Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Read More.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos RAW, Post Processing & Printing 
Thread started 11 May 2005 (Wednesday) 11:46
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Epson Stylus Photo R2400 & Picoliter Size

 
Tiger1
Senior Member
Avatar
273 posts
Joined Jun 2004
Location: Tierra Verde, Fl. USA
     
May 11, 2005 11:46 |  #1

I searched this site for information onthe new Epson Stylus Photo R2400 and couldn't find anything related - soooooooo:

Anybody familiar with this new printer? It is rumored that the new Epson UltraChrome K3 pigmented inks being used with this new printer are as bright and brilliant and the Canon Pixma inks, yet the Epson Ultra Chrome K3 pigments still maintain their longevity over the Canon inks.

2nd. Part - Is there "really" a noticable difference in the picoliter size from 2 to 3.5 picoliters?

Thanks,

Gene


Gene
Artist/Photographer/Ar​chitect
1DsMkII, 7D, 10d, SD950IS and - "Oh Yeah" "L" Glass 100-400L, 17-40L www.generizzo.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Barb42
Senior Member
Avatar
775 posts
Joined May 2003
Location: Minnesota
     
May 11, 2005 13:35 |  #2

http://www.luminous-landscape.com …printers/K3-Preview.shtml (external link)


http://www.barbsmithph​otography.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Hellashot
Goldmember
4,617 posts
Joined Sep 2004
Location: USA
     
May 11, 2005 17:53 |  #3
bannedPermanent ban

About the only difference besides maybe print speed between the 2200 and 2400 is the new type of inks. For the bang for the buck the 1800 is a lot better value, if you can get it to print the proper brightness. The 1800 does not have the straight-through paper path for thick media that the 2200 and 2400 have.


5D, Drebel, EOS-3, K1000
lenses from 12mm-500mm

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Steven ­ M. ­ Anthony
Senior Member
617 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Aug 2004
Location: Minneapolis, MN USA
     
May 11, 2005 20:45 |  #4
bannedPermanent ban

doesnt the 2400 have an additional black ink--light-light black


Steve
non calor sed umor...
www.smaphoto.com (external link)
www.smallbizwebmn.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Hellashot
Goldmember
4,617 posts
Joined Sep 2004
Location: USA
     
May 11, 2005 21:41 |  #5
bannedPermanent ban

Yes, as I stated, it has the new type of inks. That statement included the 9th ink tank (new) they added.


5D, Drebel, EOS-3, K1000
lenses from 12mm-500mm

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mdr
Goldmember
Avatar
1,167 posts
Joined Jan 2005
Location: Glasgow, Scotland
     
May 12, 2005 05:52 as a reply to  @ Hellashot's post |  #6

The proof is in the pudding, but the new 2400 should beat the 2100/2200 hands down when it comes to gloss prints. Secondly, 3 pure black (or shades of black) inks for B&W should also be a significant improvement over the black/colour B&W prints.

Then 1800 is let down heavily by the printer software, which lets the printer down drastically.


Marc
Glasgow, Scotland
www.marcderidder.com (external link)
www.deridder.me (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tiger1
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
273 posts
Joined Jun 2004
Location: Tierra Verde, Fl. USA
     
May 12, 2005 13:09 |  #7

Thanks to all for your replies.

How about the picoliter size. A 2 picoliter measurement is a decimal of a "trillion" which is infintesimal. I don't see how the 3.5 picoliter size could create images any less clear than the 2 or the 1.5 picoliter.

Any comments?

Thanks,

Gene


Gene
Artist/Photographer/Ar​chitect
1DsMkII, 7D, 10d, SD950IS and - "Oh Yeah" "L" Glass 100-400L, 17-40L www.generizzo.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
UncleDoug
Goldmember
Avatar
1,103 posts
Joined Sep 2004
Location: North lake Tahoe, CA
     
May 12, 2005 13:53 as a reply to  @ Tiger1's post |  #8

Tiger1 wrote:
Thanks to all for your replies.

How about the picoliter size. A 2 picoliter measurement is a decimal of a "trillion" which is infintesimal. I don't see how the 3.5 picoliter size could create images any less clear than the 2 or the 1.5 picoliter.

Any comments?

Thanks,

Gene

I can't give you any scientific assessment of whether or not you will see a difference or not.

But our Roland printer sports variable droplet heads/tech. varying from, i believe, 5pl to 3pl.
Not too sure if the Epson printers utilize this.(Our heads are manufactured by Epson though)
If I'm not mistaken this was supposed help with gradations and allowance for different print resolutions and ink usage.

After having the printer for 4 years, yes, I can see a difference in the performance of our printer when the droplet size is changed. I may be hypercritical and anal on this.
The 1.5pl is getting very small and may not be noticed.
But once again the media that is being printed on will have a large effect on this.


-Uncle Doug
Canon 5D & 7D
Nikon D200 - :p
Mac and PC environment
VTour (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

2,625 views & 0 likes for this thread
Epson Stylus Photo R2400 & Picoliter Size
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos RAW, Post Processing & Printing 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is livingHi
720 guests, 264 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.