Looking for an Inkjet for low prodution brochures (11 x 17) edge to edge

[Roveer]

I have a need for a new printer to create 11 x 17 2 sided brochures for an upcoming project. Would like to stay in-house for this light work. Brochures will have a combination of text, graphics (water color site maps), and photo artwork.

Not all that much into graphics design but would assume I need a printer that can print to the edge. Some recommendations would be helpful.

HP? Epson? Other? I see HP as several but they are not photo printers, Epson has a few with lots of ink cartridges. Just don't want to waste time with the wrong printer when this might be a well known request. Would think the budget would be around or under 1,000 USD to get set up.

Thanks.

 

[costadinos]

An Epson 1400 or the newer 1500w would be ideal, and you could probably get one for around $300 or less.
They can both print edge to edge up to A3+ and they use 6-colour dye inks which produce very glossy and vibrant prints.

 

[Roy Sletcher]

I have a need for a new printer to create 11 x 17 2 sided brochures for an upcoming project. Would like to stay in-house for this light work. Brochures will have a combination of text, graphics (water color site maps), and photo artwork.

Not all that much into graphics design but would assume I need a printer that can print to the edge. Some recommendations would be helpful.

HP? Epson? Other? I see HP as several but they are not photo printers, Epson has a few with lots of ink cartridges. Just don't want to waste time with the wrong printer when this might be a well known request. Would think the budget would be around or under 1,000 USD to get set up.

Thanks.

How many copies would you be producing for each design?

Inkjet could be economical for very small quantities or colour proofing. No so much for quantities of several hundred per item.

RS

 

[ghwellsjr]

I have some Canon i9100 wide format printers that I would like to get rid of. They do not automatically print on both sides. These use the unchipped cartridges making refilling simple. Where are you located?

 

[The Hat]

How many copies would you be producing for each design?

Inkjet could be economical for very small quantities or colour proofing. No so much for quantities of several hundred per item.

RS

You are perfectly right, inkjets were not very economical for large quantities, but a funny think happen some time ago and that was the introduction of good quality 3rd party inks.

Since then the ball park is open and doing the business right now in the premiership league and the only high costs today are labour and paper plus the incentive to do the job yourself, and your Pro 100 will fit the bill nicely..

 

[Roveer]

At this point the total production run will be maybe 30-50 pieces for an investor presentation. But we also might want to print selective 1 page flyers. Again fairly low production. Once we get above a hundred or more pieces we'd likely just send it out.

Would love a fairly cheap printer (cheap to me is 300-600). After we finish with this project it may not likely get a whole lot of use. Do the Epsons and their 6 color dye inks stand above the others in terms of print quality? The way I'm thinking of this would be to attack it as follows:

1. Printers that print in the format that I need (11x17 to be folded into brochures). Don't need a duplexer for the amount of pieces i plan to print

2. Edge to Edge printing, again with the 11x17 folded brouchure idea in mind

3. Best printer/ink/paper setup to give a really nice result. Remember, production is only going to be 30-50 pieces but we will probably also do some single page pieces after that.

BUT...

If there is a better printer that will last a lot longer, be more sturdy, handle paper better and do more things I would possibly consider it and do more photo printing and brocure making.

So,

Someone suggested the Stylus 1500w which is the Artisan 1430 in the US (that's what I read). It's a 300 dollar printer.

Would I also consider the Stylus Photo 3000 (650 dollars) or the Stylus Photo 3880 (1000 dollars)? I don't mind paying more on the initial investment if it means that I'll get a better piece of hardware that is likely to last longer.

Would the print quality be any better between the 1500w, 3000 & 3880? I read the 3880 is a 45 pound printer. Sounds like it's built a lot better than the others.

I'm going to research those 3 and also listen to your feedback here. Thanks for your input.

Roveer

 

[Roveer]

So right off the bat I read this about the Stylus 3880: Compared with the R2880 and R3000, resolution (on the 3880) drops from 5,760x1,440dpi to 2,880x1,440dpi, but image quality is still excellent.

So it seems that this printer is more about large ink cartridges 80ml and sturdy build. Don't know that I want to lose print quality. So I think it makes sense to drop the Stylus 3880 from my list. It's more of a production printer and I don't really plan on a lot of production.

Roveer

 

[costadinos]

The R3000, R2880, R2000, 3880, all use pigment inks, which are aimed at improved longevity, something not important for brochure printing.
A dye printer (1400, 1500w), can produce the same or larger gamut, and better D-Max (blackness) with fewer colours.

As for the resolution difference, this is not something a regular person would notice, and would definitely not make a difference on cheap paper designed for brochures. I have and operate both a 7900 (lower in advertised resolution, similar to the 3880) and an R2000 (similar to the R3000), and I would not able to tell two prints apart based on the resolution, unless if looking at them with a magnifier and unless the prints were made on super smooth high end (expensive) fine art paper.

And you should also not worry about the durability of the printer. My 1400 has already more than 15000 pages printed on it, and that's with 3rd party inks and a CIS system. A CISS will also be a viable option with the Epsons once your production volume increases. If it's only brochures you are printing, and light-fastness isn't important, you can get quality 3rd party inks and cut your costs in ink to $0.02 or so for a 11x17 with full ink coverage!

 

[Roveer]

This is great information. So you are basically saying that the 3000 and it's inks are more for really great photo reproduction which is not the most important thing for me brocure needs. So to get out cheap and to get what I need the 1500 still seems like the right choice.

Now that I am spending some time look at and comparing different printers, inks technologies etc I'm starting to expand my thinking about photo printing. We build very large houses that we usually professionally photograph so we have lots of really great photos. As a part of this project it might make sense to outfit our sales office with displays of some of our best photos in larger scale to showcase our work. With that thought in mind would it be a liability to my brochure project to use a R3000 and get the added capability of great photo printing? If it would, than I'd say I'll probably go with the 1500 but if I get added capability than maybe the 3000 would be a good choice. Trying not to overthink this, but do want to get the most out of it.

Roveer

 

[costadinos]

The R3000 would be better than the 1400 in reproducing black and white photos, due to its inkset which contains extra shades of grey in addition to the colours.
Apart from that, the 1400 still makes for one of the best photo printers.
In fact, for anything except black and white prints, the 1400 should produce superior results in terms of gamut and Dmax. The R3000 uses the same 6 colors (with the addition of two shades of gray), but as I said before, dyes do make a difference when it comes to colour vibrancy and black-ness.
The printers used for printing your everyday 4x6" photos, at least most of them, be it traditional minilabs (chemical processing) or digital minilabs, use 4-colour dye processes, similar (and even inferior) to the Claria inkset used in the 1400.

The only drawback of using the 1400 is the limited longevity of the prints, especially if you use third party inks. But if you stick with OEM inks, the dyes currently used by Epson printers (the inkset called "Claria"), are pretty much equivalent in light resistance to traditional photographic materials, so they should last for a couple of years indoors hanging on a wall unprotected, and even longer behind glass.
Even if you go for the third party dye inks, yes, you are going to notice fading after a few months if in a bright room, indoors, but the cost of reprinting would be so low that it shouldn't matter.