* My Profile My Galleries My Networks

New Ink Jet Printers?

I currently use the Epson 2200 which I use for making color and b&w prints for exhibition….seems pretty good. I’m considering  buying either the Epson 1800 or 2400 but don’t know which would be better; any feedback about the pros and cons of either printer?

by Adam Cohen at 2005-08-14 15:37:30 UTC (ed. Mar 12 2008 ) Brooklyn , United States | Bookmark | | Report spam→

Adam, I have tried to get a decent black and white print from the 2200 and cannot, what software are you using to print b/w. I have seen black and white prints fron the 2400 and they were stunning, Dan Burkholder reccomended the 2400 to me .
He has some wonderful little photoshop  videos that you can download for $3.00 called "Tiny Tutorials."

by Leonard Neumann | 14 Aug 2005 15:08 | Dallas, United States | | Report spam→
Adam, etc:


Try these they are shareware drivers from Roy Harrington, check them out.
I too am curious about the 2400, let me know what you find out.

by [former member] | 15 Aug 2005 10:08 | new orleans, United States | | Report spam→
PS I looked up Digital Outback review of 2400, says the blacks are about the same on the matte paper, which is what I prefer……

by [former member] | 15 Aug 2005 10:08 | new orleans, United States | | Report spam→

Check-out the Epson Stylus Pro 4800 which is featured in PDN August 2005 page 62.
It uses Eight color UltraChrome K3 inks with surprising results printing B&W prints!

by Chester Simpson | 15 Aug 2005 13:08 | Washington, DC, United States | | Report spam→

This review offers a different opinion……..

by [former member] | 15 Aug 2005 13:08 | new orleans, United States | | Report spam→
Well folks, thanks for the info. Have to confess, my heads spinning a bit….rips, soft proofs, profiles and percentages of inks lost per black cartridge change; all coming out my ears.
I print mostly color [probably about 85% of my prints] and i should add most are from video….yes you heard that right, video, not even digital photos. So I don’t expect my prints to look like traditional fine art prints. That much said, gaining more control over color, better dmax, etc. are still important to me.
So whats a boy to do? Well I did go to the luminous landscape site to read the 4800 reviews and still trying to decide whether its worth ‘moving up’ from my 2200 to the 4800….about 3 times the price but it does make bigger prints….question is will it also make that big a difference in print quality? I’ve been using alot of the Red River Ultra-Pro Satin paper, which is slightly better than the Epson Luster with essentially the same surface [most of my images die on matte and I hate glossy] and almost half the price. There are low-res samples of my work at my website; www.blindgrace.com for an idea as to what kinds of images I’m working with.
Thanks again for the continuing dialogue.

by Adam Cohen | 15 Aug 2005 15:08 (ed. Aug 15 2005) | Brooklyn, United States | | Report spam→

I just did a bunch of color digital printing this past weekend, I used the 4800 extensively. Used Enhanced Matte, pretty happy with the results,but also had the chance to do a direct comparison with a 2200 off the same monitor/file at the same location. The 4800 print did not walk away from the 2200, but there was a difference, the 4800 seemed richer, more depth to the print. The best thing about the 4800 was the speed, larger print size, and ease of use. The worst thing about the 4800 is the Epson print drivers for the Mac which are the worst. Oh, by the way, thanks for the shout out on the Casasola show, simply amazing.

by [former member] | 16 Aug 2005 21:08 | brooklyn, United States | | Report spam→
For you all that are printing with inkjets…Why? Is it better then getting large print from a lab? More or less exspensive??
thanks for any input

by Joshua Prezant | 17 Aug 2005 07:08 | | Report spam→
For me its a business decision, and I have all I need with the 2200 right now. As Joshua points out I can always go to a lab for larger prints anyway……so I usually wait for the breakthrough models, the 2200 was one, the 10D was one in cameras, before I re-invest.

If a collector orders a 13×19 I can do that in-house, for less than $5.

by [former member] | 17 Aug 2005 09:08 | new orleans, United States | | Report spam→
By the way, definite check out those Harrington profiles. They are really nice, and you don’t need an RIP to utilize them. In fact, they do exactly what a RIP would do, for $50.

by [former member] | 17 Aug 2005 09:08 (ed. Aug 17 2005) | new orleans, United States | | Report spam→
I prefer using the inkjets for portfolio prints and editions. Once a book goes out and it makes the rounds it gets trashed. It is easier to update and replace prints at a fraction of the cost.

by [former member] | 17 Aug 2005 18:08 (ed. Aug 17 2005) | brooklyn, United States | | Report spam→
I have an Epson 3000 that I need to get rid of (moving to a smaller apartment). I am in Brooklyn 11205 (near pratt). It is large, makes 17inch wide prints.

by Aaron Lee Fineman | 17 Aug 2005 18:08 (ed. Aug 17 2005) | Brooklyn, NY, United States | | Report spam→

Get notified when someone replies to this thread:
Feed-icon-10x10 via RSS
Icon_email via email
You can unsubscribe later.

More about sponsorship→


Adam Cohen, Film/Picture Maker Adam Cohen
Film/Picture Maker
(Adam Cohen filmmaker)
Berlin , Germany
Leonard Neumann, Photographer Leonard Neumann
Dallas / London , United States
Chester Simpson, Photographer Chester Simpson
(Chester Simpson Photography)
Washington Dc , United States
Joshua Prezant, Photographer Joshua Prezant
Miami, Fl , United States
Aaron Lee Fineman, Photographer Aaron Lee Fineman
New York City , United States


Top↑ | RSS/XML | Privacy Statement | Terms of Use | support@lightstalkers.org / ©2004-2015 November Eleven