Epson 3800

[stp]

From my experience, every bit as good.

[chrispy]

It probably has been asked before, but haven't been able to find a direct

answer. I am looking at buying the Epson 3800.

 

Since I have had no experience with inkjet or any other form of printer for

photography, I just wanted to know how the prints compare to a lab print. Do

they look like they have been printed with an inkjet printer? How robust are

the prints compared to a lab print (scratching colors off etc).

 

Thanks

[austinphoto]

From what I've seen, they're beautiful. What I really would like to know is the cost of an 8x10, 11x14 and a 16x20 print. I can't seem to get that information. Does anyone out there know?

[jonathan_walker]

I figure about $2 per square foot for inks for my R2400.

 

I've estimated that the 3800's larger ink carts save you about one-third on ink costs, so figure $1.33 per square foot.

 

Paper is extra.

[greg lockrey]

The "going" average from everyone I know who has one is that it uses about 2.5 ml per 13x19" print at 1440 dpi. That figures to about $.61 per 8x10.

[cricket_saleh]

Hello Chris,

 

We bought the 3800 a month ago, and have been printing proof books on the Ilford Gallery paper, and the results are divine.

I bought it to give me great black and white results from digital files. Unlike the prints I was obtaining from colour photographic paper from the lab, the results are punchy with a great tonal range and without colour bias.

 

The smooth pearl paper is quite good for handling and does not seem to scratch with ease, yet the gloss is a different matter, and needs to be handled with much care. I had to reprint many for a commercial job, as scratching from the guillotine was a problem.

 

Great investment though, enjoy!

[chrispy]

Hi Cricket,

 

You say you have been printing proof books, do you think it can be used to print wedding photo books? If you print on both sides, does the paper get all warped due to the ink?

 

Chris

[greg lockrey]

Yes, and you have to let it dry first. Don't forget to use two sided paper.

[chrispy]

Hi Gregory, when you say "yes" are you refering to wedding ablums or the fact that they do get warped.

 

By the way, thank you for everyones responses.

[patricklavoie]

You could print on both side no problem, choose a Dual side paper that have enough weight to support the ink properly. Normaly any inkjet paper dual side should do it no problem. Inkjetart or Inkjetmall have a house paper mirco ceramic dual side that look stunning. As for the quality, i am pretty sure it will exceed what you curently get from a lab as for quality and longevity. I will not be shy to give those print to any demanding client...if you work profesionaly in CS2 AND READ THE DOCUMENT that come with your printer to get the best out of it.

[greg lockrey]

Both....I use a comb hole punch and plastic combs to mount them.

[greg lockrey]

But if you wait a day to dry before you print on the otherside, It will be fine.

[roger_smith4]

I haven't seen the Epson 3800 but haven't seen pigmented color inkjet prints that are "better" on glossy paper than a Frontier with Crystal Archive. Dye inkjet prints off a mid-range Canon on Pro Glossy paper looked much better to me.

 

Part of it is that most of the papers and ink combos are defective in some way- bronzing at different angles, gloss differential, unattractively dull-looking glossy surface (Epson Premium Glossy), glossy but acidic and non-archival (above Ilford papers), etc. Maybe someone's found the perfect paper (Costco Kirkland glossy was as good as I've seen for a true glossy) but I'm not yet very impressed with my own output. The best prints are about equal with a Frontier but many are inferior. I'm still experimenting and may change my mind, however.

 

This doesn't apply to black and white where I like the true matte inkjet papers and new faux fiber papers (Silver Rag, etc) better than "matte" Frontier prints as they have less metamerism, less glare under glass, etc.

[greg lockrey]

Like you said, you haven't seen the 3800. ;>)

[chrispy]

Which canon models are you refering to? If your refering to the Pixma range then I suppose these aren't in the same league as the 3800.

[roger_smith4]

"Like you said, you haven't seen the 3800. ;>)"

 

True. I had seen the Epson 2200. If you give me an image to print (I have Epson Semi-Gloss and Pictorico Photo Glossy sitting around in 8.5x11) and want to do a print swap let me know. I'm using MISPRO color inks in an Epson R220 (and for B&W MIS UT-R2 in another Epson R220.

 

Also, to clarify my above post the Canons looked equal to slightly more vivid than Frontier prints and quite superior to my own color glossy pics. MIS UT-R2 kills the Canon for neutral BW.

[roger_smith4]

I think I saw the Canon IP4200 or something like that which my father uses- the output between the lower and higher end dye-based Canons seemed pretty much identical in the store. My $5 Epson R220 gives better B&W results on glossy and matte than what I've seen from an Epson 2200 w/OEM inks without a RIP, so printer price isn't everything. I didn't even understand what bronzing was until I held up a 2200 print at an angle and saw a red glare.

 

I don't think my pigmented color output is bad on glossy and can look essentially the same under glass as a Frontier print but just don't see it being superior either.

 

Again, if anyone wants to do a print swap (your image or mine) to compare, I'm game. I'm particularly interested in this for color as I have more experience with B&W.

[movingfinger]

I see a customer review of the 3800 on B&H and he describes "gear marks" which are noticeable on glossy and luster papers. Have any other 3800 owners seen this? Did this customer get a bad one or are they all like that?

[patricklavoie]

I print on Luster and Smooth Pearl, 13x19 and i dont see any gear mark, i cant say for the glossy paper.

[steve_brink1]

I just sold both my Epson 4000 and 2400 printers, both of which make excellent prints. However, of course they do look like inkjet prints. I much prefer the look of Lightjet prints printed on Fuji Crystal archive paper. I've had friends compare and they pick the Lightjet prints everytime. It also takes time to make inkjet prints which I don't have to deal with. I don't think the cost is bad eihter. A 16x20 is $25 first print and $18 2nd print including shipping. Most gallery's prefer thes Digital C prints also. I use Pictopia.com which uses a state of the art LightJet 430. And many people don't know that the B&W prints on these are excellent also. Just make a 5x7 proof print, and then dodge & burn accordingly for the full size print. This works well for me.

[patricklavoie]

Steve_What did you mean by <...of course they do look like inkjet prints...> it is a good or a bad thing? If its a bad thing, what was you experience with your printer? color management? darkroom?

 

With the right combination of ink/paper you should and could obtain the same if not better print quality that you use to get from traditional darkroom...in lees time, and *maybe* with longer longevity (depending of printer/ink/paper/handling etc..)

 

To get a good print you need a good picture, a good knowlegde in CS2, a good printer, and indeed experience in all the workflow. I found that many photographer (not all of course) have a weak link, and are pretty fast to blame one of the above;

 

my picture look not as i use to get...digital suck!

 

my process images have blown hightlight, dark shadow...LCD screen are cheap and CS2 suck!

 

my print dont look like what i use to get from my lab...of course they do look like inkjet prints : )

 

As for the price, it cost me a fraction of a ligthjet print for a same size to produce, rarely (read close to never) i have to do a second print because i am not happy, thanks to my color managed workflow. As for the speed of it, i get a 16x20 after 5min. no waiting, no sending, no problem.

[srr]

No gear marks on glossy, or any other paper I've used: loading from from the top (glossy and luster) or rear (velvet). Gears are on the opposite side of the ink.