Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/08/05

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: RE: [Leica] Was Burkholder workshop , now printer accuracy...
From: Darrell Jennings <darrell_jennings@yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2002 08:54:44 -0700 (PDT)

They don't speicfy measuring the two sides in the
documentation, but they suggested I do it on the phone
when I was trying to resolve banding issues (still am
trying to resolve those, actually swapping printers as
I type...inks are loading now). The 3000 feeding
mechanism is pretty inaccurate...

I have two 3000's, both have the same characteristics
in terms of feeding. When the paper feeds in, you can
see that the mechanism can and does pull a bit
inaccurately (front feeding). They are well within the
Cones requirements for accuracy, but are not accurate
at all compared to some of the more modern/higher end
machines. So far the only recommendation I have gotten
from the folks at Cones Editions is to buy an Epson
7000 (pretty damn expensive fix since they cost more
than the 7600). 

I did finally gave up on trying to get Generations
color inks to work.  The difference between the
Generations color on the 3000 vs. the 7600 or the six
color Epson processes is pretty startling. The Epson
inks on the new printers look radically better and
print detail where the 3000 with Generations printed
muddy noise (same scan used for both). 

If you want good quality prints bigger than 13 inches
you get into some pretty serious money.  This is being
somewhat mitigated by the fact that Epson has gotten
smart enough to drop the printer prices, and focus on
making the profit on inks and paper. The fact that you
can by a 7600 for $3K vs. a 7000 for $4K is an
indicator that  some of the high end stuff will get
more affordable in time. 

I haven't tried back loading the 3000, unfortunately
if I had to do that I would have to do some radical
rearranging to get at it....though if I can't get a
better print out of the second 3000 I will give it a
try...it is a lot cheaper than a 7000. DJ


- --- Austin Franklin <darkroom@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> > Actually the very first thing you do to install
> the
> > Cone Peizography inks on an Epson 3000 is to load
> the
> > Epson color inks and run a 20 inch print, then get
> out
> > your ruler, and measure the two sides. If they are
> no
> > more than 3/16ths of an inch off they are OK for
> the
> > Cone inks, if they are more than that they are OK
> for
> > Epson inks, but not for the Cone inks.
> 
> Hi Darrell,
> 
> This must be new, since this originally was only to
> measure the overall
> length, to see if the transport was slipping...not
> to compare the two sides.
> Are you sure about comparing the two sides?  That
> just doesn't make sense to
> me...
> 
> > Both my printers are slightly longer on one side
> than
> > the other.  This presents problems in matting, but
> > also would present problems in registration with a
> > negative. I haven't used the 1280's or other Epson
> > desktop printers, but I assume they are not much
> > better than the 3000 (maybe a wrong assumption on
> my
> > part).
> 
> Every printer is better than the 3000.  It's a front
> feed printer, which is
> what adds to the problem.  If you are having paper
> feed problems, feed it
> from the rear.  I have no problem feeding from the
> front though with Epson
> Heavyweight Matte paper.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Austin
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe, see
http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Health - Feel better, live better
http://health.yahoo.com
- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html