Epson R1900 or Canon Pro9000MKII to refill with Precision Colors Inks?

[aruiz]

Hi.

Larry (TXavi8tor), reading your arguments, once more, I am convinced to finally buy a Pro9000.

But before to buy it, I want to download the profiles of each printer to compare with SoftProof. Really it is not useful because, with it, I will have an approximate idea of the colors with OEM inks. But it is not my case. I will use third party inks.

Then I see once more, the very few color comparisons published, between Epson printers with Pigmented inks and the Pro9000 like this:

http://www.photo-i.co.uk/Reviews/interactive/Canon Pro 9000/page-6.html

In this comparison is not present a R1900 but is present a R2400 and a R1800. On other comparisons that I saw the R1900 seemed to have better colors than the R2400 and the R1800.

Here the Pro900 has non vibrant and dark colors. Specially dark are the green and orange colors.

I don't know if the reason is that's was an old Pro9000 not the Pro9000 MKII or due to a not good paper.

And I think that I must to give an opportunity to the new Epson coated anticlog, and to their details and colors on shadows.

After, I think about clogs and on a possible metamerism and bronzing of pigmented inks.

And I think on your sentences, like:

"a printer that doesn't print, or produces prints with banding, streaking, puddling, etc. has NO gamut, regardless of its theoretical advantages"
"No output=no gamut. "
"My approach is to use hardware that is reliable for me"

And you have reason.

I will compare the sofprroft results on a CS4, to understand why the colors of the Pro9000 are so dark and muted.

Thank you very much.

Xavi.

 

[TXAvi8tor]

The more I study, the more I'm forced to conclude that paper choice and good profiles are overlooked in the quest for print quality. Finding the right paper and profiling it accurately (or having an accurate profile made for you) may contribute to the fullest possible gamut at least as much as ink technology (dye or pigment) and ink choice.

Every major printer mfr (HP, Canon & Epson at least) generates as much or more revenue from ink as from the initial hardware sale. Therefore, a brisk market exists in 3rd party inks, and you, like me, know from the beginning that we intend to use them. Knowing this, profiles MUST be based on the inks one intends to use - tests and profiles made with factory inks mean nothing - only the inks you will actually use matter.

Lastly, with today's technology, the 'best' printers only represent about half of the theoretical gamut. ALL of our photographs and resulting prints are a subjective representation of reality. Therefore, worrying about which is theoretically more accurate frankly seems pointless, unless one is a graphic arts professional charged with close replication of product colors. While today's best technology may only capture 50% of the theoretical gamut, digital imaging has brought the ability to produce astounding pictures within the reach of more amateurs than ever before. No longer do you have to settle for the efforts of a lab, or set up a wet darkroom and work with the very real limitations of THAT technology (which I was still doing only a little more than a decade ago).

Buy a reliable printer, invest in quality ink and paper, learn how to make accurate profiles (or have them made for you) and go make interesting photographs. Hang them on the walls of your home, in your workplace and make them available to friends and family. No one is going to hold a gamut chart up to your print and say "Well, Xavi, your greens are a little off."

If they did, I would say "If you think you can do better, HAVE AT IT!" while (theoretically or actually) grabbing them by the collar & seat of the pants, and giving them the bum's rush into the street. This Texan will only put up with so much.

Larry

 

[aruiz]

Hi Larry (TXAvi8tor)!

Thank you for your interesting answer.

When I buy a printer and after the first refill I buy different papers to test with the refilled cartridges. Here Epson papers offers a good quality/price ratio. After select the paper I request to profile my printer with these inks and paper.
I think that's impossible to use a printer of a manufacturer, a paper of a third manufacturer and non-OEM inks and obtain color accuracy on prints.
In fact I want to try to make my own profiles. I have bought an IT8 card that I will use with Profile Prism, a software that use a scanner like a colorimeter.
Also ,I am thinking to buy locally a second hand PrintFix Pro from a trustable person located near home.
IMHO is essential to have correctly profiled the monitor (if possible with MVA/PVA or IPS technology) and a correct profile made with a colorimeter or a spectrophotometer.

Only after doing that will be possible to compare the results of 2 printers with non-OEM Inks.

Today I had the possibility to softproof a test image with a profile of a Pro9000, made using non OEM inks and I am surprised of the good results specially with color accuracy on shadows.



"Buy a reliable printer, invest in quality ink and paper, learn how to make accurate profiles (or have them made for you) and go make interesting photographs"

Due to my impossibility of doing interesting photographs, I rest comparing printers ....
Seriously, you have reason but I pretend to buy the better option possible. Then I need to read reviews, compare and request some help due to the impossibility to find comparisons of 2 profiled printers with the same non OEM ink and paper.

Thank you Larry for your help and advices.
Xavi.

 

[mikling]

If you think decisions are hard to make, we'll make them harder.

The following is a sample of output from my KLARIAH pigment on an Epson R260 ( I got some used for $15 and $25) against an Epson R2880 ( You'll want to look up the cost of that one ($800 list...nice if you can afford it.) Both are using the same Kirkland Paper..not the best by any stretch and both are using pigment inks. Output is profiled.

Well one printer is worth over ten times what the other one costs used. Both pics will be just as archival and both are beautiful.

Which one is from the el cheapo printer? If you have a hard time judging, it drives home the point. Find a decent printer, get it properly profiled with decent inks and paper, know its limitations, work with it and then SHOOT and PRINT some pics. It's what in the viewfinder that really counts now.

The following is a handheld shot as scanners cannot show how close they really are!

I once said that the Claria machines properly set up can give an R2880 close competition. Here it is!

 

[mikling]

Let's throw in one of the cursed and denigrated and constantly whipped model of the Epsons. The R200. Yeah that oldie ( with big blob droplet sizes!) same situation running pigment inks, profiled and same paper. Do we need to be rich to print well? OK. it's on the right where a powershot lens has problems with softness.
I see used R200s all over the place and thrift stores.
Do the droplet sizes really make a difference. Beats me! It looks great and that is what counts!

 

[mikling]

Remember, by editing in softproofing mode, I can nudge any output to essentially look closer to another and I can see the results on the screen before I actually output it. That is what softproofing is. None of these images have been softproofed edited prior to output so the potential has not been used yet. Due to the limitations/capabilities of printer/ink/paper combinations you cannot make one look identical but within limits darn darn close.

 

[leo8088]

Talking about cursed Epson printers I have a R300. It did finish a set of OEM cartridges. The total number of 8x10 photos I was able to print satisfactory were less than 30 and the print head was clogged a few times already. Right now it is a door jam and it doesn't do well as that either. I refill it with pigment inks from Inksupply once. It did not even finish a few prints before the print head got clogged. Switched back to dye inks and it is still clogged. I did not try hard enough though. I am sick of it completely.

I also got a R280 and it is sitting in my car. It was given to me by a friend who ran out of yellow ink but decided not to spend any more money on it. It is probably a working printer still. I only need to get a new yellow ink cartridge to make it work. Well, I probably need all others very soon too. I am reluctant to spend money on Epson cartridges either. I may be not the norm. But I am so happy with Canon printers. Despite Epson putting dye ink in these R series printers they are no match to the economy of Canon printers with cheap but great ink from Hobbicolors. You can keep selling Epsons but I am not going to buy that. I am sure many will do the same too.

 

[jackypunker]

I used to have a Lexmark Inkjet printer that ended up getting busted up during our move youre not gonna believe this an Epson WorkForce 600 All-in-One Color Inkjet Printer! An inkjet printer is a printing apparatus that creates an image on a sheet of paper by The printhead of an ink jet color printer typically has at least one nozzle array.

 

[aruiz]

If you think decisions are hard to make, we'll make them harder.

The following is a sample of output from my KLARIAH pigment on an Epson R260 ( I got some used for $15 and $25) against an Epson R2880 ( You'll want to look up the cost of that one ($800 list...nice if you can afford it.) Both are using the same Kirkland Paper..not the best by any stretch and both are using pigment inks. Output is profiled.

Well one printer is worth over ten times what the other one costs used. Both pics will be just as archival and both are beautiful.

Which one is from the el cheapo printer? If you have a hard time judging, it drives home the point. Find a decent printer, get it properly profiled with decent inks and paper, know its limitations, work with it and then SHOOT and PRINT some pics. It's what in the viewfinder that really counts now.

The following is a handheld shot as scanners cannot show how close they really are!

I once said that the Claria machines properly set up can give an R2880 close competition. Here it is!

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y20/mikord/comparison.jpg

Really amazing results of your comparison.

Seems that a good paper, good inks and a correct profile reduce the differences with printer models.

Also, the size of the picture made very difficult to compare them meticulously but seems that any print has a color cast and both shows neutral B&W and vivid colors.

Regards,
Xavi.

 

[aruiz]

The total number of 8x10 photos I was able to print satisfactory were less than 30 and the print head was clogged a few times already. Right now it is a door jam and it doesn't do well as that either. I refill it with pigment inks from Inksupply once. It did not even finish a few prints before the print head got clogged. Switched back to dye inks and it is still clogged..

Actually I am evaluating to buy a second hand R2400 to a neighbor that was unused for 5-6 months. I am worryed about if I will be able to unclog it and once unclogged to avoid constant clogs. Also this printer seems to have a communication error, that Epson was unable to solve, that during a print, stops printing and ejects the print before it is completed.

I am sure that if I buy this printer will be at a cheaper price. On the other hand Epson seems to offer vivid colors with OeM inks and also with IS inks. The Pro9000 seems to show a little bit dark colors and bright colors a little bit muted.