Has Epson fixed their printers?

[philfx]

<p><strong>This is under Pro/high volume, but lately I print low volume with some Pro printers.</strong><br>

I used to use Epson up until the Stylus 7000. I had the Pro 5000, the 4000, and other smaller versions including the Original Stylus Color...the Amazing breakthrough in printer technology when all HP could do is print halftone looking colors. And I was in love with Epson.<br>

So then came <strong>Epson clogging issues, ink waste issues... They were just too sensitive, and finicky, and resulted to trashing a couple Epsons in that time. When the Epson had these issues and then ink swapping needs, I then switched to the Designjets from HP.</strong> By this time they had caught up to the output quality and had far "better" build quality/ink usage than what I was used to from Epson. <strong>The DJ HP's were made nice and robust and the printer you could leave on for days even weeks and come back and get a clean great print right off the bat with no (at least noticeable) cleaning cycles. They didn't need cleaning cycles to keep things primed. The prints were beautiful and I was very happy. I also noticed much better ink usage. Its a frugal ink user the HP.</strong><br>

I write this as I'm looking to get another LF printer.<br>

I just received a couple print samples from Epson Pro 4900 with a nice B&W of Gorman's Jeff Bridges port, and a somewhat rich color print from Elizabeth Carmel "Autumn Splendor" (not really an impressive color print).<br>

I liked the 4900 output, but I don't think they are any better than what I can get out of the recent Canon or HP printers. I think my older Dye based HP 130(vivera inks) could do such a job, or the 5500. I have seen beautiful B&W prints from the 12 ink Canon's also. I would love the B&W file of Jeff Bridges to give it a test print and see.<br>

I appreciate the feedback from those that have used a range of machines with multiple media, and not the smug newer users of one brand ...or worse, one model with the typical "I never had that problem" reply.( I do understand it maybe the case that you didn't have an issue). I have used a good number of printers over the years, except the Canon ProGraf line, ( I maybe leaning towards), but often wonder if Epson has changed their way of ink and paper handling.<br>

I was actually quite happy with the HP product, but the Desgnjet support team did nothing for me when I spent $3000 on papers, and their EFI RIP didn't support the HP papers I wanted to use...Besides just an overall bad experience. Expiring dates forcing me toi not buy in bulk, etc. <br />I have had a number of pro Canon camera's and gear, and I have been happy with their service and support.<br>

<strong>My question is....</strong><br>

Did Epson do anything specific to improve or change the ink line and usage?<br />Do they still have to be on, and go through cleaning cycles? <br />Do they still use a lot of ink? Do they suffer from clogs as they used to? (I used a 7500 some time back, and looked like they improved build from 7000. And I seen the 7900). Once the 7900 gets printing, it looks like workhorses. But I change papers often, and print a few at a time these days. I can have the printer sitting for weeks-month without a print needed.<br />Have they made them less sensitive? Has the paper feed been simplified and made easier to swap sheets and media?<br>

<strong>I much appreciate the feedback from long time users with a good understanding of the different systems of ink and feed.</strong><br>

Thanks!</p>

 

[digitaldog]

<p>The bottom line with the 900 series seems to be, you need to run them regularly, every couple days or there can be issues with clogging. But some of this may be environmental too. I have a 4900 that will clog if not used within a few days and in the same room, a 3880 that never clogs even if left for months. I do find that the 4900 is much happier if I never power it down. It has a very low (6w) use so maybe just being on is helping. The 7900 is a workhorse and if you use it that way, you'll probably find less issues than those using it sporadically. But what's with the 3880? I just love that little printer. </p>

[pics]

<p>If you read the reviews, you can see that many people still experience the same issues/problems with newer Epson printers. Their inkjet printers are the gold standard in terms of image quality but I keep hoping they will put some serious effort into the long term durability/ maintenance issues they suffer from. (paper feeding issues, ink waste etc..) The main reason I have held off on home inkjet printing is that it seems like you need to spend a decent amount of money to keep them running well. They don't like being put away for a year and then brought back into service.</p>

[philfx]

<p>Thanks Andrew and Daniel. I guess I will hold off from Epson. While I think the image quality is still amazing, I don't think that HP and Canon fall much short (if any) from it.<br>

I do see a very nice deep rich black on this Epson sample with such careful toning as to bring the left cheek ever so slightly apart from the background(well done Gorman as well), I do think HP and Canon can do this as well (from experience of other prints with such details). The paper they have it on is the Prem Luster 260. Its got a slightly strong contrast/gloss to it with some fine texture. His shirt fabric sheen looks great on it. I do love the Pro Satin from HP. Less glossy very heavy weight paper. I can see how the Luster260's charactrics works so well with this image. Would love the large file to test out. Wonder if Gorman would "lend" it out ? :-)<br /><br /><br>

* I have yet to see prints made from these 3 brands using the same file.(all using the recent 12 ink systems with proper profiling).</p>

[digitaldog]

<blockquote>

<p>While I think the image quality is still amazing, I don't think that HP and Canon fall much short (if any) from it.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>The ink head technology is quite different. On some it is an expendable part.<br>

HP seems to be out of this space. The Canon I had was very nice. </p>

[Mike D]

<p>My R3000 had to be replaced by Epson due to ink clogging and now the refurbished replacement sometimes drops splatters of ink in one corner. Switching back and forth between glossy and matte black cartridges wastes a lot of ink ans is probably the cause of my recent clogging problem. Epson's real problem is that they no longer repair their printers locally. They have to be sent to a centralized repair/replacement facility out of state. Not being able to take the printer to a local repair shop is a real problem for me. If I had known this in advance, I would never have bought another Epson printer. They used to have authorized repair shops when I had previous Epson printers years ago. </p>

[philfx]

<p>Yes, the HP has print heads that need to be replaced from time to time. They actually last pretty long, about a year+ or so. They are priced less than ink carts, and can be found for discounted prices often. If an Epson head is damaged, you have to get your fingers dirty with good instructions and patients, or send it off. On a desktop size printer, I have replaced one before, and it cost $140 for the head(I think it was the 1280?). It ended up being trash not long after.<br>

I did a goog search for the image of Jeff Bridges from GGorma, and the largest I found was only 980pixels. :-/ </p>

<p> </p>

[digitaldog]

<blockquote>

<p>Wonder if Gorman would "lend" it out ? :-)</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Maybe if you asked him here, but it's not inexpensive (food and wine are awesome though):<br>

http://www.gormanphotography.com/#mi=1&pt=0&pi=4&p=-1&a=0&at=0</p>

[philfx]

<p>$4350, That better be some good wine!<br>

Funny, About a decade ago in Hollywood, I ran his own Epson 4000 for a few tests when he was looking to swap it out. I passed it up then :-) I think he is a top photographer... and just as much a businessman. <br /><br /><br /></p>

[philfx]

<p>Did you take the workshop or setup his colors? Perhaps you know the wine list :-)</p>

[digitaldog]

<blockquote>

<p>$4350, That better be some good wine!</p>

</blockquote>

<p>One afternoon's worth: http://www.digitaldog.net/files/GormanMendo06Workshop_06June15_383.jpg<br>

There's way more to this than wine:<br>

<a href="http://www.digitaldog.net/GormanMendo07/index.html">Greg Gorman's Mendocino Digital Workshop</a><br>

<a href="http://digitaldog.net/GormanWorkshop2011/">Greg Gorman's Mendocino Digital Workshop w/Robb Carr</a><br>

Nudity warning</p>

[philfx]

<blockquote>

<p>There's way more to this than wine:</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I know it :-)<br>

Some wonderful takes! It looks like a pleasure, making me want to be there. thanks.<br>

He is one of my top 5, maybe 3 favorite port/nude/B&W photographers. He has a unique sense of comfort and relaxed warmth in his images.<br>

But I must say...You have a better chance of asking for the file :-)</p>

 

[philfx]

<p>I guess the answer to this is in general a "No".<br>

Anyone know of a site that has done some side by side comparisons with the same source file?<br />(I can understand some nuance adjustments done for the characteristic of the individual printers).<br>

I know there used to be that one pay site that does all the printer testing, I forget the name, Famm or something?</p>