2200/ b&w/matte/pano possible? or switch to 3800?

[parasko_p]

Hi all.

 

I have the Epson 2200 printer which I purchased with the optional roll-cutter

approx 2 years ago, but which I have never really used much.

 

Since purchase, the K3 inks have arrived so I want to know if I should sell

the 2200 and purchase the new 3800 so I can print larger and also save on

inks.

 

I am not very print technical and I read the new printers print beautiful b&w

images virtually 'out of the box' w/out fussing with rips, curves etc.

 

I will be printing mostly b&w, using only matte papers and panoramic images

(produced with my xpan). The prints will be for sale and not for personal

admiration only.

 

Is it worth selling the 2200 and upgrading to the 3800?

 

If not, what are the best b&w inks for the 2200 these days? I remember trying

Black only printing and not really happy with the results.

 

Is ImagePrint the best product if I also wish to produce colour images on the

2200?

 

Any advice appreciated.

[AaronFalkenberg]

If you like matte inkjet b+w, you can't go wrong with the Epson Ultrachrome inks and the <a href="www.quadtonerip.com">QTR</a> rip. Much better than black only, IMO, but some do like the warm black only look. I like QTR because it gives very fine tonal control from very warm to very cool. If you want more shadow density in your prints, I advise changing to a dedicated B+W inkset for the 2200 or upgrading to the 2400/3800 and use glossy/semi-gloss stock of one kind or another. The ultrachrome inks on glossy/semi-gloss stock produce too much bronzing for me. From the sounds of it, the 2400 might be a better choice for you over the 3800 since the 2400 takes roll paper and the 3800 does not. <br><br>

 

Cheers,<br>

Aaron

[AaronFalkenberg]

For some reason the link didn't work: http://www.quadtonerip.com

[Uhooru]

Aaron, makes a good point about the control you get in QTR and I do like to use it. I also like B-only as well. You have some control on the warmth by the paper you use. I get very nice results with Condor B/W but I also really like the warmth of Epson Velvet fine Art. But its nice to be able to control that in software like w/the qtr.

[parasko_p]

I am considering dedicated B&W inks if I stick with the 2200. How would such inks on the 2200 compare with K3 inks on the new printers, when printing on matte papers?

[Ed_Ingold]

The Epson 2200 has a built-in roll feeder and cutter. While the R2400 has a roll feeder, you must cut the prints by hand. Either will print up to 44 nches long (maybe longer with software). A 12x36 inch panorama is a useful size for display, for which inexpensive, generic frames are available (11-3/4 x 36 inch poster frames).

 

ImagePrint is very useful, perhaps essential for printing B&W on a 2200. Standard, color-managed programs like Photoshop can print with excellent color, given monitor calibration and suitable print profiles. Epson will not help you if you use third-party inks and screw up - a common event, unfortunately.

[beauh44]

This is just my .02 cent's worth and everyone's mileage will vary of course.

 

I own both the 2200, QTR and the 3800 and can tell you that, even with QTR and the 2200, the Epson B&W driver built-in to the 3800 smokes the 2200/QTR combo. There are probably several reasons why that have nothing to do with QTR (which is a fine product); although these are just guesses on my part: The 3800 uses an extra black ink cart that the 2200 doesn't have; It could be the new K3 inkset, or possibly the new and improved printhead on the 3800 - I just don't know. Even the color prints are noticeably "better". How? It's hard to put into words - perhaps more "vibrant" might be a good one to use.

 

Now, since you already own a 2200 and QTR is relatively inexpensive, the question becomes (in part) is it worth it to buy a $1400 printer to get better B&W prints versus $50 to buy QTR to get your 2200 sort of close? I don't know - only you can answer that. (BTW you can order Epson's RIP to use with the 3800, although I'm not sure why one would necessarily want to in most situations)

 

Since you never or rarely used your 2200's roll-cutter (me either) you won't miss that with the 3800 - it doesn't support roll-fed paper. But its paper handling ability with cut-sheet is impressive; you can load paper from the front, back and top.

 

And try getting a 2200 to print borderless. I never got mine to do it right. The 3800 nails it.

 

The 3800 will print much larger cut-sheet paper too. So again, if the absence of a roll-feed mechanism doesn't bother you and you aren't using your 2200's anyway, you'll be able to print larger prints with the 3800 using the newer Epson papers that have been promised - but AFAIK aren't quite yet available.

 

The (included) B&W print driver with the 3800 is *very* good. You can use their canned "presets" for "neutral", "warm", "cool", etc., or "roll your own" with a very intuitive interface that anyone could use quickly and easily. (QTR, I can't say is "easy to use" - at least the version I got; it needs .tif files, a separate GUI and some networking capabilities installed in XP for it to work at all)

 

I do have one possible concern about the 3800; it seems to gulp ink and at ~ $50 a cartridge, that's not cheap compared to the 2200's which can be had for less than $10 per cart at Atlex. I've only owned my 3800 a few weeks and haven't yet run out of any of the inks but it *appears* to really drink light-cyan and light-magenta when printing color prints. If you print mostly B&W on matte papers you can expect to eat up mostly the matte-black ink.

 

It's also not nearly as big of an ordeal to switch from black to matte-black; that happens automatically with the 3800, simply by your choice of paper - although it takes a couple of minutes for the printer to prime the line, which isn't a very bright design on Epson's part. They could've provided a separate line for the matte black cartridge without incurring a huge cost, IMHO.

 

Oh yeah - I know you say you pretty much always use matte papers but ya' never know if you might get a request for a glossy paper print. The 2200 (IMHO) was *awful* with Epson's own Premium Glossy Photo Paper. The 3800 does a beautiful job (no "gloss differential") and can print a borderless print that'll knock your socks off with Epson's glossy papers, whether you print in B&W or color.

 

Again, just my .02 cent's worth. Good luck!

[grepmat]

Black and white will be FAR, FAR better on the 3800, straight out of the printer with no rip or other software (no rip is needed). I have had the 2200 and now have the 3800, and it's night and day. It is MUCH more preferable to move to the K3 ink than to mess around with alternate ink sets and rips, etc.

 

I don't think the ink consumption is significantly different between the two. For what it's worth, Epson claims that ink costs will be about 50% less. However, although the cartridges on the 3800 are a little cheaper per ml, you will inevitably wind up using more because you will be printing larger (and because it's faster). Switching black inks will cost you about the same (very roughly) as switching on the 2200. There is no roll capability with the 3800, obviously.

 

In my opinion, the 3800 is an excellent upgrade from a 2200 (less so from a 2400 unless you need the size). It's an easy and transparent move - just plug it in and you will be right at home. You will be pleased with the added speed, the added size and most of all blown away with the improvement in B&W. Of course, only you can decide if the expense of the upgrade is worth it to you.

[brian_ellis16]

I use QTR and Ultrachrome inks in my 2200. Before that I used an Epson 1160 and a 1280, both with MIS b&w inks and Paul Roark's curves. I'm very happy with the 2200, UC inks, and QTR, I see no consistent obvious difference between the MIS inks in my earlier printers and UC inks in the 2200 with QTR (without QTR UC inks are a disaster for b&w printing in the 2200 IMHO). I do plan to buy a 3800 just for the ability to make larger prints than I can with the 2200 but not until Roy Harrington makes QTR available for the 3800 as he's planning to do but exactly when that will be is uncertain.

 

Unless you need the larger print capability of the 3800 I'd suggest trying QTR with your 2200 and see what you think. You can try it for free and if you like it you pay $50 to Roy. If not you've lost nothing except the time it takes to learn how to use it. You'll see that it has profiling capability but you don't need to become involved with that just to try it out.

 

As I'm sure you know, the Epson 2400 has an Advanced B&W mode. I don't have a 2400 so I can't speak from experience but I think there's a consensus within the digital black and white printing group that in the 2400 Advanced B&W wasn't as good as other methods of printing b&w (e.g. Piezography, MIS inks, RIPs, etc.). Maybe the Advanced B&W mode in the 3800 is such an improvement over that mode in the 2400 that RIPs, dedicated b&w inks, etc. are no longer ncessary. We'll have to wait and see until more 3800s are in use by more serious b&w printers. As of now I'm skeptical but open to being convinced otherwise.

[parasko_p]

Thanks for your opinions.

 

I think I will take the plunge and buy the 3800.

 

Cheers.

[jtk]

2200, Epson OEM driver, MIS UT7 ink: more blacks than the newer machines.

 

Black Only can be great, but in letter size and smaller it under-resolves fine 35mm detail. I like grain when I want it, my scanner resolves it and controls it however I want it (Nikon V with Vuescan), but I don't want to be stuck with grain simulation by printer dots.

 

I've seen prints by online-famous Black-Only enthusiasts and I'm certain the'd have done better (ie more to my taste) with QTR and OEM pigs or MIS UT7 with OEM driver.