Advice Requested

[Neelly]

Just wondering if I could ask you guys opinion on my small problem. After many years, about nine I think, sterling service my Epson 1290s has finally given up the ghost. I had thought about sending my images off to be printed, cost effective yes, but it almost seems like kind of stopping half way through the process, missing the point almost so I really think I should replace it.
Now I only print for myself really, some to give away, so its not huge volumes we are talking here. I print mainly colour but am veering towards B&W more these days so the printer would have to be capable of decent B&W.
I have been looking at the Epson R2000 at £420 & the Epson R2880 at £499. There is also the R3000 at £550

So can anybody offer any advice on the choice, is the R3000 £130 better than the R2000 or is the R2880in the sweet spot?

All comments gratefully accepted

Thanks

[dubaiphil]

I think the R3000 has the larger ink cartridges - I did some research a while back but didn't follow through with the purchase. That would be far more cost effective if it is the case.

[Mark von Kanel]

Hi Neil Look up permajet, i bought my 3880 from them they gave a good price and they do archival inks and refillable cartridge systems that are worth a look, Marrut do similar products with Lyson inks which are again very good

When i was buying my printer i rang them and they gave me good advice on the pros and cons on all Epson printers. At the time i didnt even know the sold them, i was just calling them about paper samples. Give them a call.

[Neelly]

Thanks for that guys, but due to the fairly small quantities I print ink costs are not a huge factor. It was more print quality per Pound that I am concerned about

Regards

[Manfred M]

I would pass on the R2000. it does not use the K3 Ultrachrome colours. The other two printers do, so that should narrow down the field a bit. The R2880 is a bit older generation than the R3000, so I suspect that is why it is a bit less expensive.

[Scott Stephen]

I don't understand the appeal of printing one's own.

Cost:
Between the wildly expensive ink cartridges and the expensive photo paper (and the $500 printer itself!) it is really hard to believe it isn't cheaper to pay a few cents a print to Adorama or Shutterfly (NOT WALGREENS) to print the few actual prints one actually makes.

Quality:
Hard to believe that something I'd spend even $500 or $600 on, and which is the size of couple cases of Coke, could possibly make as good and as long-lasting/non-fading/non-blurring, running as the $50,000.00 photo printer they have at Adorama or Shutterfly. My dad has his own photo printer, and the prints he sends me (sorry Dad!) are clearly inferior to what you get from a big lab.

[Manfred M]

I don't understand the appeal of printing one's own.

Scott - it's almost the same question as to why we own quality cameras and lenses, when a lot of people seem to think that their iPhone takes great shots. I know one person who does a fair bit of traveling, but can't see why she would ever take a camera because "all those places have been photographed before".

For some of us. especially those of us that spent a lot of time in the chemical darkroom, the print that you do yourself is part of the process. The commodity printers and custom printers existed back in the film days too.

I agree if you want commodity prints; high volume, moderate quality then the type of printers you suggest is the way to go. The $50,000 photo printers are built for speed and volume, which is where the high costs come in - automated controls, automated job tracking, high speed printing and paper handling / packaging. I also have to be satisfied with the paper finishes / types that they have, the use of dye rather than pigment inks, etc.

On the other hand if you go to the custom printers that do high quality printing, with archival quality inks and papers (including a range of materials, sizes and finishes) , then you are looking at a totally different price structures and it is not just a few cents a print. When I look at the printers they have in the back room, I even see the one I own sitting there for low volume work.

[KCBrecks]

I would imagine Scott that Neil is not in the fortunate position most of you would be in America where there is a WALGREENS on every intersection (even if you would not recommend them), or the others not too far away. From my recollections of Ireland he would probably have go a fair way to get a fine quality print, other than Tesco or Asda, and pay somewhat more than 'a few cents' for them. It could well be a convenience and an economy, even a necessity, for him to have his own printer. Anyway, there is nothing nicer than pressing a button and looking at the latest print from alongside your computer (IMHO).