I getting close to buying one of these printers. They both have their pluses & minuses for me.

2200:
Lots of experience already out there on this printer
I already have curves that work well with my Platinum Printing.
Slower & More expensive.

R1800
Newer technology
Faster & Cheaper
I'd have to redo all my curves
I haven't heard if any one has had success with this printer yet for enlarged negs (I use Pictorico OHP).

Any thoughts?

Steve

I getting close to buying one of these printers. They both have their pluses & minuses for me.

2200:
Lots of experience already out there on this printer
I already have curves that work well with my Platinum Printing.
Slower & More expensive.

R1800
Newer technology
Faster & Cheaper
I'd have to redo all my curves
I haven't heard if any one has had success with this printer yet for enlarged negs (I use Pictorico OHP).

Any thoughts?

Steve

I did some tests with the R1800 and mentioned the results in the recent thead "Digital Negatives with the R800."

Briefly, the pigmented ink set of the R1800 takes longer to dry than the Ultrachome set of the 2200, which increases the possility of pizza wheel marks, and the inks have less transmitted density, which means that one can not use the color picker of Nelson's PDN system. Too bad because the R1800 gives smoother tones with less grain than the 2200.

Sandy

Just noticed the R2400. That might be the way to go. Too many choices, my head is spinning!

Just noticed the R2400. That might be the way to go. Too many choices, my head is spinning!

I would hold off on the R2400 also until there is some report on how the pigmented ink set works with UV processes. I have some concern that the 2400 may use the same pigmented ink set as the R1800.

Sandy

Any word on the R2400 Sandy et al?

My wife has an Epson R1800 (as well as a 1290 that is set up for monochrome work on a C.I.S.), as a colour printer it works very well but gobbles ink at a prodigious rate. For that reason I would recommend against buying one unless a C.I.S. can be found to suit. Two head cleans and I get to spend £80 on a set of inks.

I think I'm going to stay with my 2200

Thanks Dave, I suspected the cost of inks was expensive - but £80 a set, wow! btw this is all a bit new to me, what's a C.I.S. ?

Oh ... continuous ink sys?

Sandy,
Have you tested the Epson 4000 yet?

Any word on the R2400 Sandy et al?

Not anything definitive. I did learn that the Epson 2400 does *not* use the same ink set as the R1800, which is a good thing since I was not satisfied at all with my experiments with the R1800 for making digital negatives.

Nothing against the R1800. It is great for color print, but on transparency material the inks dried so slowly that I saw pizza wheel marks, and the inks do not give much transmitted density to UV light,, which means one can not use the PDN system with it.

Sandy

Alright. I've done it. Today I bought an Epson R2400. The printer is very large, but really silent and fast, even with the fast-printing option turned off.

I had no transparency sheet left, so I just tested the printer on archival matte paper with BW images. Stunning. The details are very subtle in both shadows and highlights and the quality and resolution are indeed high. I can't say if the inks dry quick or slow. I couldn't see any metamerism effect. The R2400 uses new "K3" Ultrachrome inks, which are different than ones used by R1800 and the "old" 2200. As far as I understand the main difference is that these new inks have already a glossy optimizer into them, except for the plain black, for which there are two different cartrdiges (glossy and matte). Inks should be also more long-lasting.

Tomorrow I'll buy some transparency sheets and I will do some testing with digital negatives. I cannot find Pictorico sheets in Italy, I'll use ordinary 360/720 dpi transparencies.

The printer driver doesn't have a "transparency" option. Just plain paper, matter, glossy, epson specials, etc. etc. Is the same on Epson 2200 printers? If yes, which printing mode do you suggest to use? Plain paper / Fine detail? Is it advisable to use the matte black or the glossy black with transparencies? The Epson R2400 comes with 3+1 black cartridges: 1 light light black, 1 light black, 1 black (matte or glossy).

Do you have more hints on digital negatives printing? I will gladly run any test that may be helpful to the community.

Fulvio

The printer driver doesn't have a "transparency" option. Just plain paper, matter, glossy, epson specials, etc. etc. Is the same on Epson 2200 printers? If yes, which printing mode do you suggest to use? Plain paper / Fine detail? Is it advisable to use the matte black or the glossy black with transparencies? The Epson R2400 comes with 3+1 black cartridges: 1 light light black, 1 light black, 1 black (matte or glossy).

Fulvio

For media setting I would suggest using glossy paper and best photo detail, with the glossy black. You want to the printer to print ink with the finest detail possible.

Sandy

For media setting I would suggest using glossy paper and best photo detail, with the glossy black. You want to the printer to print ink with the finest detail possible.
Sandy

It worked! I just discovered that on this printer you can set the printer head speed; you can set a delay up to 50 seconds before the inked paper passes through the pizza wheels.

I didn't print the negative yet, but appears to be very good: no print flaws, no scratches, no pizza wheels traces, no ink pools. I used maximum photo quality with the glossy black and told the printer the paper was a premium glossy sheet. Will print the negative within tomorrow and let you know.

The only sad thing with this printer is ink waste. It uses 9 inks but in the head there's room only for 8 cartridges. You have to swap matte and glossy black ink depending on which paper media you're going to print. Each time you do this swap the printer goes on an head cleaning process and this means about 15% of EACH of the remaning 7 (8 minus the black you've installed) cartriges is lost. While on digital negatives the glossy black is possibly the best, is it advisable to print on matte surfaces (e.g. epson archival matte sheets or similar paper) with the glossy ink? I'd like to print some b+w picture sometimes but I prefer mattes surfaces and I don't really want to waste loads of inks (and money) each time I want to do a digital neg. Any ideas?

It worked! is it advisable to print on matte surfaces (e.g. epson archival matte sheets or similar paper) with the glossy ink? I'd like to print some b+w picture sometimes but I prefer mattes surfaces and I don't really want to waste loads of inks (and money) each time I want to do a digital neg. Any ideas?

Use the glossy black ink. That should work, but you will have to make comparisons to see what you like best. Also you may wish to try a luster surface or semi-matt surface with glossy black ink. There are an amazing number of ink jet papers to try and experiment. You might wish to try some of the Moab papers.

But as an aside (not meaning to sound like a smartass) why would you purchase this printer and then want to print on matt paper since the strength of this printer is no bronzing on glossy papers, given that there is so much ink waste when switching carts? I think Epson screwed the consumer on this feature.

Don Bryant

Use the glossy black ink. That should work, but you will have to make comparisons to see what you like best. Also you may wish to try a luster surface or semi-matt surface with glossy black ink. There are an amazing number of ink jet papers to try and experiment. You might wish to try some of the Moab papers.


thanks Don, but I would prefer archival matte paper... other than Epson, which other manufacturers does a similar paper?


But as an aside (not meaning to sound like a smartass) why would you purchase this printer and then want to print on matt paper since the strength of this printer is no bronzing on glossy papers, given that there is so much ink waste when switching carts? I think Epson screwed the consumer on this feature.


I purchased this printer mainly because it should be superior in b&w printing and secondly because I couldn't find the 2200 anymore near my place.

I tried a premium glossy sheet and I can't see any bronzing. But I don't like very much glossy and reflective surfaces.

I tried to print an epson archival matter with glossy ink; I compared the same bw image printed on the same paper with matte ink... The glossy print on matte paper is too flat in contrast. And the true blacks aren't as much deep as on the print with the matte ink. I guess I'll have to switch to a semiglossy paper. Which brand/paper is longlasting and suitable for photo archival? I don't really want to try every paper in the world; I do already that mess with analog photography and do not intend to do the same with digital :-)

Any word on the R2400 Sandy et al?

Mark Nelson posted the following information on the alt-photo-process list. The news is very good for the 2400, not at all good for the R1800. Mark's comments about the R1800 ink set confirm my own finding reported here a couple of months back.

"****INK DENSITIES
Epson 2200 (UltraChrome) - This was the best of all printers I ever tested for the ability to adjust the density of the negative exactly to the exposure scale of the process. I had very good luck with Palladium and long exposure scales.

Epson 2400 - (UltraChrome K3) This inkset is capable of even slightly higher densities in certain color ranges than the Epson 2200. It has a different "signature" than the 2200 when you map the UV densities with a UV densitometer. When printing Palladium, the ink densities as measured by a UV densitometer seem to be right on. I think I will probably like the ink signature just as well as the 2200, if not better.

Epson R1800 (UltraChrome High Gloss) - This inkset is a comparitively low density inkset and I don't recommend it for someone who would like to work with a variety of processes including those with very long exposure scales. To handle a really long exposure scale, you have to use black ink and this limits you to just one density range in a high density range negative."

Sandy

Great to know - thanks!

There are rumors, that the early model epson 1270 ,may be as good as the modern printers for digital negatives with ohp.
http://www.inkjetart.com/news/13_comp/17.html