My Epson 3800 is done for, what now?

[Jan Brittenson]

Okay, so my Epson Stylus Pro 3800 (K3 Ultrachrome) is done for, after what, 15 years or so. I think the nozzle simply self-destructed; it leaks ink when printing. I noticed it once or twice before over the last year, but now it happens on every print.

Maybe it's fixable, but I think it's time for something new!

I'm looking at the Canon ImageProGraf 1100. Is this is a good idea? I use MacOS and DxO PhotoLab with Nikon Z7 and Z9. Looking for a 17x22 carriage model (16x20 with border). One great thing about the Epson was its default color profiles were really perfectly good for my needs, and there were plenty of profiles for most papers, although I used mainly Premium Luster and Satin (and the equivalent Calumet house Brilliant brand stock - remember those?).

I do a fair bit of B&W work. And a little of everything in color.

The IPF 1000 vs 1100 looks a bit like the then 3800 vs 3880; the 1100 using slightly improved inks. It wasn't worth upgrading for, but of course if buying new the $200 increment in price is probably worth it (and not hugely significant for something I plan to keep and use until it falls apart).

What do you guys think?

 

[stngoldberg]

EPSON P800 is a great printer
‘I’ve been using it for over two years with zero issues
stanley

 

[bags27]

EPSON P800 is a great printer
‘I’ve been using it for over two years with zero issues
stanley

I believe the 800 has been replaced by the 900, which early on had significant paperfeed issues, mostly now corrected and, from what I understand, not a problem at all if one is printing one sheet at a time and isn't printing on very small paper. Not that those are necessarily problems, but apparently for some.

I'm in the market for a printer and otherwise the P900 is attractive. The Canon 1100 gets excellent marks, but, from what I understand, is far less thrifty with ink costs, is twice the weight (~75 pounds), and printer guru Keith Cooper advises to keep it on all the time (I can't remember if it is to save ink or prevent clogging).

 

[bags27]

Sorry, I guess the 800 is a seperate and very different printer than the 900. Mea culpa.

 

[MGrayson]

I had and loved Epson 3800 and 3880 printers - used them for more than a decade. I now have a Canon Pro1000 and like it even more. (No roll feed, alas). There are no bad choices here.

 

[stngoldberg]

No paper feed issues with the P800.…quite the contrary…I can stack several sheets of paper in the feeder and print multiple images with one press of the button

 

[MartinN]

I have a 3880. Keeps churning. Paperfeed is the only thing a bit problematic, but that is by design, I understand.

 

[Jan Brittenson]

I did see the Canon ink consumption issue, and Keith Cooper's video(s). Leaving it on isn't a problem for me, so I ended up ordering a Pro-1100... It does seem like there are no terrible choices here, and in fact the P900 was another one I eyeballed. The P800/Pro-1000 would be fine too. There's no problem finding ink for even old workhorses like the Epson 9600... so I suspect there will likely be ink available longer than these printers last us. I have to admit part reason for picking Canon this time around is just for something different. *Shrug* I can't imagine it being a disaster, but if it is it can always be returned.

 

[MGrayson]

Oh, I didn't even know there was an 1100. I don't print more than once/month anymore, so no reason to upgrade, but good to know there's progress.

 

[getscreen]

The improved inks are great for B&W work, and having good color profiles will help.

 

[Jan Brittenson]

Got the Pro-1100 set up. Reprinted a few prints I had from the 3800 on the same paper (17x22 Epson Glossy) and placed them side by side. Just straight up, no profiles, just to see what's good and what's not. In terms of color they look practically indistinguishable, which is pretty good news as it means I can reprint almost anything. Really deep orange-reds look slightly more saturated on the Pro-1100, but I assume it has a wider gamut and those might have slightly clipped the gamut on the 3800 to begin with. But no tints, odd shifts, or anything like that. With 12 inks I'm not surprised, and with this being Canon I sort of expect them to have an ink cart dedicated to orange-red sunset glows. Seriously, I just installed the inks and didn't take not what they were, exactly.

What is VERY noticeable is the denser black point. The printer introduces a knee at after which it gets darker fast, somewhere in the low midtones or slightly below. I've seen people refer to it as crushing shadows, but I don't really think that's what it does, instead it introduces the knee to use its full tonal scale without darkening the mid to highs which would just make prints look dark. I think the knee is too high; I think I'll want to lower it, weaken it, and combine it with a toe. The toe so that only actual blacks get very deep; there's not much to see there anyway unless you have massively bright illumination. In normal light the black end gets very dark - I'd rather lift the detail in there slightly so it's visible in normal illumination, then have it fall off to black for contrast, almost like a cutout (though with proper edge fading or it will look artifacted). Contrast and negative space is great use for such deep blacks, but there's no point trying to place detail there as it just won't be visible. This in turn I think calls for exposing to the right, or the very bottom will band, and it's likely to be practically limited by the capture dynamic range anyway. Just thinking out loud here... feel free to ignore.

Overall my first impression is a big WOW. This is a fantastic printer. It has no weird color warping or tints. The reason I see for profiles will be to linearize saturation (though this too seems good), gamut warnings in proofing, and produce a more practical tonal scale. The latter is probably the hardest; not to create a profile for it (it can easily be done in ArgyllCMS) but to actually proof the output on an RGB monitor. It's going to require previsualization no matter what.

It seems the biggest change from the Pro-1000 is that the 1100 replaces the dye inks with pigment inks. This also means the gamut likely is very different around the boundaries (surfaces), and it will take a few months for paper mfg's to catch up and provide profiles. It's a little faster than the 3800, maybe 5 min or slightly more, for a 17x22 with a small border.

Can't wait to do some B&W's, and also actually shoot for it!

 

[Remko]

It seems the biggest change from the Pro-1000 is that the 1100 replaces the dye inks with pigment inks.

Can't wait to do some B&W's, and also actually shoot for it!

Jan,

It pleases me you are that happy with the Pro-1100

I expect the results to be even a bit better when you are using ICC profiles for the prints you make on this printer. One might expect to have a bit better print quality from a newly developed printer like the Pro-1100 compared to a very old design like the Epson 3800. Especially with the Pro-1100 the Mat Black will show an improvement compared to the Pro-1000 and the Epson 3800.

The Pro-1000 has pigment inks as well, no dye inks at all.

I suggest watching this video from Keith Cooper who reviews the new Canon printer. This one is about 2 special media types for printing B&W that are not available on default. Meaning you have to get them via Canon's MCT software.

And here is the link to his website with Canon printer reviews, among which is the Pro-1100: https://www.northlight-images.co.uk/keith-cooper-photography-videos-index/#prin16

He is very experienced - and unbiased - in reviewing printers of all the brands.

Cheers,
Remko

 

[Jan Brittenson]

I just came across that video myself! Haven't watched it yet. I'm also getting up to speed with AM1X files, which has various configuration parameters like max ink capacity and platen gap. It seems they are uploaded to the printer with the Configuration Tool, which is a pretty nice solution since 1) they become printer specific and 2) are automatically shared between multiple computers. When printing it seems to me the Canon printer dialog fetches a list of them from the printer selected to populate the media options list.

 

[bensonga]

Got the Pro-1100 set up. ...
It seems the biggest change from the Pro-1000 is that the 1100 replaces the dye inks with pigment inks.

The Canon Pro-1000 is a terrific printer and it had pigment inks also (like the 13 inch wide Pro-10 and Pro-300 models). I'm sure the new Pro-1100 will be exceptionally good too.

Like Stan I have been using a Epson P800 for many years (4+) with no problems. When I finally have to replace it, as much as I like the Epson for printing B&W using the Epson's ABW (Advanced Black and White) driver, I will be very tempted by a Canon Pro 17 inch model. The build quality of the Canon Pro-1000 certainly feels better to me than the Epson P900 which I think was a step down from the P800 build quality.

Gary

 

[Jan Brittenson]

Build quality - yeah, the Pro-1100 runs circles around the far more plasticky feeling 3800. It's pretty damn robust feeling, not to mention quite a bit heavier.

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

A bit late to the party here, but one of the reasons why I chose Canon over Epson when I needed to replace the old 3880 is that Canon printers are much easier to service. Although modern printers aren't supposed to clog as easily as the older ones, it can happen. A new print head for the 3880 would have cost more or less as much as a new P900 and is not user replaceable. Neither are the print heads of new Epson printers. With Canon printers, print heads are less than half the price, and they are user replaceable. That means that in a critical situation, I can have a new print head shipped overnight and replace it myself, while with Epson, I would have to wait for a technician.

Another side of this is that all high-end Canon printers use the same print head, so if I buy a Pro-1100 for printing smaller formats, it will use the same head as my new GP-4600S, in spite of the latter using fewer inks.

 

[Jan Brittenson]

Yes on the replaceable print head! In fact, the print head comes in a separate box and has to be installed. The instructions are also wrong, just following them won't position the carriage where it can actually be installed. I don't recall what I had to do, but if I recall there's a service setting that makes the head/carriage accessible. Otherwise when the top cover is opened the head is moved to the side, in behind the display panel.

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

Yes on the replaceable print head! In fact, the print head comes in a separate box and has to be installed. The instructions are also wrong, just following them won't position the carriage where it can actually be installed. I don't recall what I had to do, but if I recall there's a service setting that makes the head/carriage accessible. Otherwise when the top cover is opened the head is moved to the side, in behind the display panel.

There's a menu item called Head Replacement under the maintenance menu that places the carriage in the correct position. At least that's the case with the x600 printers.

 

[Jan Brittenson]

There's a menu item called Head Replacement under the maintenance menu that places the carriage in the correct position. At least that's the case with the x600 printers.

Yeah, I think it's the same on the 1100.