Best Printer for True Black?

sara505

I'm considering purchasing a new printer that will give me true blacks, and up to 13x19.

Advice? Experience?

Thanks!

Sam

That's a wide open question.

Do you want a dedicated B&W printer or one that will give you good B&W as well as color?

If you are looking for a dedicated B&W printer you can buy a special ink set for some of the Epson printers along with software.

If you are looking for a one printer solution for both color and B&W I would recommend researching printer that have two blacks (one for mat paper and one for gloss), and two grays.

As an example only..............I have a Canon ipf5000 printer with 12 inks. This printer produces great color and B&W prints.

I am sure there are Epson and HP equivalents as good or even better available now.

Also see if you have a local store with demo printers set up. Take your best B&W image file in for some test prints.

Do your home work here and ensure your getting a printer that will meet your quality and quantity needs on the type of papers you plan on using.

Sam

sara505

Sam wrote: »

That's a wide open question.

Do you want a dedicated B&W printer or one that will give you good B&W as well as color?

If you are looking for a dedicated B&W printer you can buy a special ink set for some of the Epson printers along with software.

If you are looking for a one printer solution for both color and B&W I would recommend researching printer that have two blacks (one for mat paper and one for gloss), and two grays.

As an example only..............I have a Canon ipf5000 printer with 12 inks. This printer produces great color and B&W prints.

I am sure there are Epson and HP equivalents as good or even better available now.

Also see if you have a local store with demo printers set up. Take your best B&W image file in for some test prints.

Do your home work here and ensure your getting a printer that will meet your quality and quantity needs on the type of papers you plan on using.

Sam

Yes, it is kind of a wide open question. Thanks for your response. I checked out your printer - that's quite a puppy you've got - beyond what I was thinking about at the moment, however. I'm in no hurry, am just in the thinking stages. I have a couple of HP c8180s that do a decent job, but every now and then I detect a slight purple cast in the shadows of my BWs - but not entirely positive of this - and am basically wondering how and when to upgrade.
Thanks, Sam.
Sara

colourbox

sara505 wrote: »

I'm considering purchasing a new printer that will give me true blacks, and up to 13x19.

Depends on what you mean by "true black." On the printing press, they deepen black by creating what they call a "rich black" that is not just black ink, but also a little bit of cyan, magenta, and yellow.

Or maybe you don't want any color in your black, you just want the deepest black. In that case you want to look around for tests to find the printer with the maximum black ink density (dmax).

Even then, you're not really looking for a printer. You're looking for a specific combination of ink and paper. Even if you get the right printer, if you print with the matte black on matte paper, you get a different black than you get with glossy ink on glossy paper, and it will be different with different papers. And since some people noticed that glossy black is darker than matte black, some paper companies came out with matte papers that can use gloss inks for more density (part of the discusion here). Basically, it's about classic printmaking materials choices as much as it is about having the "right" electronic printer. Some inks only come with some printers, so that might lead you to the printer.

pathfinder

Sara I have had very nice results with my Epson Stylus Pro 3800 and Eric Chan's profiles for B&W...

From that link you can see that he is working on new profiles for the 3880. If 17 x 24 is the maximum print size you need, I think the new 3880 will work very nice.

My B&W prints from my 3800 have no discernible metamerism, and can be printed neutral, warm, cold, or sepia. The blacks are real black to my eyes, and vastly superior to what I ever got out of a darkroom with Dektol. The 3880 is reportedly even better than the 3800..

I have my eye set on a 4880 if I ever win the lottery.

Near the bottom of the link I posted Eric lists his favorite papers, and why - One he mentions is Red River Polar Arctic Satin, which I favor also. I have used Red River paper for most of my prints for some time.

One of the nice features with the 3800/3880 is that you can switch from gloss to matte paper without having to swap out inks or purge the ink lines in the machine.

Sam

Just to add to this a little, one of the best gloss papers I have found is the Harman Glos FB AL. This paper is a tad pricey. Also I like the Hahnemuhle Fine Art Baryta.

One of the reasons I went with Canon as opposed to Epson was that no black ink cartridge swapping was needed.

Sam

pathfinder

Yes, Epson finally figured out that was a deal killer for lots of us.

My 3800 is now almost 4 years old, but I still like it quite a bit. I have had no problems - zero - with nozzle clogging and drying out, and with the single digit temps we have had in Indiana that is quite remarkable.

Does your Cannon printer have any trouble with nozzle clogging Sam? But you never get cold dry weather in California, do you?

Art Scott

pathfinder wrote: »

Yes, Epson finally figured out that was a deal killer for lots of us.

My 3800 is now almost 4 years old, but I still like it quite a bit. I have had no problems - zero - with nozzle clogging and drying out, and with the single digit temps we have had in Indiana that is quite remarkable.

Does your Cannon printer have any trouble with nozzle clogging Sam? But you never get cold dry weather in California, do you?

Pathfinder.....are you using a CLS system or single tanks?? If using CLS which one?

Thanx

Sam

Pathfinder,

The other reason I chose the Canon was it may very well be the king of non clogging printers.

While it doesn't get real cold here it will dip below freezing once in awhile. I typically keep my house on the cool side and turn the heat off at night. It's not unusual for the printer to see temps in the low 50's. Never had a clogging issue.

Art,

Please note my comments here refer to large format printers.

My printer takes 130ml ink cartridges, and is one of the most efficient printers out there. So strictly from a money standpoint it wouldn't make a lot of sense for me to spend a fortune in attempt to use a third party ink set.

Now when it comes to quality, and longevity I don't think there is any question as to the winner here.

One of the key reasons for having your own large format printer is the control and the quality.

The only area that I have read about that seems to be worth a look is the dedicated B&W ink sets and software.

The Epson 3800 uses 80ml ink cartridges so I believe just from a cost stand point the savings might not be that substantial as well.

Yes the manufactures are making a tidy sum on their ink. But they have spent a considerable sum on R&D, and maintain a clear quality edge when it comes to compatibility, color accuracy, and longevity.

Sam

sara505

Sam wrote: »

Pathfinder,

The other reason I chose the Canon was it may very well be the king of non clogging printers.

While it doesn't get real cold here it will dip below freezing once in awhile. I typically keep my house on the cool side and turn the heat off at night. It's not unusual for the printer to see temps in the low 50's. Never had a clogging issue.

Art,

Please note my comments here refer to large format printers.

My printer takes 130ml ink cartridges, and is one of the most efficient printers out there. So strictly from a money standpoint it wouldn't make a lot of sense for me to spend a fortune in attempt to use a third party ink set.

Now when it comes to quality, and longevity I don't think there is any question as to the winner here.

One of the key reasons for having your own large format printer is the control and the quality.

The only area that I have read about that seems to be worth a look is the dedicated B&W ink sets and software.

The Epson 3800 uses 80ml ink cartridges so I believe just from a cost stand point the savings might not be that substantial as well.

Yes the manufactures are making a tidy sum on their ink. But they have spent a considerable sum on R&D, and maintain a clear quality edge when it comes to compatibility, color accuracy, and longevity.

Sam

That's the reason I have stayed away from Epson printers for a while now - the ink nozzles were constantly clogging in my Epson.
This is interesting info.

pathfinder

My previous large format printer was the Epson Stylus 4000 with the original Ultrachrome inks, and I had a devil of a time with nozzles clogging in the winter, unless I was printing on a regular basis.

My 3800 does much much better in this regard. It can go for weeks to months without use, and may only need a brief cleaning with minimal ink loss. If I print once a week, I generally don't have any issues with clogging at all, even in these single digit winter temps with their corresponding very low humidity.

I think pigment printers have more of an issue with nozzle clogging than dye based printers, but that is only a vague generalization.

Art I have chosen to stick with Epson ink cartridges for now, for reasons of quality, repeatability, not having to create new paper profiles, etc.

The 3800 series do use 80ml ink cartridges, as Sam said. My old 4000 used 120 and 220ml cartridges, but the 3800 is much more consumer friendly.

Ink is a considerable expense.

I am sure it would be cheaper for me to have all my printing done by Smugmg, and I do for large images, but I like the convenience of seeing my own prints as I work on them late at night. I tend to proof by looking at prints, rather than soft proofing.

If you wish Sarah, pm me your address and I will send you an 8x10 B&W from my 3800 on satin paper from Red River.

sara505

pathfinder wrote: »

My previous large format printer was the Epson Stylus 4000 with the original Ultrachrome inks, and I had a devil of a time with nozzles clogging in the winter, unless I was printing on a regular basis.

My 3800 does much much better in this regard. It can go for weeks to months without use, and may only need a brief cleaning with minimal ink loss. If I print once a week, I generally don't have any issues with clogging at all, even in these single digit winter temps with their corresponding very low humidity.

I think pigment printers have more of an issue with nozzle clogging than dye based printers, but that is only a vague generalization.

Art I have chosen to stick with Epson ink cartridges for now, for reasons of quality, repeatability, not having to create new paper profiles, etc.

The 3800 series do use 80ml ink cartridges, as Sam said. My old 4000 used 120 and 220ml cartridges, but the 3800 is much more consumer friendly.

Ink is a considerable expense.

I am sure it would be cheaper for me to have all my printing done by Smugmg, and I do for large images, but I like the convenience of seeing my own prints as I work on them late at night. I tend to proof by looking at prints, rather than soft proofing.

If you wish Sarah, pm me your address and I will send you an 8x10 B&W from my 3800 on satin paper from Red River.

I really appreciate this conversation. You may have heard me say this elsewhere, but my photography has been on the back burner for the past 8+years due to having been in school - and how I longed for it - my first love, really, and I am in pig heaven as I now have time to dig deep, upgrading equipment and knowledge. One of the things I now realize I have been missing from the digital photography is having a print in my hands, beautifully matted and signed. So, as I upgrade my PS skills - really, it's as if I'm in love again! and so totally shocking, how little I knew (but managed to get by) - and look more towards the final product, I'm taking in this information with the goal of eventually being able to do some really high-quality printing/matting/showing.
Thank you, pathfinder, I would love to see/touch a sample of a RR print, will pm you my address

Sam

Sara,

I have a thought...............send pathfinder (and me) one of your images. Send your best edit along with the RAW.

That might give you a good idea of how your image can look with these two printers, and what if any difference you can see.

Pathfinder,

My Canon sees your Epson and raises...let the games begin!

Sam

PS: I am guessing both will look good, but it will be interesting to see if one is visibly better then the other.

sara505

Sam wrote: »

Sara,

I have a thought...............send pathfinder (and me) one of your images. Send your best edit along with the RAW.

That might give you a good idea of how your image can look with these two printers, and what if any difference you can see.

Pathfinder,

My Canon sees your Epson and raises...let the games begin!

Sam

PS: I am guessing both will look good, but it will be interesting to see if one is visibly better then the other.

Sounds good. How do I send RAW? pm/attach?

Sam

Pathfinder,

My calculations indicate my printing costs are less than pro labs for prints larger than 8X10, even when compared to chemical prints, but absolutely less expensive when compared to pigmented ink prints.

But of course cost isn't the only or even the primary reason for doing your own printing.

Sam

sara505

Sam wrote: »

Pathfinder,

My calculations indicate my printing costs are less than pro labs for prints larger than 8X10, even when compared to chemical prints, but absolutely less expensive when compared to pigmented ink prints.

But of course cost isn't the only or even the primary reason for doing your own printing.

Sam

No, the primary reason for me is to be involved with the image from start-to-finish and the satisfaction that comes from controlling it all, like back in my darkroom days.

I was daunted by the idea of printing for a long time, but with a calibrated monitor and as I upgrade my PS skills, it makes sense to follow the image through to the printing stage.

I can't describe what it feels like to see the print emerge from the printer and to hold the print in my hands - especially with a good mat board and sturdy foam backing - now there's something! Really, there's a degree of satisfaction, certainly, from seeing an image on the screen, and I love getting prints delivered from the lab - but making my own - wow- I am now hooked.

pathfinder

I agree, Sara, that I just like seeing the print emerge, and I don't like waiting several days to see the results of my efforts. I received your pm and have responded.

Sam, I am pretty sure your ink costs are lower than mine, on a print per print basis. But I have owned my 3800 for a couple years now, and am happy enough with it that I don't feel a compelling need to upgrade yet. Maybe in a couple years. I looked longingly at 24 in wide printers, for a long time, but my spouse was not willing to give me that much latitude, since this is really a hobby for me, not a livelihood. The 80ml tanks for the 3800 cost about $50.00 apiece, and there are 9 of them. I replace 8 of them maybe twice a year, but them I am not printing for production, but I do print hundreds of 6 x 9 in prints a years, as well as a number of 13 x 19 and 16 x 24 in prints. I have never actually made an effort to calculate costs, but I think there was an article by Mark Segal about costs of the 3800 on The Luminous Landscape here - http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/printers/3800-costs.shtml

Sam

sara505 wrote: »

Sounds good. How do I send RAW? pm/attach?

Depending on your email service and your RAW file sizes you can simply email it. I can receive up to 15MB (I think).

If this doesn't work look up "you send it" This is a free service that will allow you to upload up to 100MB files, you then send me a password and I can then down load it. Very simple to use.

PM me and I'll send you my email.

Sam

Sam

pathfinder wrote: »

I agree, Sara, that I just like seeing the print emerge, and I don't like waiting several days to see the results of my efforts. I received your pm and have responded.

Sam, I am pretty sure your ink costs are lower than mine, on a print per print basis. But I have owned my 3800 for a couple years now, and am happy enough with it that I don't feel a compelling need to upgrade yet. Maybe in a couple years. I looked longingly at 24 in wide printers, for a long time, but my spouse was not willing to give me that much latitude, since this is really a hobby for me, not a livelihood. The 80ml tanks for the 3800 cost about $50.00 apiece, and there are 9 of them. I replace 8 of them maybe twice a year, but them I am not printing for production, but I do print hundreds of 6 x 9 in prints a years, as well as a number of 13 x 19 and 16 x 24 in prints. I have never actually made an effort to calculate costs, but I think there was an article by Mark Segal about costs of the 3800 on The Luminous Landscape here - http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/printers/3800-costs.shtml

Our ink costs are pretty similar, not sure of how that works out in the real world with the differences of how efficient each printer is with ink usage and cleaning.

I agree that there doesn't seem like there is any driving reason for you, or myself to buy a new printer. Although if you need support for a new 24" printer I am sure I could articulate a supportive argument for the "spouse".

I think we agree that the real reason for self printing only has a little to do with cost.

Sam