Which printer ??

[Colin Southern]

I think it moved more to Epson than Canon, as more of the higher end printers use the Epson over the Canon. It comes down to if they are using Epson instead of Canon then the Epson might be making a better printer.

Cheers:

Allan

It came down to Epson or Canon for me (wouldn't touch HP with a barge pole).

After a lot of research I came to a feeling that Canon MIGHT do the job but I KNEW the Epson would do the job.

So I went with Epson and never looked back.

[James G]

Ken,
I'm an Epson user,but I did look closely at Canon when I was deciding on replacing my R2400. I actually compared the R3000 with the Pixma X10 . In all honesty printout of a couple of my images onto vendor specific glossy A3 showed slight differences. However they were slight and although I could discern them, and that another phtographer as 'picky' as me would see them, my wife and friends would not without appropriate hints.
In the end I decided to stick with Epson because of familiarity, and as I said in my earlier post, a very good price deal at the FoI trade show. I would almost certainly have switched to Canon at the show if Epson had not effectively 'price matched' the X10.
I also checked out HP printing the same images (also A3). Suffice to say that HP did it compare well
With saturation differences appearing that did not show on the Epson or Canon prints. (I had a comparison print from my own system to ensure a reasonable check ).
So, my somewhat non scientific conclusion is that there is probably not much to choose between equivalent Canon or Epson printers regarding quality of output. .... Cheers,, James
'I am conf

[Mark von Kanel]

Colin, Nigel, Mark,
thanks for your excellent and informed input to this thread. I switched from an Epson R2400 to the R3000 in the last month. It's only taken 2 years and a really good price deal from Focus on Imaging this year to persuade me.
I've been aware of the Marrutt / Lyson ink alternative for a while, but had been leery of switching given some of the negative comments out on the web. This thread though has dispelled my doubts..... hooray for CiC :-)
One quick question though?
I’m fairly comfortable with profiling and have a DataColor Spyder Print ChkR system which I've used to profile specialist papers not specifically intended for or generally used in inkjets.
However I’m wondering if I should expect significant difference in print quality, if I carry on using Epson, Calumet or Ilford vendor supplied paper profiles on the R3000 during the changeover without regenerating the profiles once I start using the Lyson /Marrutt inks. Or should I just start generating new profiles immediately rather than wait until I've completed the change over.

Think that makes sense.... James

James i personally would re profile evry time i changed one of the cartridges to an ink not of the same manufacture as that of the one its replacing. but remember that the ink supply tube will hold a few mil so dont re profile straight the way unless you flush the line as well. it probly wont make any disernable difference but why risk it?

[Colin Southern]

However I’m wondering if I should expect significant difference in print quality, if I carry on using Epson, Calumet or Ilford vendor supplied paper profiles on the R3000 during the changeover without regenerating the profiles once I start using the Lyson /Marrutt inks. Or should I just start generating new profiles immediately rather than wait until I've completed the change over.

Think that makes sense.... James

Hi James,

Sorry - I missed this earlier.

I asked the same question of Marrutt Digital, and the response was "you shouldn't need to re-profile until you've changed about 1/2 the carts" (they're all very similar colour, but the effect is cumulative), and in practice that's exactly what I found.

So in theory yes, but in practice no - not for the 7800 inks anyway.

I think that at the end of the day though, folks just have to evaluate the results - if they're fine then don't do anything, and if they're not then do something

[Macmahon]

Hec - Re your last point about Having the printer manage things for B & W, I did a lot of reading yesterday and saw, referred to in several places, guidance on using the Advanced B & W Mode on the Epsons. It's in conjunction with this facility that the suggestion is made about putting the pinter in charge. I was searching on 'Advanced B & W mode and turned a couple of resources (I'm not on my own computer at the moment and don't have the URLs) that walked you through the process from a Photoshop/Lightroom point of view (which I need to translate into GIMP, or some other printer software).

Donald

Epson's ABW mode uses only the black and gray inks. It's available only in 'Printer manages colour' mode. As you are not using any of the colour inks when using ABW, it is moot whether letting 'Photoshop/Lightroom/your application manage colours' would make any sense anyway, because most of the information in the ICC profile for a paper/ink combination relates to colour data.

I have read of folk getting subtle colour casts using the full colour ink set and 'Application manages' to print black and whites. That hasn't been my experience with good, self-built, ink-paper profiles. Nevertheless, I now always use Epson's ABW with 'printer manages' when I make B&Ws and I am a very happy camper. I feel sure Ansel Adams would do the same were he printing nowadays!

Cheers

Tim

[James G]

Mark, thanks, on reflection I know that it is always good practice to recalibrate after change. Think I was just looking for shortcuts :-(

[James G]

Colin, thanks, I think I've got myself an interesting project to now find out at what point during the switch over a discernable need to reprofile occurs. Watch ot for the research conclusions in the near future. One thing for certain, the cost of the investigation (ink), will come in lower than trying it the other way round. James

[Colin Southern]

Colin, thanks, I think I've got myself an interesting project to now find out at what point during the switch over a discernable need to reprofile occurs. Watch ot for the research conclusions in the near future. One thing for certain, the cost of the investigation (ink), will come in lower than trying it the other way round. James

No worries James,

At the time, I was all worried about changing -- I'd heard all the usual propaganda about head clogging / fading etc, but in my case, it was completely unfounded -- with the Lyson inks actually being a bit BETTER, and around 1/3 the price.

The only down-sides I've had are ...

- Marrutt had an issue with the carts where the chip didn't seat properly. They admitted the problem - offered to swap it out at no cost, but I found a work-around where I just needed to mechanically push the cart in a bit further.

- I had a seal blow on a yellow cart - sent them photos and they replaced it no charge.

- I had a cart that was damaged (crushed a little) at some point - again, they replaced it at no charge.

If your printing is time-critical then I'd suggest keeping a spare set of carts, and check them (visually) when they arrive (looking for leaks etc).

The worst part about discovering a problem is that it's usually as a cart is swapped out - job waiting - and then having to wait 7 to 10 days while a replacement arrives - so I have to order a genuine one at 3 to 4 times the cost.

[revi]

(..)
The worst part about discovering a problem is that it's usually as a cart is swapped out - job waiting - and then having to wait 7 to 10 days while a replacement arrives - so I have to order a genuine one at 3 to 4 times the cost.

But isn't that a geographical problem, you being in NZ and Marrutt in the UK?
James is in the UK (as is the OP), so delivery times shouldn't differ too much between Marrutt and Epson.

[Colin Southern]

But isn't that a geographical problem, you being in NZ and Marrutt in the UK?
James is in the UK (as is the OP), so delivery times shouldn't differ too much between Marrutt and Epson.

Yep - for sure.

Doesn't help me any though

[movielvr]

The Epson 2880 is a darn fine choice. I use it's distant relative the 7800; Epson's printing expertise is 2nd to none, IMO.

A warning to both of you though, once the bug bites ...

Colin, how do you go about mounting those lovely prints with out frame or mat? are they on canvas?

[Colin Southern]

Colin, how do you go about mounting those lovely prints with out frame or mat? are they on canvas?

Yes, Canvas.

I do my own frame manufacture and mounting.

[Donald]

Epson's ABW mode uses only the black and gray inks. It's available only in 'Printer manages colour' mode. As you are not using any of the colour inks when using ABW, it is moot whether letting 'Photoshop/Lightroom/your application manage colours' would make any sense anyway, because most of the information in the ICC profile for a paper/ink combination relates to colour data.

Very helpful post, Tim, in terms of my learning curve.

It spawns another (and I think, final pre-purchase) question. It's not about whether you think 'application manages' or 'printer manages' is the right route. So, if we could leave that aside for now.

The question is - If I have applied a tone to the image in post processing, do I therefore need to avoid the use of ABW so that the colour carts will come into play in order to apply the tone?

One solution, if one does want to utilise ABW, if the answer is 'yes', is obviously to avoid applying tones. Is this line of thinking correct?

There will, I have no doubt, be lots and lots more questions in the post-purchasing period!

[Polar01]

Donald; yes if you have added a coloured tone, say a blue or a yellow then you have to use "application manages" instead of ABW as this only if using black inks.
Again yes if one wants to utilise ABW than no tones can be applied to the image.
Remember that a colour tone added to a B&W image now makes the image a CMYK image not B&W.

Cheers:

Allan

[Donald]

Donald; yes if you have added a coloured tone, say a blue or a yellow then you have to use "application manages" instead of ABW as this only if using black inks.
Again yes if one wants to utilise ABW than no tones can be applied to the image.
Remember that a colour tone added to a B&W image now makes the image a CMYK image not B&W.

Cheers:

Allan

Thank you Allan.

So, if I've already put a tone on an image (with Silver Efex Pro 2) and now want to print that, I have to use 'Application Manages' Okay. Got that.

Probably a stupid question, but if I print using ABW, will I get a print that gives me a good B & W and ignores the toning, or do I just get a mess that I shouldn't have tried to print that way?

[Macmahon]

Probably a stupid question, but if I print using ABW, will I get a print that gives me a good B & W and ignores the toning, or do I just get a mess that I shouldn't have tried to print that way?

Hi Donald

You'll get a B & W. Whether it's a good one will depend on how the tone (greyscale luminance level?) of the colour you added complements, competes with, or confuses the underlying B & W tones that you'd generated in SEP2 before adding the colour. This may be a case of having to "suck it and see" as they say down here.

However, is this not a tad academic? Surely you would add a colour tone only if you intended to print it with the colour tone, and conversely, if you wished to produce a B & W print, you would not have added a colour tone? Or did I miss something?

Cheers

Tim

[Donald]

However, is this not a tad academic? Surely you would add a colour tone only if you intended to print it with the colour tone, and conversely, if you wished to produce a B & W print, you would not have added a colour tone? Or did I miss something?

No, Tim, you didn't miss anything. That's why I added in the caveat about it probably being a stupid question.

This is about me just trying to get my head around what printing is all about.

Given what I'm reading and learning about the Epson R3000 (which is what I've got my eye on), I was just wondering how much I should be regretting having put tones onto the files at the post-processing stage for online viewing. And whether I should have made a B & W and a toned version, in case at any time (which seems to be now) I would want to move on to do my own printing rather than just view images online (if that ramble makes any sort of sense)!

The thinking that lies behind the above ramble is:

• All that I read says it's better to use Epson's 'Advanced B & W', which utilises 'Printer Manages' mode, for printing B & Ws
• But if I want to print my (already made) toned images, I exclude that option. So I need to print them in 'Application Manages' mode.
• So have I shot myself in the foot by having applied these tones (given that I can't undo the tone in those applied using SEP2). I'd have to go back to the TIFF made from the RAW file and start all over again.

Then again, I may be suffering from beginner's 'over thinking it' syndrome and need to just get on with it and stop asking so many stupid b..... questions.

[James G]

Donald, I don't do a lot of B&W work, but one of the reasons I switched to the R3000 was because I do not need to remove the photo black ink cartridge to print. It was all a bit of a hassle on the R1400.
One question does occur though, since I understand you mostly work with B&W? Does your workflow start in grayscale mode or do you process in colour (RGB, L*a*b, etc) and then convert to B&W after using a layer change as I do?

I ask because I just tried a quick check and applied a change to grayscale mode on a "B&W" image I generated recently.
On the monitor I could see no obvious change in the tonal range.

I guess, though I havn't done it this way yet, that printing the same image using ABW inkset would give a different and hopefully richer range of grayscale tones. What I can't get my head around yet, is if I started with a grayscale image from the raw file, with no colour workflow, could I get the same tonal balance before proceeding to print.

I'll have a crack at this and let you know the outcome, but I'd be interested to hear from anyone else out there who regularly processes and prints B&W.

I d like a new challenge.... :-) James

[Donald]

One question does occur though, since I understand you mostly work with B&W? Does your workflow start in grayscale mode or do you process in colour (RGB, L*a*b, etc) and then convert to B&W after using a layer change as I do?

All my B & W work is done is Silver Efex Pro2. So, the workflow is:

• Process RAW file with DxO Optics Pro 8. Produce TIFF (which is in colour)
• Save this TIFF (archive for possible future re-editing) and make a copy
• Open copy TIFF in Silver Efex Pro2, which automatically appears as B & W with Nik's default settings applied. (NB - I do not have Photoshop or Lightroom so do not use SEP2 as a plug-in, despite all the marketing that says you must have those to use it. I use it as stand alone, so have to tell the file to 'Open with'. I actually have things set up to open all TIFFs with SEP2, so I just have to double click on it).
• Save this copy TIFF once all work done in SEP2.
• Open copy (B & W) TIFF in the GIMP and save in GIMP .xcf native format. Finalise work.
• Delete copy TIFF (.xcf now main master file).
• Make JPEGs.

[Polar01]

Donald as to your probably is it will print as a B&W if the your have done some stupid as I have, went to print a beautiful colour print come back after it printed to fine a B&W on the tray. Can not figure how what happened, go to reprint and then realize that someone had not changed the ABW back to colour. So if you mess up you will get a nice B&W print that should have been colour if you forget to change the setting. Been there, don that, likely will do it again, and again.

Cheers:

Allan