Well I'm finally to the point where I'm thinking about trying my hand at making my own prints. The only problem is I don't know which printer to get
My needs are pretty basic- I'm not looking to sell, and I don't really need 200 years of archival quality. I'm also not looking to make prints bigger than 13 x 19, so I don't need a mammoth printer either. My price range is $200-$400, which, while I realize is low, accurately reflects my funds and (hopefully) needs. I'm thinking about the Epson 1400, but only because it seems to be a good all-around machine for a decent price.
Overall, I want a printer that's a good introduction to making my own prints and has decent quality. I've also already factored in the cost of a calibration system, so no need to worry about that
Nathaniel, from the sounds of your comment here the 1400 is probably an excellent fit for price range, print size, etc. I have used nothing but Epson Printers over the years and enjoy the use of my present R2400 very much. As with most things for me, I wish the replacement cartridges and paper could be purchased much cheaper, but I have learned to live with that expense so far.
I noticed the Epson site has a rebate on the 1400 right now so the price with that rebate might be just right if you have not shopped around for exact pricing yet.
Posted by Nat Coalson on March 25, 2009 at 7:18 PM
Nathaniel - the R1900 would be a great choice at $399 retail list price.
At first, stick with Epson papers only; after getting used to the software settings and results you can use other papers with this printer, too... including rolls.
Posted by Paul DeCesare on March 25, 2009 at 8:18 PM
Nathaniel, the Epson R1900 is the clear winner if you can swing it. It's at B&H for $499 with a $150 mail-in rebate right now. The reason the R1900 is better is due to the pigment inks. The R1400 uses dye-based inks which can start discoloring in as little as 10 years. The pigment ink also prints B&W way better. Pigment ink is the future technology and is what's used in all the pro-level printers. I have a Canon PixmaPro 9000 and an Epson R380 which are both DYE-based printers, and I do plan on upgrading when the time is right. One thing that the older dye-based inks were known for was the superior prints on high-gloss papers, but the R1900 apparently can do that now even with pigment ink.
I use the R1900 for small printing projects that I don't want to run through the 4800 machine. The 1900 makes very nice prints and the profiles are very accurate.
I've used both Epson & Canon printers and had successes and difficulties with each. My Epson (13"x19") (can't remember the model # - it was a few years ago ) tended to get plugged heads. I had to replace the whole unit because the heads had to be installed by a repair shop at a cost higher than a new printer. My Canon i9100 (also 13"x19") has been a workhorse for years now though I killed a set of print heads by using discount Brand-X inks. It has user-replaceable heads so that helped a bit. Went back to the Canon inks and the printer still works fine. Now I'm also using a Canon iPF 6100 (24"W x whatever) but that's out of the price range you describe.
The real cost of printers comes in the inks. At a price of about $14 for 13 ml of ink, an example I just found with a google search (yes that's over $1000 per liter!!!) being able to get larger cartridges and efficient print heads will save you money in the long term even if the printer costs a bit more initially. Friends have actually bought complete new printers on sale because the cost was less than buying a set of inks!
If you're interested in printing B&W as well as color check to see if you'd need to remove cartridges and flush the lines to get the matte/glossy inks in play. Some of the Epson models required this and it was an expensive process. I've found it's best to get a printer that uses inks in individual cartridges because that way you replace only the inks you've run out of rather than a multi cartridge that may still have quantities of ink in colors you use less of - another money waster.
For longevity of prints the pigments are first choice. The dye-based are cheaper but will fade some pretty rapidly. It's all a matter of what your needs and expectations are.
All that being said there are some really good printers out there by companies like Epson, Canon, HP and others. This was a rather long-winded way of suggesting you watch out for the "hidden costs" that show up once you get the printer home.
Alright, I took your suggestions and researched the 1900 a little bit. It looks like a very capable printer, and has a pretty sweet cost. The only problem I could find is that people had troubles with Epson ink cartridges not being recognized by the printer, resulting in a return for a refurbished printer. Anyone have any experience with this or is it just a rare bug?
I don't drink the kool-aid the other posters do, so I am going to break with tradition and recommend you take a look at the Canon Pixma Pro 9000. I after years of frustration with a variety of Epson printers, I decided to try Canon and never went back. The issues included cartridge recognition, ink usage, really s-l-o-w printing, print head clogging, etc. I purchased my i9100 in 2003 and still use it today. Sometimes I print as many as 40 8x10s in one batch, and at other times the printer will lie dormant for weeks at a time. I can say that once I experienced some clogging, but it was with third party ink. When using Canon-brand inks there has never been a problem. I did have one issue, indirectly resulting from the bout of clogging. I used the print head cleaning utility in the printer utilities so often during that 2 month period of time that I used that bad ink, that I filled the overflow "tank" which stopped the printer cold. A little research and I found out that by removing a few screws you could access the so called tank, which was nothing more than a huge sponge the size of the base of the printer, which was there to absorb the overflow from the cleaning operation. At this point I had owned the printer for about 3 years. I removed and washed the sponge in fresh water, squeezed it dry and placed it back in the printer. I then removed the print head (something that cannot/should not be done at home on an Epson), ran some clear distilled water through the nozzles, then blew compressed air through the print head. Once I ran several test prints to make sure all nozzles were firing, I have not had an issue since. Learning from that experience, I will never buy a printer that does not have user-replaceable print heads. While the printer will not produce prints that will last 85 years like an Epson, but using Canon papers, or high quality watercolor or fine art papers you will get 10-20 years. For day to day use I like Ilford Galerie Classic Pearl - rich color saturation, good shadow detail, smooth highlights, slight but easily correctable magenta cast with my printer. It takes about 30 minutes to dry to the touch, and another 24 hours to stabilize color. I have printed an image recently that I had also printed 4 years ago and I could not detect any evidence of fading.
There is one major but often not discussed feature of Canon's printers - they have a huge print head and cover a tremendous amount of paper in a relatively short time - so I can get an 11x14 image finished in less than 70 seconds. There is also a "look" to a dye based print that simply cannot be achieved with a pigment printer. Some love it, some hate it. I happen to love it. I do not print black and white images. If I did, I would either shut up and buy an Epson and a good RIP or buy the Canon Pro9500, which is also pigment-based, but costs about twice what a Pro9000 costs. I hope this does not result in an Epson vs Canon war. Everyone's mileage can differ.
Posted by David Bostedo on March 26, 2009 at 4:12 PM
I do not print black and white images. If I did, I would either shut up and buy an Epson and a good RIP or buy the Canon Pro9500
I've done some very nice B&W with my Pro 9000 Gene.... Is there something inherent in Epson's that makes it better? The Pro 9000 has an advanced B&W mode that seems to keep things very neutral (for this class of printer, without dedicated B&W inks). I don't think you'd necessarily get better just by switching to Epson, unless it has some of the grey ink features or custom inks. Of course, the B&W mode on the Pro 9000 is SLOW, compared to color mode, but I print more in color so it's no big deal for me.
I love my Pro 9000. One other thing to consider, is that if you're an "every-now-and-then" printer, like I am, dye's will have less tendency to clog than pigments. (I print maybe once or twice a month, but may print several large prints in succession when I find the time.)
Posted by Scott Fricke on March 26, 2009 at 5:48 PM
I have had an Epson 2880 and currently have a R-1800. Both have produced great quality prints, but both have had serious problems. They both developed a problem where it would have a "Communication Error" in the middle of printing that wastes a lot of ink and paper, no one from Epson could ever figure out the problem. Tried different computers, cords, everything, no resolution. Both printers also had severe problems with roll paper and the sheet feeder either jamming or feeding all the way through the printer (imagine dealing with a 30 foot long piece of paper that just went through your printer, multiple times. I am in need of a new printer, looking for something that will print 24" wide and it will not be an Epson this time.
In general I think that pigmented inks work best for black and white, along with a Quadtone RIP. I have seen output from an Epson (model?) with this RIP and it was as close to wet process as I have seen so far. I was not aware of the b/w capability of the Pro 9000. Now I have another reason to get that one when my i9100 dies, but it still seems to be printing flawlessly so it could take a while yet.
Scott,
A while back I was looking at larger format printers and was very impressed with the Designjet 130 at a list of $1300. Even though it was only a three color plus black printer, the output was outstanding! The best blacks I had ever seen from an inkjet printer. If you need pigment ink, archival quality, built-in color calibration, removable print heads, etc - then the Z3200 is a strong candidate and certainly worth a look, but the list is $3400, or the z2100 which does not offer the calibration at $2800.
Posted by Paul DeCesare on March 26, 2009 at 10:14 PM
OK, I think I'll keep my Pixma Pro 9000 and be happy about it! It's still boxed, haven't set it up yet (I'm not convinced I've shot anything worth printing larger than 8x11).
As a long time owner of canon printers- presently i9900, I'd like to add 2 cents here. i use media street inks, which means I have to fill cartridges. Messy, but possible. Also, at approx. .75 per refill vs 8-12$ for canon ink, I can afford to print at will. I have had some clogging problems, but, it seems to be more an issue with cartridges rather than the ink. I am still refilling old canon cartridges for over a year with no problems, but have had some problems with the empty refills I bought. They would clog. I have had to replace printer heads- twice, but not because they were clogged but rather one color or another had an electrical problem - didn't work at all, even though I could force manually color through. Also, I have seen no difference between canon inks and media streets'. I have many prints, behind glass or plastic, at least 5 yrs old with no fading evident. Don't have anything older. So, although I would not use 3rd party cartridges - although some folks do and are happy with them, when someone says they switched to canon inks and had no problems, you are also switching to canon cartridges, which may have been the problem rather than the ink. This is just a hypothesis. Now, ink2image, who sells media street inks, have new cartridges with a rubber lift off plug that seems to work. Instead of material in the cart., it looks like some kind of foam rubber. By the way, to replace all carts with canon ink would run from 50 - 90 bucks for all 8. A print head is around 70$. so , at about $6. per refill of all 8 carts with media street, in each fill up I've saved the cost of a new print head. Am also using red river papers at the moment. Seem pretty good and reasonable. Eventually the printer will die and I guess I'll get the pro 9000, or, by then, they'll probably have another update:)
Cheers
Greg
Discussion
13 repliesMy needs are pretty basic- I'm not looking to sell, and I don't really need 200 years of archival quality. I'm also not looking to make prints bigger than 13 x 19, so I don't need a mammoth printer either. My price range is $200-$400, which, while I realize is low, accurately reflects my funds and (hopefully) needs. I'm thinking about the Epson 1400, but only because it seems to be a good all-around machine for a decent price.
Overall, I want a printer that's a good introduction to making my own prints and has decent quality. I've also already factored in the cost of a calibration system, so no need to worry about that
Any recommendations?? Thanks in advance!
I noticed the Epson site has a rebate on the 1400 right now so the price with that rebate might be just right if you have not shopped around for exact pricing yet.
At first, stick with Epson papers only; after getting used to the software settings and results you can use other papers with this printer, too... including rolls.
Rob
The real cost of printers comes in the inks. At a price of about $14 for 13 ml of ink, an example I just found with a google search (yes that's over $1000 per liter!!!) being able to get larger cartridges and efficient print heads will save you money in the long term even if the printer costs a bit more initially. Friends have actually bought complete new printers on sale because the cost was less than buying a set of inks!
If you're interested in printing B&W as well as color check to see if you'd need to remove cartridges and flush the lines to get the matte/glossy inks in play. Some of the Epson models required this and it was an expensive process. I've found it's best to get a printer that uses inks in individual cartridges because that way you replace only the inks you've run out of rather than a multi cartridge that may still have quantities of ink in colors you use less of - another money waster.
For longevity of prints the pigments are first choice. The dye-based are cheaper but will fade some pretty rapidly. It's all a matter of what your needs and expectations are.
All that being said there are some really good printers out there by companies like Epson, Canon, HP and others. This was a rather long-winded way of suggesting you watch out for the "hidden costs" that show up once you get the printer home.
I don't drink the kool-aid the other posters do, so I am going to break with tradition and recommend you take a look at the Canon Pixma Pro 9000. I after years of frustration with a variety of Epson printers, I decided to try Canon and never went back. The issues included cartridge recognition, ink usage, really s-l-o-w printing, print head clogging, etc. I purchased my i9100 in 2003 and still use it today. Sometimes I print as many as 40 8x10s in one batch, and at other times the printer will lie dormant for weeks at a time. I can say that once I experienced some clogging, but it was with third party ink. When using Canon-brand inks there has never been a problem. I did have one issue, indirectly resulting from the bout of clogging. I used the print head cleaning utility in the printer utilities so often during that 2 month period of time that I used that bad ink, that I filled the overflow "tank" which stopped the printer cold. A little research and I found out that by removing a few screws you could access the so called tank, which was nothing more than a huge sponge the size of the base of the printer, which was there to absorb the overflow from the cleaning operation. At this point I had owned the printer for about 3 years. I removed and washed the sponge in fresh water, squeezed it dry and placed it back in the printer. I then removed the print head (something that cannot/should not be done at home on an Epson), ran some clear distilled water through the nozzles, then blew compressed air through the print head. Once I ran several test prints to make sure all nozzles were firing, I have not had an issue since. Learning from that experience, I will never buy a printer that does not have user-replaceable print heads. While the printer will not produce prints that will last 85 years like an Epson, but using Canon papers, or high quality watercolor or fine art papers you will get 10-20 years. For day to day use I like Ilford Galerie Classic Pearl - rich color saturation, good shadow detail, smooth highlights, slight but easily correctable magenta cast with my printer. It takes about 30 minutes to dry to the touch, and another 24 hours to stabilize color. I have printed an image recently that I had also printed 4 years ago and I could not detect any evidence of fading.
There is one major but often not discussed feature of Canon's printers - they have a huge print head and cover a tremendous amount of paper in a relatively short time - so I can get an 11x14 image finished in less than 70 seconds. There is also a "look" to a dye based print that simply cannot be achieved with a pigment printer. Some love it, some hate it. I happen to love it. I do not print black and white images. If I did, I would either shut up and buy an Epson and a good RIP or buy the Canon Pro9500, which is also pigment-based, but costs about twice what a Pro9000 costs. I hope this does not result in an Epson vs Canon war. Everyone's mileage can differ.
I've done some very nice B&W with my Pro 9000 Gene.... Is there something inherent in Epson's that makes it better? The Pro 9000 has an advanced B&W mode that seems to keep things very neutral (for this class of printer, without dedicated B&W inks). I don't think you'd necessarily get better just by switching to Epson, unless it has some of the grey ink features or custom inks. Of course, the B&W mode on the Pro 9000 is SLOW, compared to color mode, but I print more in color so it's no big deal for me.
I love my Pro 9000. One other thing to consider, is that if you're an "every-now-and-then" printer, like I am, dye's will have less tendency to clog than pigments. (I print maybe once or twice a month, but may print several large prints in succession when I find the time.)
In general I think that pigmented inks work best for black and white, along with a Quadtone RIP. I have seen output from an Epson (model?) with this RIP and it was as close to wet process as I have seen so far. I was not aware of the b/w capability of the Pro 9000. Now I have another reason to get that one when my i9100 dies, but it still seems to be printing flawlessly so it could take a while yet.
Scott,
A while back I was looking at larger format printers and was very impressed with the Designjet 130 at a list of $1300. Even though it was only a three color plus black printer, the output was outstanding! The best blacks I had ever seen from an inkjet printer. If you need pigment ink, archival quality, built-in color calibration, removable print heads, etc - then the Z3200 is a strong candidate and certainly worth a look, but the list is $3400, or the z2100 which does not offer the calibration at $2800.
Cheers
Greg