Just Announced - Epson Stylus Pro 3800

[jwkramer]

http://************/oshfr
(wait for the ad to run, and then you'll see the article)

It looks like an awesome printer! Due out in December, with a street price around $1200. It's on my Christmas List!!! :lol:

-Jim

[R Hardman]

Looks like it just might fill a nitch...

[Mac]

I am interested, and I am using a 2400...but I want something wider and with bigger cartridges...:D

[jwkramer]

I would think the ability to hold both blacks is a big plus. I have heard a lot of complaints about having to purge the lines on the 4800 to switch out the blacks inks (at a cost of about $95). I personally have been waiting for a wide printer with these kind of specifications for some time. To be honest, the 4800 is a bit over the top for me. I really don't print the kind of volume needed to sustain the ink volume of the carts in that bad boy. I was always afraid that the ink would go out of date before I would run the carts dry. My usage is more in line with the 2400's ink system, but I want to be able to print 16x20's or 17" x xxx pano's at home. This printer is the perfect match for me. The price is such that it is not out of my reach either. I think Epson may have hit a homerun with this one... I guess time will tell.

-JK

[jwkramer]

I did some further research, and it appears that this printer does *NOT* accept roll media. I have no idea why Epson decided to do this. This decision limits the printer to a maximum size of 17"x22"... which is a major stumbling block for me. I routinely print pano's even on my little old 1270 that are longer than the 22" restraint of the 3800. What the he77 was Epson thinking???

[ipacmm]

I use the R2400 right now and I was thinking about buying a wider format printer like the 4800 but now with the new 3800 out, I might consider it...I will wait for some reviews but it does look good.

[Picture North Carolina]

I did some further research, and it appears that this printer does *NOT* accept roll media. I have no idea why Epson decided to do this.

You know, I have to agree with this. Sometimes I wonder (not just with epson) if the R&D people of major organizations aren't just smoking weed behind those locked lab doors. It's like they solved one problem (dual blacks), but decided just to throw another back in (no roll) just to be consistent.

I wonder just how much printer drivers have to do with controlling size. In other words, if you built your own roll paper holder if you couldn't just put a long print thru it anyway, or if the driver would limit that.

[Mac]

I did some further research, and it appears that this printer does *NOT* accept roll media. I have no idea why Epson decided to do this. This decision limits the printer to a maximum size of 17"x22"... which is a major stumbling block for me. I routinely print pano's even on my little old 1270 that are longer than the 22" restraint of the 3800. What the he77 was Epson thinking???

Oh man...if this is the case, this kills it for me. I have printed several panos on my 2400, and although it is not an everday occurance, I am really starting to enjoy them, so I do more. Why would they make a wide format and remove the roll feature...??????:???:???

[chtgrubbs]

If it is a question of paper size, then I am sure someone will offer paper large enough.
But if the limit is in the driver/software, then it is a really bad design decision on Epson's part.

[jwkramer]

Unless they just "forgot" to put it in the documentation... it appears it doesn't handle any kind of roll media. Without the support from the driver, it won't matter if you can rig some kind of paper holder or not... it won't keep printing past the border of the print.

[jwkramer]

I just got off the phone with Epson, and they confirmed - the printer does *not* handle any kind of roll media. This has to be the single dumbest thing I have ever heard of a company doing since "New Coke". Oh well... scratch that one off my list.

[coreypolis]

So what's the largest size print you can do on this machine?
17x22

[coreypolis]

I just got off the phone with Epson, and they confirmed - the printer does *not* handle any kind of roll media. This has to be the single dumbest thing I have ever heard of a company doing since "New Coke". Oh well... scratch that one off my list.
they still want to sell 4800s ;)


as a 4800 owner, this actually makes me happy, no hurt to my system :D

[coreypolis]

I use the R2400 right now and I was thinking about buying a wider format printer like the 4800 but now with the new 3800 out, I might consider it...I will wait for some reviews but it does look good.
if you can find a deal on the 4800, get it. roll paper abilities and much cheeper ink

[jwkramer]

if you can find a deal on the 4800, get it. roll paper abilities and much cheeper ink

Is the 80ml ink going to be more expensive than the 110ml that the 4800 uses? You are the second person that has made reference to the 3800 being more expensive in the ink department.

[coreypolis]

Is the 80ml ink going to be more expensive than the 110ml that the 4800 uses? You are the second person that has made reference to the 3800 being more expensive in the ink department.
same price as the 110, and no option for the 220

[jwkramer]

oh, I get it... same price - less ink. Makes perfect sense.

Epson - put down the crack pipe, and slowly back away.

[pxlmvr]

From:
http://www.inkjetart.com/news/archive/IJN_09-26-06.html#1

"MEDIA HANDLING UPDATE: we asked one of our friends in the upper levels of Epson's support departments just how long the 3800 can print - they replied that they understand it will handle up to 37 inch lengths using the normal driver. For all those out there wanting a 16x24 print this is very good news. Epson says that you must load these longer sheets from the top main loader."

[coreypolis]

Good to know, but unless you always print on sheet paper only, the 4800 is still the better buy. (He roll paper and more cost effective inks will make up the difference quickly.

[kickmaster]

It's certainly on my Chirstmas list!!

[Mathiau]

Trust me, if they were smoking weed behind the doors it would be an even more awsome printer. now, they are more likely doing lines or dropping acid....

[cdifoto]

I won't use a printer that doesn't handle the rolls again. The reverse rolling for flatness is a bit of a pain, but the cost savings and ability to run off a huge template of 4x6s, 5x7s, etc and any combination thereof in a big job vs a bunch of small jobs is beautiful.

[Mathiau]

^^ question for you, the r1800, if i buy a roll of paper, could i technically print a picture the length of the roll?

or could i only do the max 13 x 44" ?

[cdifoto]

^^ question for you, the r1800, if i buy a roll of paper, could i technically print a picture the length of the roll?

or could i only do the max 13 x 44" ?

I have the R2400, not the 1800. If I remember correctly it's limited to 44 inches, no matter how long your roll actually is.

[CyberDyneSystems]

It seems the Canon I have on order takes rolls, but the roll feeder is an option, and pricey at that ($250.00)

I've not used a roll printer yet, but definitely will want to go that route. But @ 250.00? I may just make something up in the old wood shop for a roll feeder,. unless the printer actually needs to "talk" to the roll feeder, I bet the one I make will be better anyways. :lol:

I only bring this up as I am wondering will that same option be applicable to this new Epson? Or will the driver prevent it?

[coreypolis]

It seems the Canon I have on order takes rolls, but the roll feeder is an option, and pricey at that ($250.00)

I've not used a roll printer yet, but definitely will want to go that route. But @ 250.00? I may just make something up in the old wood shop for a roll feeder,. unless the printer actually needs to "talk" to the roll feeder, I bet the one I make will be better anyways. :lol:

I only bring this up as I am wondering will that same option be applicable to this new Epson? Or will the driver prevent it?
driver limited.

the canon looks good, but until there is more long term testing, testing with multiple papers, and a ink cost breaksown, the 4800 is still the leader.

[Mathiau]

that sucks :(, i would think as long as you can feeed in the paper it wouldnt care.....

i wonder if there is a way around this.

[cdifoto]

It seems the Canon I have on order takes rolls, but the roll feeder is an option, and pricey at that ($250.00)

I've not used a roll printer yet, but definitely will want to go that route. But @ 250.00? I may just make something up in the old wood shop for a roll feeder,. unless the printer actually needs to "talk" to the roll feeder, I bet the one I make will be better anyways. :lol:

I only bring this up as I am wondering will that same option be applicable to this new Epson? Or will the driver prevent it?

Can't say I know how the Canons work but the Epson roll holder is simply that...a holder. The printer pulls the roll through, and you could have the roll on a dowel rod back there if you wanted.

[coreypolis]

that sucks :(, i would think as long as you can feeed in the paper it wouldnt care.....

i wonder if there is a way around this.
thats why the 4800 is still the better buy, roll paper and mose cost effective ink. Don't be fooled by the lower price point, unless you change between matte and glossy all the time, the 3800 isn't the best bet

[Mathiau]

i dont know if i can find a 4800 down here in CR and i doubt the box would fit in carry on if i bought it while in Canada, i wouldnt trust it through the handlers at airports.

And buying it online would suck if it broke and had to send it back to the U.S for warrenty, as then i got to pay around $100-$200 for a temp export permit so i dont pay duties when it comes back in :(

is the 1800 really that bad now or ?

[coreypolis]

i dont know if i can find a 4800 down here in CR and i doubt the box would fit in carry on if i bought it while in Canada, i wouldnt trust it through the handlers at airports.

And buying it online would suck if it broke and had to send it back to the U.S for warrenty, as then i got to pay around $100-$200 for a temp export permit so i dont pay duties when it comes back in :(

is the 1800 really that bad now or ?
unless your carry-on is a semi truck, it won't be going on a airplane.



http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v721/viperx27/IG3Q7475.jpg




It just depends on your needs. the 4800 arrives on its own pallet. The 1800 is fairly small, for a large printer. The 4800 is cheeper in the end, but based on your needs, it might be better to go with a 1800 or 2400 and or send out for prints.

[Picture North Carolina]

It seems the Canon I have on order takes rolls, but the roll feeder is an option, and pricey at that ($250.00)

I've not used a roll printer yet, but definitely will want to go that route. But @ 250.00? I may just make something up in the old wood shop for a roll feeder,. unless the printer actually needs to "talk" to the roll feeder, I bet the one I make will be better anyways. :lol:

I only bring this up as I am wondering will that same option be applicable to this new Epson? Or will the driver prevent it?

This is hard to believe, unless it's a mechanized device. However, if it's simply a holder, get yourself a paper towel rack at walmart and mount it on a couple of sections of 4x4. /Dan

[coreypolis]

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/videos/epson3800-vid.shtml

a interview with Epson about the 3800 from Michael Reichman of LL

[Mathiau]

unless your carry-on is a semi truck, it won't be going on a airplane.




It just depends on your needs. the 4800 arrives on its own pallet. The 1800 is fairly small, for a large printer. The 4800 is cheeper in the end, but based on your needs, it might be better to go with a 1800 or 2400 and or send out for prints.


yeah, i am not plannign to be printing off hundreds of prints, i would think maybe 1-2 prints a week for aroundthe house various size, and maybe 1-4 prints a week - being generous if i get out taking more pics for sale.

[Mathiau]

decided in the new year iam going to buy the r1800 down here from a licensed Epson center, will save me cost if it breaks on shipping it to the U,S, and it is only $200 more here :(, but i am sure the ink and paper will cost a fortune too, maybe stock up on some while i am in canada.

[amonline]

Picking up a dead thread here, but I have questions about the 3800 for anyone who has experience with the older Stylus Photo's and newer large formats.

I have an old Stylus Photo 785EPX I use here at the house that prints remarkably beautiful images. For a cheap printer, it continues to blow my mind for simple 8x10 work. The resulting images are very rich and glossy (my preference) and resemble high end lab quality.

I recently picked up a 7800 for fine art reproduction primarily (a seperate business), but I have printed some large scale photos just out of curiosity. (I usually use a lab for large prints over 8x10) I am considering the 3800 Portrait system in hopes of keeping most jobs in-house and to raise profit margins.

My question pertains to the following... On my 7800, the photos are no where near as rich and glossy on the same papers as my results in the older 785 Stylus Photo. The color is there and there's no issue regarding calibration whatsoever. The photos simply are flatter - especially white areas where I continue to see a gloss from the 785. ??? (yes, I am using the photo black ink, not matte)

For anyone who has the 3800, I would like to know how you compare your photos to that of the older Stylus Photo printers. Basically, I really want the rich, thick and glossy results I get from the 785 Stylus Photo from a new large format Epson and I can't seem to figure out which large format printer offers this quality.

Thanks for any help...

[coreypolis]

what paper are you using? Some look better than others. I tried some Moad semi gloss double sided the other day in the hops of making some home made albums, and it was awful. Not exactly cheep paper either. But I find the Ilford Gallerie smooth peral to rival the best pro labs print.

[amonline]

I used PPGP in both to test this. From the same ream. ;)

edit: that's Epson talk for Premium Photo Glossy Paper. :D