Do I really need Colorburst RIP with an Epson 4000?

[joe_ethridge]

I currently own an Epson 1280, and thought that I'd step up to an

Epson 4000, due to the archival inks, larger format (for 16x20) ,

and savings in ink, over the long run (as opposed to an Epson 2200).

I realize that Epson is about to market the 4800, but thought that

since they are offering a rebate of $300.00 or free RIP by

colorburst, perhaps I should go with the 4000. I'm currently an

amature getting ready to go pro (yes, I realize what I'm getting in

to, and no, you don't know the hell my present career has been these

past 26 years. There is no turning back:) I'm just not sure if I'll

be needing a RIP program. I prefer to keep things to a minimum if

possible, and I'm not sure if I'll really get the most from a RIP.

Perhaps the $300.00 rebate would be better. I know the 4000 is a big

step from the 1280, but most of my prints (Hahnemuhle, Lumijet,

parchment and velvet type) have been great without using a RIP. Any

feedback on which way to go would be appreciated. Thanks, Joe:)

[doug_dolde]

Forget it.....buy the 4800 !

[finepics]

You answered your own question Joe, most of your prints have been great without a RIP. RIPs are really meant for high volume digital labs rather than the home user. Take the rebate and get some custom paper profiles made instead.

[mag_miksch]

IMO you only need the rip software if you want to print panorama pics, eg. 16x30, using roll paper; if you want to stay with the 16x20 size there is no need for a rip.

[www.whitemountainphoto.com]

Mag, why would he need a rip for 16x30 roll paper? I just printed a 16x34 on roll paper Monday that came out absolutely stunning.

 

Dana/

[joe_ethridge]

I appreciate the feedback, I'd probably get overwhelmed with the additional software, as I've got much to learn in so many areas, anyway. I guess now, my decision should be whether to buy the 4000, or go with the new model, the 4800.

 

Thanks again, Joe

[john_laporte1]

I print on epson 4000's and 7800's...you won't need a rip. But, check out Q Image Pro software. It will lay out all of your print sizes on the page size of your choice. It does a great job of sizing your output to just about anything you want. I've done 24x30's from 8x10 files and they are perfect. Best part... you can download it for abour $50.00.

I print professionally using about 150 rolls of 24" paper per year. Q image is flawless.

[joe_ethridge]

Great info.

[michael_bement]

I was bummed a bit after hearing about the 4800 as I recently purchased a 4000, so I contacted Epson.

 

After corresponding with Epson about the 4000/4800, it appears that the 4000 will still be marketed and sold as a premier solution for color printing. The 4800 is NOT an upgraded 4000, it just has a different ink system. The fellow indicated that the only area in which the 4800 will outperform the 4000 is B&W.

 

After using the 4000 with RIP and comparing it with output from my 2200, I was very happy. I felt very comfortable that my prints would be just about as good as they can be.

 

You certainly don't need a RIP, but it helps with B&W, and the profiles seem to be much more accurate than the standard thing. Other aspects of printing seem simplified and/or better quality as well.

 

Now, I have added the X-Rite Pulse system, which seems to be provide a complete color management solution for me. It seems that 'color management' is another area that gives you what you pay for.

 

With the 4000 and the Pulse, I am no longer 'guessing' or 'wondering' about what is going on. It may be overkill, but color management is an area in which I am very interested. I really want to know what is going on and be certain about it. You don't need that to make nice prints.

 

Good luck,

 

Mike