no metamerism. 

Definitions, in case needed: Bronzing is when you look at a print at a sharp angle and it starts to look sort-of "posterized." Metamerism is where a print takes on a color cast, say green or magenta, under different light.

Hope this helps.

Jesse. This is an old printer and it's failings have been well documented. I have no experience of it's use with the Quadtonerip. All I know is that when I bought it when it came out it was heralded as a printer that could really get to grips with b&w. I really struggled. I never printed glossy on it, who buys glossy prints?Not my clients. It did produce bronzing an metermerism with b&w. we used to carry the prits around the house looking at them under tungsten, strip, halogen, daylight, etc etc, they changed colour as we moved from room to room. next to fibre print they were unsellable. From our business anyway. 
So I invested £600 in Imageprint. It improved things a bit but not good enough for our business that had been selling beautiful fibre prints for the last ten years. They just were not up to the quality.
We now print on a 4800 on Davinci or Innova paper and get great results. Not quite as good as fibre, but all the same very good.
Jules


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "jespes" <jesse.pesta@...> wrote:

>
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Jules" <jules50uk@> wrote:
> >
> > 
> >  Sadly (the 2200) was faulted as a decent photographic image printer with it's bronzing and metermerism.
> >
> >
> 
> That sounds scary. So let me describe my experience in more detail, in case it helps put Jules's important observations in context.
> 
> Re bronzing: It's my impression -- others will correct me if I'm wrong -- that bronzing with the 2200 could happen with glossy paper. Printing on matte paper (which is all I use), I saw no bronzing.
> 
> Re metamerism: I saw metamerism when using the stock Epson driver to print b/w. This is why I recommended in my earlier note to skip Epson driver, and instead install the Quadtonerip. With QTR and stock Epson inks, I see no metamerism. 
> 
> Definitions, in case needed: Bronzing is when you look at a print at a sharp angle and it starts to look sort-of "posterized." Metamerism is where a print takes on a color cast, say green or magenta, under different light.
> 
> Hope this helps.
>

I wonder if the 2200 printer, ink or Epsom matte paper was quietly improved during its life? I do a lot of B?W printing with mine, using matte black ink only unless I am "toning" it. I have never noticed metamerism or bronzing, but I have noticed that my prints looks superior to my old darkroom prints. Perhaps it is a result of personal preferences or the style of prints we make. I do a lot of "lithos."

Alan Scharf
Saskatoon 
 
  Jesse. This is an old printer and it's failings have been well documented. I have no experience of it's use with the Quadtonerip. All I know is that when I bought it when it came out it was heralded as a printer that could really get to grips with b&w. I really struggled. I never printed glossy on it, who buys glossy prints?Not my clients. It did produce bronzing an metermerism with b&w. we used to carry the prits around the house looking at them under tungsten, strip, halogen, daylight, etc etc, they changed colour as we moved from room to room. next to fibre print they were unsellable. From our business anyway. 


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

Jules. You didn't read my note very carefully. I know the printer's weaknesses-- I describe them in my note, don't I? And I provide solutions that worked for me.

Do you have solutions to offer Lew, short of "buy a 4800"? Because that's not addressing his question as I understand it.




--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Jules" <jules50uk@...> wrote:

>
> Jesse. This is an old printer and it's failings have been well documented. I have no experience of it's use with the Quadtonerip. All I know is that when I bought it when it came out it was heralded as a printer that could really get to grips with b&w. I really struggled. I never printed glossy on it, who buys glossy prints?Not my clients. It did produce bronzing an metermerism with b&w. we used to carry the prits around the house looking at them under tungsten, strip, halogen, daylight, etc etc, they changed colour as we moved from room to room. next to fibre print they were unsellable. From our business anyway. 
> So I invested £600 in Imageprint. It improved things a bit but not good enough for our business that had been selling beautiful fibre prints for the last ten years. They just were not up to the quality.
> We now print on a 4800 on Davinci or Innova paper and get great results. Not quite as good as fibre, but all the same very good.
> Jules
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "jespes" <jesse.pesta@> wrote:
> >
> > 
> > 
> > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Jules" <jules50uk@> wrote:
> > >
> > > 
> > >  Sadly (the 2200) was faulted as a decent photographic image printer with it's bronzing and metermerism.
> > >
> > >
> > 
> > That sounds scary. So let me describe my experience in more detail, in case it helps put Jules's important observations in context.
> > 
> > Re bronzing: It's my impression -- others will correct me if I'm wrong -- that bronzing with the 2200 could happen with glossy paper. Printing on matte paper (which is all I use), I saw no bronzing.
> > 
> > Re metamerism: I saw metamerism when using the stock Epson driver to print b/w. This is why I recommended in my earlier note to skip Epson driver, and instead install the Quadtonerip. With QTR and stock Epson inks, I see no metamerism. 
> > 
> > Definitions, in case needed: Bronzing is when you look at a print at a sharp angle and it starts to look sort-of "posterized." Metamerism is where a print takes on a color cast, say green or magenta, under different light.
> > 
> > Hope this helps.
> >
>

I did answer it in my previous post. I would never use OM inks. 
Jules


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "jespes" <jesse.pesta@...> wrote:

>
> Jules. You didn't read my note very carefully. I know the printer's weaknesses-- I describe them in my note, don't I? And I provide solutions that worked for me.
> 
> Do you have solutions to offer Lew, short of "buy a 4800"? Because that's not addressing his question as I understand it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Jules" <jules50uk@> wrote:
> >
> > Jesse. This is an old printer and it's failings have been well documented. I have no experience of it's use with the Quadtonerip. All I know is that when I bought it when it came out it was heralded as a printer that could really get to grips with b&w. I really struggled. I never printed glossy on it, who buys glossy prints?Not my clients. It did produce bronzing an metermerism with b&w. we used to carry the prits around the house looking at them under tungsten, strip, halogen, daylight, etc etc, they changed colour as we moved from room to room. next to fibre print they were unsellable. From our business anyway. 
> > So I invested £600 in Imageprint. It improved things a bit but not good enough for our business that had been selling beautiful fibre prints for the last ten years. They just were not up to the quality.
> > We now print on a 4800 on Davinci or Innova paper and get great results. Not quite as good as fibre, but all the same very good.
> > Jules
> > 
> > 
> > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "jespes" <jesse.pesta@> wrote:
> > >
> > > 
> > > 
> > > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Jules" <jules50uk@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > 
> > > >  Sadly (the 2200) was faulted as a decent photographic image printer with it's bronzing and metermerism.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > 
> > > That sounds scary. So let me describe my experience in more detail, in case it helps put Jules's important observations in context.
> > > 
> > > Re bronzing: It's my impression -- others will correct me if I'm wrong -- that bronzing with the 2200 could happen with glossy paper. Printing on matte paper (which is all I use), I saw no bronzing.
> > > 
> > > Re metamerism: I saw metamerism when using the stock Epson driver to print b/w. This is why I recommended in my earlier note to skip Epson driver, and instead install the Quadtonerip. With QTR and stock Epson inks, I see no metamerism. 
> > > 
> > > Definitions, in case needed: Bronzing is when you look at a print at a sharp angle and it starts to look sort-of "posterized." Metamerism is where a print takes on a color cast, say green or magenta, under different light.
> > > 
> > > Hope this helps.
> > >
> >
>

I have been in the photography business in some way or another all my life since I picked up a camera and first started developing and printing from about 1965. I studied photography full time for three years and did my apprenticeship for two years working with London advertising photographers I now am a director of a successful portrait business.We went digital about seven years ago  we sell large, expensive (because of their quality ad photography) art b&w framed prints. I mention this, not to blow my own trumpet in any way but to give my basis for my view of the Epson 2200. I experienced bad metermerism and bronzing from the printer after trying many papers, profiled properly for the printer  I then as I said tried Image Print as this was reckoned to improve things.It did to a small extent but there was n way I could sell these to our customers as an alternative to the Agfa paper prints we had done professionally, previously. Almost 100% of our work is b&w and most of our images larger than 10x8. I think everyone has different standards and are happy with different results. Our aim was (frightening at the time) to swap from one day to the next from film and fibre to a digital print without our customers noticing. Many had been to us before and would hang their new prints next to the older fibre ones under all sorts of different lighting. this would have been impossible using prints from the 2200. At the time of it's introduction it probably was the best b&w printer of that calibre around but was very quickly superceded but the vastly improved K3 inks. 
I realise that anyines views of a b&w print are their own. But do the metermerism test if you don't beieve me. Hold a fibre print next to the digital one and walk it though differently light rooms if you can. I think you will see what I mean. Then ask would a client be happy with all of tos results in the different conditions. The bronzing of the 2200 is well documented but improved with different papers to some extent.
I hope this makes my views (and that's all they are) clear.
Jules


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Alan Scharf <ascharf@...> wrote:

>
> I wonder if the 2200 printer, ink or Epsom matte paper was quietly improved during its life? I do a lot of B?W printing with mine, using matte black ink only unless I am "toning" it. I have never noticed metamerism or bronzing, but I have noticed that my prints looks superior to my old darkroom prints. Perhaps it is a result of personal preferences or the style of prints we make. I do a lot of "lithos."
> 
> Alan Scharf
> Saskatoon 
>

I'l now answer the OP's question properly! Lol.

 No you shouldn't. Why you ask. because manufacturers go to extreme care to make the inks they put in their carts. they are also loaded in controlled dust free atmospheres and under vacuum to eliminate dust and air bubbles. 

 Alternative ink cart producers do not have the money and facilities to adhere to these extremes. There is nothing worse than doing a large print (or even a small one) to fins a blob of something that shouldn't be there right in the middle. How much more often do nozzles get clogged with OM inks? A lot i would say. It is IMHO a false saving. I use Epson inks on my 2200 and 4800 and very rarely have any problems. 
 But it's up to you. Save a few bucks at your risk.
jules


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Lew" <lew1716@...> wrote:

>
> I'll be firing up my 2200 for the first time this weekend. Since I print exclusively in BW should I exercise the option to go with an alternative ink set?
>

First, I'd like to thank the list for a comprehensive discussion of the
issues facing me. It seems that the QuadToneRIP is the way to go in that it
will enable me to get the most bang per ink set.
Just as an fyi, while I was researching my options, I came across the
current BH price for a 4880: $1,763.95, shipping with a $500 rebate offer.
That's 1263 for a new machine.


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

I'm not primarily interesting in saving money (although I wouldn't mind).
I'm wondering if there isn't an all black inks set which would tickle my B&W
only fancy without too much trouble.

 Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 6:13 AM, Jules <jules50uk@...> wrote:

>
>
> I'l now answer the OP's question properly! Lol.
>
> No you shouldn't. Why you ask. because manufacturers go to extreme care to
> make the inks they put in their carts. they are also loaded in controlled
> dust free atmospheres and under vacuum to eliminate dust and air bubbles.
>
> Alternative ink cart producers do not have the money and facilities to
> adhere to these extremes. There is nothing worse than doing a large print
> (or even a small one) to fins a blob of something that shouldn't be there
> right in the middle. How much more often do nozzles get clogged with OM
> inks? A lot i would say. It is IMHO a false saving. I use Epson inks on my
> 2200 and 4800 and very rarely have any problems.
> But it's up to you. Save a few bucks at your risk.
>
> jules
>
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com<DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint%40yahoogroups.com>,
> "Lew" <lew1716@...> wrote:
> >
> > I'll be firing up my 2200 for the first time this weekend. Since I print
> exclusively in BW should I exercise the option to go with an alternative ink
> set?
> >
>
>
>


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

We ran 2200's (before replacing them) using QTR with both the Epson inksets and all "black" inksets in our student photo lab.  QTR solved our B&W print problems and allowed even our 1st semester students to produce masterful B&W prints.  You can keep it as simple or complicated as you care.

In our experience, the all black inksets don't withstand downtime as well as Epson's UC without clogging, but regular use would eliminate that problem.

FWIW,
-Barry

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Lew Schwartz <lew1716@...> wrote:

>
> I'm not primarily interesting in saving money (although I wouldn't mind).
> I'm wondering if there isn't an all black inks set which would tickle my B&W
> only fancy without too much trouble.
> 
>  Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 6:13 AM, Jules <jules50uk@...> wrote:
> 
> >
> >
> > I'l now answer the OP's question properly! Lol.
> >
> > No you shouldn't. Why you ask. because manufacturers go to extreme care to
> > make the inks they put in their carts. they are also loaded in controlled
> > dust free atmospheres and under vacuum to eliminate dust and air bubbles.
> >
> > Alternative ink cart producers do not have the money and facilities to
> > adhere to these extremes. There is nothing worse than doing a large print
> > (or even a small one) to fins a blob of something that shouldn't be there
> > right in the middle. How much more often do nozzles get clogged with OM
> > inks? A lot i would say. It is IMHO a false saving. I use Epson inks on my
> > 2200 and 4800 and very rarely have any problems.
> > But it's up to you. Save a few bucks at your risk.
> >
> > jules
> >
> > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com<DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint%40yahoogroups.com>,
> > "Lew" <lew1716@> wrote:
> > >
> > > I'll be firing up my 2200 for the first time this weekend. Since I print
> > exclusively in BW should I exercise the option to go with an alternative ink
> > set?
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

If a new printer is an option, the Epsons with stock K3 inks (three blacks instead of the 2200's two) are very good. I have a 3800 and strongly recommend it.

Over the years I've messed around with two b/w-only inksets. Unquestionably, they produce my preferred prints. But each demanded tolerance for headaches and tinkering that reasonable people might consider unnecessary, given the state of the art in off-the-shelf options like the 3800. Today, I use the 2200 with Piezography for smaller prints, and the 3800 for larger. Tomorrow, who knows?

Good luck! 



--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Lew Schwartz <lew1716@...> wrote:

>
> First, I'd like to thank the list for a comprehensive discussion of the
> issues facing me. It seems that the QuadToneRIP is the way to go in that it
> will enable me to get the most bang per ink set.
> Just as an fyi, while I was researching my options, I came across the
> current BH price for a 4880: $1,763.95, shipping with a $500 rebate offer.
> That's 1263 for a new machine.
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

"Lew" <lew1716@...> wrote:
>
> I'll be firing up my 2200 for the first time this weekend. 
> Since I print exclusively in BW should I exercise the 
> option to go with an alternative ink set?
>

This thread seems to have turned into a debate as to whether dedicated B&W inksets have anything to offer over the original equipment manufacturer (OEM) inksets. 

I think they do, but the reasons to use the dedicated B&W inksets has certainly decreased radically over the years.  In the days of the 1280, it was very simple to beat the OEMs in B&W.  With today's Epson and HP printers with LK and LLK inks, it's a different matter.  

With my interest in longevity of prints, it was a trivial matter to beat the 1280 dyes, but today only 100% carbon can beat the OEMs.  So, I use 100% carbon where possible, but also compromise and now favor the HP PK based blended (carbon + color) inks where a cooler image is needed.

Basically, I think one has to ask how much sense it makes to print B&W with high gamut color inks.  Those inks are the source of all sorts of problems -- metamerism, faster and differential fading, more visible dots, and sensitivity to profiling among them.   

With the 2200, out of 7 inks, only 2 are low gamut gray inks.  While I've seen some very nice B&W prints made with K2 printers and QTR, on close inspection they are not going to equal what a dedicated B&W inkset can do.

Can one save money by avoiding OEM inks.  Yes indeed, but it depends on how much you're willing to do.

Do third party inks clog more?  On average, probably so, but I'd say it depends on various factors.  It is true that the OEMs can pull a better vacuum than most, and many complaints about MIS "clogs" are just air in the line that can be avoided when one learns how to use the carts.  

Aside from air, there seem to be two major factors with respect to clogging: the ink load (how  much pigment relative to base) and how much binder is in the ink.  The "glue" that sticks the pigments to glossy paper also sticks them to other things.  The matte-only inks that I've recently used, probably because they do not have much if any binder in them, have been the most clog free -- more clog free than the OEM inks.

When I first got into making and facilitating the use of dedicated B&W inksets it was, in part, an effort to overcome the horrible reputation inkjet printing had.  At this point, there is no longer a significant need for that.

I still have an interest in facilitating the accessibility of the best possible B&W imaging to the most budget restricted photographers.  However, this is becoming more of a user-mixing approach, sort of an analogy to the home darkroom.  

I and a number of others will, I'm sure, continue to prefer B&W that uses more than just a minority of the potentials of our printers.  Why would I want a machine that is 2/3 high gamut color inks if I'm only printing B&W?  No thanks.  I can do better for much less money.  But what I do is becoming much more of a niche -- more like the old "alternative" wet process printing alternatives, where the process is part of the point.  Doing something different that is better has value in and of itself.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

I have been toying with getting a 3800 to augment the 4800. Epson are doing a good deal if you already own certain printers (at least they were). How do you find the 3800? is it easy and not too wasteful to swap between mat and gloss?
See
http://www.epson.co.uk/loyalty
Jules



--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "jespes" <jesse.pesta@...> wrote:

>
> 
> If a new printer is an option, the Epsons with stock K3 inks (three blacks instead of the 2200's two) are very good. I have a 3800 and strongly recommend it.
> 
> Over the years I've messed around with two b/w-only inksets. Unquestionably, they produce my preferred prints. But each demanded tolerance for headaches and tinkering that reasonable people might consider unnecessary, given the state of the art in off-the-shelf options like the 3800. Today, I use the 2200 with Piezography for smaller prints, and the 3800 for larger. Tomorrow, who knows?
> 
> Good luck! 
> 
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Lew Schwartz <lew1716@> wrote:
> >
> > First, I'd like to thank the list for a comprehensive discussion of the
> > issues facing me. It seems that the QuadToneRIP is the way to go in that it
> > will enable me to get the most bang per ink set.
> > Just as an fyi, while I was researching my options, I came across the
> > current BH price for a 4880: $1,763.95, shipping with a $500 rebate offer.
> > That's 1263 for a new machine.
> > 
> > 
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>

I've had the 3800 for some time so not sure how easy they are to find today.  As for swapping gloss/matte, I print only matte, so I've switched to gloss only once (and that was by accident). The machine took maybe three or four minutes to make the switch, as I recall. I didn't watch how much ink it consumed, but did grit my teeth listening to all the sucking sounds going on in there!



--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Jules" <jules50uk@...> wrote:

>
> 
> I have been toying with getting a 3800 to augment the 4800. Epson are doing a good deal if you already own certain printers (at least they were). How do you find the 3800? is it easy and not too wasteful to swap between mat and gloss?
> See
> http://www.epson.co.uk/loyalty
> Jules
> 
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "jespes" <jesse.pesta@> wrote:
> >
> > 
> > If a new printer is an option, the Epsons with stock K3 inks (three blacks instead of the 2200's two) are very good. I have a 3800 and strongly recommend it.
> > 
> > Over the years I've messed around with two b/w-only inksets. Unquestionably, they produce my preferred prints. But each demanded tolerance for headaches and tinkering that reasonable people might consider unnecessary, given the state of the art in off-the-shelf options like the 3800. Today, I use the 2200 with Piezography for smaller prints, and the 3800 for larger. Tomorrow, who knows?
> > 
> > Good luck! 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Lew Schwartz <lew1716@> wrote:
> > >
> > > First, I'd like to thank the list for a comprehensive discussion of the
> > > issues facing me. It seems that the QuadToneRIP is the way to go in that it
> > > will enable me to get the most bang per ink set.
> > > Just as an fyi, while I was researching my options, I came across the
> > > current BH price for a 4880: $1,763.95, shipping with a $500 rebate offer.
> > > That's 1263 for a new machine.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> >
>

While many years back, trying everything from various MIS offerings, Indelible (long gone), Lyson, Generations, Fotonic, Cone, etc etc, I may have had the occasional higher incidence of nozzle performance problems than with the intended Epson inks for the wide variety of models I've had, this seems to be an out of date perception that just won't die over the years.
By far, with contemporary ink sets, I have BETTER nozzle performance with the 3rd party inks I use than with Epsons. I am in regular touch, and have been for years, with many other printers using specialty ink sets, and there have been no such complaints from them either, for a long long time. There have been the occasional horror stories, but they seem to be rare and radical exceptions. I also have to say they generally seem to be with 4xxx printers, the 4000 being the more regularly mentioned.
I have 4 Epsons here now, 2 x800s with UCK3s, and a desktop with K7s custom mixed from a variety of Cone K7 sets, and a 9600 with custom dual Cone quad setup. I can only now speak for the inks I use, but others I talk to using MIS sets, like Paul, have not mentioned any problems with contemporary sets they use.
And now, back to trying to get my 9800 nozzles to work... and the humidity is currently high...
Tyler
http://www.custom-digital.com/


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Jules" <jules50uk@...> wrote:

>
> I'l now answer the OP's question properly! Lol.
> 
>  No you shouldn't. Why you ask. because manufacturers go to extreme care to make the inks they put in their carts. they are also loaded in controlled dust free atmospheres and under vacuum to eliminate dust and air bubbles. 
> 
>  Alternative ink cart producers do not have the money and facilities to adhere to these extremes. There is nothing worse than doing a large print (or even a small one) to fins a blob of something that shouldn't be there right in the middle. How much more often do nozzles get clogged with OM inks? A lot i would say. It is IMHO a false saving. I use Epson inks on my 2200 and 4800 and very rarely have any problems. 
>  But it's up to you. Save a few bucks at your risk.
> jules
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Lew" <lew1716@> wrote:
> >
> > I'll be firing up my 2200 for the first time this weekend. Since I print exclusively in BW should I exercise the option to go with an alternative ink set?
> >
>

What, approximately, does 'regular use' mean? eg:  A throw-away print a
week?

On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 9:44 AM, Barry Snidow <barrysnidow@...> wrote:

>
>
> We ran 2200's (before replacing them) using QTR with both the Epson inksets
> and all "black" inksets in our student photo lab. QTR solved our B&W print
> problems and allowed even our 1st semester students to produce masterful B&W
> prints. You can keep it as simple or complicated as you care.
>
> In our experience, the all black inksets don't withstand downtime as well
> as Epson's UC without clogging, but regular use would eliminate that
> problem.
>
> FWIW,
> -Barry
>
>


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