lf-photo.org.uk

OK, so I realise that I'm about 5 years out of date but I have acquired a cheap Epson 2100 photo printer. It was cheap because it had a fault - but I've fixed that and it's printing now.

I'm using cheap compatible inks to get it going, but I'm thinking about moving to a CIS like this one http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll? ... 0410805696. I'm also thinking about using Harman FB paper as it seems well recommended.

So, the questions: when I run a nozzle check I always seem to get one or two missing bars, these aren't consistent and it often seems to get worse if I run the head clean. Is this just crap ink?

Profiles: I think I understand what using the correct profile does and that you really need to create a profile with the specific ink/paper/printer combination, but I'm confused about the number of places where you seem to be able to apply the profile. I'm on XP and the printer driver seems to want to apply a profile in the 'Color Management' (sic) section of the properties (E177_1 is the default). I have selected 'no color adjustment' in the Epson Printing defaults, but I'm unsure how this interacts with the XP E177_1 driver. I am then using an Epson supplied profile in PS3, which seems to apply a magenta tint to the print preview, although the result looks more yellow/green tinted than what I'd expect from my (uncalibrated) screen - as if it's still not applying enough magenta cast.

I know people on the US LF forum are using the 2200 (US model 2100) to print B&W with (apparently) good results. So do I have to use Quadtone RIP to get good results with B&W, or can I just use Ken Lee's PS toning approach http://www.kenleegallery.com/bronze.html ? I much prefer KL's approach as it's one less piece of S/W to learn, and I can print directly from PS.

Thanks in advance!

To be honest Patrick, you would be better off cutting your losses and either reselling the printer or even dumping it. The 2100 was notorious for problems, including very poor B&W printing with plenty of metamerism; after all, it only has one black which means the only grays you will get will be made up of varying size dots which can be only too visible in paler tones.

I had a 1290 (similar age) and never got it to satisfactorily print reliably without plenty of head cleaning routines which drank the ink. The biggest problem was the heads drying out if you didn't print almost every day.

Of course, YMMV.

Actually it has two blacks - AFIAK the latest ones have three.

I too had a 2100 and was never satisfied with the B&W for the same reasons Joanna mentions above although I did have some success with 'black only' prints. Its replacement the 2400 is now getting a bit long in the tooth but still produces stunning B&W prints. After Paul Owen's glowing report on the 3800 I think this may be my next purchase. Before you ask I have someone lined up to buy my 2400

Paul

Patrick Dixon wrote:I'm using cheap compatible inks to get it going, but I'm thinking about moving to a CIS like this one http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll? ... 0410805696. I'm also thinking about using Harman FB paper as it seems well recommended.

The cheap compatible inks probably won't do it any favours. If you're going to go with a CIS then get a decent branded one, otherwise you're still using cheap quality inks and getting decent ( long-lasting prints ) with good colour is going to be difficult.

The Harman paper is excellent stuff.

Patrick Dixon wrote:So, the questions: when I run a nozzle check I always seem to get one or two missing bars, these aren't consistent and it often seems to get worse if I run the head clean. Is this just crap ink?

This is probably because the printer needs a good service, unfortunately, it's not a easy thing to do, especially for these consumer grade printers. When you run a head clean, the printer will pump out lots of ink to "clear the pipes" so to speak, and will usually have a rubber wiper blade which is dragged across the head. In time, this blade gets encrusted with dried ink, and thus cleaning becomes less affective and can often make matters worse. What you can easily do is saturate the ink pad with distilled water, and turn it off and leave it overnight, this will then park the head and should hopefully loosen up any clogs.

Patrick Dixon wrote:Profiles: I'm on XP and the printer driver seems to want to apply a profile in the 'Color Management' (sic) section of the properties (E177_1 is the default).

This is the default device profile, it's a "one size fits all" profile for the printer which is intended for use if there's no specific profile provided, to that end, it's not especially accurate, and not one you should be selecting in Photoshop. You should be able to find loads of ICC profiles available for the 2100, it was the first of the Ultrachrome printers and very popular.

Patrick Dixon wrote:I have selected 'no color adjustment' in the Epson Printing defaults, but I'm unsure how this interacts with the XP E177_1 driver. I am then using an Epson supplied profile in PS3, which seems to apply a magenta tint to the print preview, although the result looks more yellow/green tinted than what I'd expect from my (uncalibrated) screen - as if it's still not applying enough magenta cast.

You've pretty much got the process right there, set "No Colour Management" in the driver, and in Photoshop choose "Let Photoshop Manage Colours" and then choose your media specific ICC profile. If the prints are coming out with a colour cast, it's most likely because you're using non-original inks and a paper that the profile wasn't destined for, and your uncalibrated monitor isn't going to help!

Patrick Dixon wrote:I know people on the US LF forum are using the 2200 (US model 2100) to print B&W with (apparently) good results. So do I have to use Quadtone RIP to get good results with B&W, or can I just use Ken Lee's PS toning approach http://www.kenleegallery.com/bronze.html? I much prefer KL's approach as it's one less piece of S/W to learn, and I can print directly from PS.

You don't need Quadtone RIP to get good black and whites, but you'll likely get better ones with it, as it's a RIP and bypasses the printer drivers and can do 16 bit printing, the only way on Windows to do this. Quadtone RIP is extremely easy to use, you'll still do all your work in Photoshop, just save the image as a TIFF and load it into QTR to print. What you will need to get decent neutral B&W prints is a proper ICC profile, otherwise you're likely to have a colour cast in it.

Thanks for the advice. I'm not hankering after a better printer yet - this is really an experiment to see what kind of prints I can make. Frank Petronio is selling B&W prints made with an Epson 2200 and his customers seem very pleased with the results, so it should be possible to get decent prints.

I've run a few prints though now and the nozzle check pattern looks fine. Prints look OK given the use of thick old paper and cheap inks, but I'm not sure yet what it's capable of, or how far I am away.

I have the special Epson software program which allows all the setup adjustments, and I've given the printer a good clean. The system of waste pads to catch excess ink is truly horrid and an affront to my engineering sensibilities, but I've washed the pads out as best I can.

The CIS system I linked to claims pigment ink tested for longevity and as good as the Epson inks. It's not branded, but that doesn't mean it's no good. However, I don't suppose I'm going to be hammering this, so I wonder if I'd be better buying refillable cartridges like the Lyson ones. I could then use either the Lyson inks or the MIS PRO ones from inksupply in the US.

Patrick Dixon wrote:The CIS system I linked to claims pigment ink tested for longevity and as good as the Epson inks. It's not branded, but that doesn't mean it's no good.

I think the reasons to go for a branded set is that because they're branded, their reputation goes with the product. I believe Epson inks are hideously overpriced, I also believe they are higher in quality than any "compatible" inks, Epson has the resources to spend millions in research to get their inks working optimally, and importantly, consistently between batches. The smaller companies don't have those resources, and whilst I believe many are very good, an unbranded vendor has nothing to lose by selling sub-standard inks... and nothing to lose if one batch is different from the next, and consistency is important.

Also, the claims of longevity are just that, claims, and often with no evidence or test data to back it up ( even sometimes with the branded inks ).

Patrick Dixon wrote:Thanks for the advice. I'm not hankering after a better printer yet - this is really an experiment to see what kind of prints I can make. Frank Petronio is selling B&W prints made with an Epson 2200 and his customers seem very pleased with the results, so it should be possible to get decent prints.

Not forgetting the years of experience that Frank has to get to that level

Patrick Dixon wrote:I have the special Epson software program which allows all the setup adjustments, and I've given the printer a good clean. The system of waste pads to catch excess ink is truly horrid and an affront to my engineering sensibilities, but I've washed the pads out as best I can.

Do you mean the pads under the heads, or the real waste pads deep inside the bottom of printer?

Patrick Dixon wrote:The CIS system I linked to claims pigment ink tested for longevity and as good as the Epson inks. It's not branded, but that doesn't mean it's no good. However, I don't suppose I'm going to be hammering this, so I wonder if I'd be better buying refillable cartridges like the Lyson ones. I could then use either the Lyson inks or the MIS PRO ones from inksupply in the US.

If you are planning on getting consistent results, you will need a profile for each combination of inks/paper. Swapping manufacturer will mean re-profiling for the new inks or paper and changing ink manufacturer without purging the CIS lines and cartridges will result in a mixing of two different inks until the new ink gets through the system, thus making it almost impossible to get a good profile.

Without a profile, you are unlikely to get rid of any colour casts, as they are too complex in their distribution to respond to a simple correction in PS.

Paul Mitchell wrote:After Paul Owen's glowing report on the 3800 I think this may be my next purchase. Before you ask I have someone lined up to buy my 2400

Now stop that!!! I too have fallen for that seduction and am having to have my credit card fitted with a childproof lock

Joanna Carter wrote: Not forgetting the years of experience that Frank has to get to that level

Well yes, but that's what the internet's for isn't it?

Joanna Carter wrote:Do you mean the pads under the heads, or the real waste pads deep inside the bottom of printer?

The waste pads. You are supposed to change them, but people wash them out.