Large Format Printers

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by remove the ~ to reply, Jul 27, 2003.

  1. Anyone have experince with printer that print bigger than 8x10. Now
    that I have a 5 MP camera I was thinking about some 11X16 prints. I
    know they are out their put for the typical consumer at an acceptable
    price.
    remove the ~ to reply, Jul 27, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. remove the ~ to reply

    Bill Hilton Guest

    >From: remove the ~ to reply ~

    >Anyone have experince with printer that print bigger than 8x10.


    Yes, the 13 x 19" desktop models are very popular. I've owned three of them
    the past few years.

    >Now that I have a 5 MP camera I was thinking about some 11X16
    >prints. I know they are out their put for the typical consumer at
    >an acceptable price.


    Epson 1280 or Epson 2200 or the Canon replacement for the S9000 are all
    excellent and print up to 13x19".
    Bill Hilton, Jul 27, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Bob Hatch wrote:

    > The printers that print to 13 x 19 could not truly be called "large format"
    > printers. Large format printers are usually identified as 24" wide or
    > bigger, such as the Epson 7600, 9600, or 10600. I have a 7600 and the
    > results from this printer are *better* than lab printing to as large as 24"
    > x 72" panorama prints.


    He did say "typical consumer at an acceptable price". $2995.95 (Current
    B&H price) for the 7600 is not what I would call acceptable for the
    average consumer.

    The 2200 is a very nice printer (I just got one) that makes very nice
    prints at an "acceptable" price. If $699 is not as acceptable as you
    want, the 1280 is very nice at $399.

    >
    > My only regret is that I didn't buy the 9600 to allow me to print on 44"
    > wide paper. Maybe next generation I'll move up a notch.


    And $2000.
    Andrew McDonald, Jul 27, 2003
    #3
  4. remove the ~ to reply

    Bob Hatch Guest

    "nobody nowhere" <> wrote in message
    news:awnbtJAKQAJ$...

    > You are probably a pro, and have a very big house...


    Yes on both counts. My office where the printer, computer, scanner (yes I
    have one), and Tektronix Phaser printer are is 9 x 11 feet.

    Just out of
    > curiosity, is the 7600 with its greater size etc not a little trouble?


    No. It sits on it's own stand to the left of my desk. The desk faces a
    corner of the room and has a wing off to the right. No trouble at all.

    I
    > understand that you need periodic maintenance, lots of ink, etc.


    I bought the printer in January. I've run 18128 cm of 24" wide paper through
    it. The only maintenance so far has been to run a cleaning cycle every month
    or so. Ink use is not bad considering the overall cost. 8x10 prints, paper
    included run me 80 cents each.

    And, a
    > silly question, what do you do if you want to print say an A3 or A4?
    > presumably you cut the paper accordingly after printing?


    I don't know what an A3 or A4 size is. I use Qimage for most printing
    functions for smaller images. I don't print just 1 8x10, but let things
    stack up a bit until I can print at least 2 or more 8 x 10 or equivalents.
    Then we trim.

    Make me even
    > more jealous by answering these questions... :)
    >

    Did it work?

    >
    > >I have a 7600 and the
    > >results from this printer are *better* than lab printing to as large as

    24"
    > >x 72" panorama prints.
    > >
    > >My only regret is that I didn't buy the 9600 to allow me to print on 44"
    > >wide paper. Maybe next generation I'll move up a notch.

    >
    >
    > Nobody


    --
    http://www.bobhatch.com
    Our web site about RV Stuff
    A work in progress
    Bob Hatch, Jul 27, 2003
    #4
  5. It did!;-)

    In article <bg12f9$jggug$-berlin.de>, Bob Hatch
    <> writes
    >"nobody nowhere" <> wrote in message
    >news:awnbtJAKQAJ$...
    >
    >> You are probably a pro, and have a very big house...

    >
    >Yes on both counts. My office where the printer, computer, scanner (yes I
    >have one), and Tektronix Phaser printer are is 9 x 11 feet.
    >
    > Just out of
    >> curiosity, is the 7600 with its greater size etc not a little trouble?

    >
    >No. It sits on it's own stand to the left of my desk. The desk faces a
    >corner of the room and has a wing off to the right. No trouble at all.
    >
    >I
    >> understand that you need periodic maintenance, lots of ink, etc.

    >
    >I bought the printer in January. I've run 18128 cm of 24" wide paper through
    >it. The only maintenance so far has been to run a cleaning cycle every month
    >or so. Ink use is not bad considering the overall cost. 8x10 prints, paper
    >included run me 80 cents each.
    >
    >And, a
    >> silly question, what do you do if you want to print say an A3 or A4?
    >> presumably you cut the paper accordingly after printing?

    >
    >I don't know what an A3 or A4 size is. I use Qimage for most printing
    >functions for smaller images. I don't print just 1 8x10, but let things
    >stack up a bit until I can print at least 2 or more 8 x 10 or equivalents.
    >Then we trim.
    >
    >Make me even
    >> more jealous by answering these questions... :)
    >>

    >Did it work?
    >
    >>
    >> >I have a 7600 and the
    >> >results from this printer are *better* than lab printing to as large as

    >24"
    >> >x 72" panorama prints.
    >> >
    >> >My only regret is that I didn't buy the 9600 to allow me to print on 44"
    >> >wide paper. Maybe next generation I'll move up a notch.

    >>
    >>
    >> Nobody

    >



    Nobody
    nobody nowhere, Jul 27, 2003
    #5
  6. Re:

    > And, a
    > > silly question, what do you do if you want to print say an A3 or A4?
    > > presumably you cut the paper accordingly after printing?

    >
    > I don't know what an A3 or A4 size is. I use Qimage for most printing
    > functions for smaller images. I don't print just 1 8x10, but let things
    > stack up a bit until I can print at least 2 or more 8 x 10 or equivalents.


    > http://www.bobhatch.com


    Bob,

    You must be in the US or Canada. Just about the rest of the world has
    standardized its paper sizes: see this for the lowdown ....

    http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~mgk25/iso-paper.html

    You'll be surprised....
    Eddie Bromhead, Jul 27, 2003
    #6
  7. remove the ~ to reply

    Trajabador Guest

    Thanks for the link - I've wondered how that stuff worked...

    A metrically-challenged USA resident.

    <snip>
    > You must be in the US or Canada. Just about the rest of the world has
    > standardized its paper sizes: see this for the lowdown ....
    >
    > http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~mgk25/iso-paper.html
    >
    > You'll be surprised....
    >
    >
    Trajabador, Jul 28, 2003
    #7
  8. Where did you get the beast? (I live in UK, London). Are you happy with
    it? Are the results visibly/much better than with the 1290?

    In article <3f24cfcb$>, gsum
    <> writes
    >According to my calculations, the 7600 ink and
    >paper costs are about half of the 1290 costs.
    >The UK price has dropped recently to 2000
    >pounds i.e. about four times that of the Epson
    >2100 so if you are selling prints the 7600
    >makes sense.
    >
    >I had completely underestimated the size and
    >weight of the 7600 - it was only just possible to
    >get the thing through our front door and we had
    >to unpack it before dragging/pushing it upstairs
    >(it weighs 60 kgs).
    >
    >Graham
    >
    >"nobody nowhere" <> wrote in message
    >news:awnbtJAKQAJ$...
    >> You are probably a pro, and have a very big house... Just out of
    >> curiosity, is the 7600 with its greater size etc not a little trouble? I
    >> understand that you need periodic maintenance, lots of ink, etc. And, a
    >> silly question, what do you do if you want to print say an A3 or A4?
    >> presumably you cut the paper accordingly after printing? Make me even
    >> more jealous by answering these questions... :)
    >>
    >> >

    >> Nobody

    >
    >
    nobody nowhere, Jul 28, 2003
    #8
  9. remove the ~ to reply

    gsum Guest

    I can't remember which supplier I used as
    our server is down.
    I followed the 'where to buy' link on the Epson
    website and entered my postcode for a local
    supplier. The prices at the Epson re-sellers appear
    to be fixed so there is no advantage in choosing one
    over another.

    The results are very similar to those from the 1290
    except that there is a slight amount of bronzing of the
    blacks but this is not very noticeable.

    The main advantages of the 7600 over the 1290 are:

    1. The ink dries instantly. The 1290 ink requires a
    couple of hours to dry and loose a slight majenta cast.

    2. Printing is much faster.

    3. Consumables seem to be about 50% cheaper (I'm still
    assessing this).

    4. The ink and paper are light fast for 65 years - I'm
    not sure how they know that but I have had problems
    with fading of 1290 prints after a few months.

    If you decide to buy, check with the Epson site. When
    I bought mine in March, there was an offer for half
    price consumables which the re-seller knew nothing
    about. At that time you could get 700 pounds
    worth of ink and paper for 340 pounds.

    Graham

    "nobody nowhere" <> wrote in message
    news:eek:eC32UAclOJ$...
    > Where did you get the beast? (I live in UK, London). Are you happy with
    > it? Are the results visibly/much better than with the 1290?
    >
    gsum, Jul 28, 2003
    #9
  10. Thank you very much, I regard £2K as very reasonable for what is
    offered, in particular longevity of pics, and 50 per cent cheaper
    consumables are tempting, however, it now seems that the most important
    digital photo piece of equipment is... the size for the room or flat...
    :)

    In article <3f2506c0$>, gsum
    <> writes
    >I can't remember which supplier I used as
    >our server is down.
    >I followed the 'where to buy' link on the Epson
    >website and entered my postcode for a local
    >supplier. The prices at the Epson re-sellers appear
    >to be fixed so there is no advantage in choosing one
    >over another.
    >
    >The results are very similar to those from the 1290
    >except that there is a slight amount of bronzing of the
    >blacks but this is not very noticeable.
    >
    >The main advantages of the 7600 over the 1290 are:
    >
    >1. The ink dries instantly. The 1290 ink requires a
    >couple of hours to dry and loose a slight majenta cast.
    >
    >2. Printing is much faster.
    >
    >3. Consumables seem to be about 50% cheaper (I'm still
    >assessing this).
    >
    >4. The ink and paper are light fast for 65 years - I'm
    >not sure how they know that but I have had problems
    >with fading of 1290 prints after a few months.
    >
    >If you decide to buy, check with the Epson site. When
    >I bought mine in March, there was an offer for half
    >price consumables which the re-seller knew nothing
    >about. At that time you could get 700 pounds
    >worth of ink and paper for 340 pounds.
    >
    >Graham
    >
    >"nobody nowhere" <> wrote in message
    >news:eek:eC32UAclOJ$...
    >> Where did you get the beast? (I live in UK, London). Are you happy with
    >> it? Are the results visibly/much better than with the 1290?
    >>

    >
    >
    >


    Nobody
    nobody nowhere, Jul 28, 2003
    #10
  11. Thank you, a few more questions, if I may:-
    (see below)

    In article <3f2506c0$>, gsum
    <> writes
    >
    >The results are very similar to those from the 1290
    >except that there is a slight amount of bronzing of the
    >blacks but this is not very noticeable.


    What does "similar" really mean? Some people in this NG (unless I
    misunderstood them) seemed to argue that the results from the 7600 are
    vastly or much better than those from a humble inkjet like the 1290. Is
    this also your view? Would you regard the bronzing effect a small or
    acceptable price to pay for longevity? I love my prints from the 1290,
    in particular those on premium glossy paper, but if you and Bill and
    others are right, they will fade even before I have had a chance to
    boast ` about them, which is not a very comfortable feeling, even if I
    don't sell my prints.
    >
    >The main advantages of the 7600 over the 1290 are:
    >
    >1. The ink dries instantly. The 1290 ink requires a
    >couple of hours to dry and loose a slight majenta cast.


    At least you acknowledge the existence of the cast, I thought it was
    something wrong with me or my eyes. Perhaps I should wait to see if the
    cast does disappear within a few hours.
    >
    >2. Printing is much faster.
    >
    >3. Consumables seem to be about 50% cheaper (I'm still
    >assessing this).


    Now, this is really something which would seduce me. I like medium
    format, and large prints, which is a recipe for financial hara-kiri, as
    I mentioned in a previous posts.
    >
    >4. The ink and paper are light fast for 65 years - I'm
    >not sure how they know that but I have had problems
    >with fading of 1290 prints after a few months.


    I must confess that this is not my experience, I deliberately exposed
    1290 prints under lots of light, for long periods, and have not detected
    any noticeable fading (but the "experiment" is less than one year old),
    and I may be wrong.
    >
    >If you decide to buy, check with the Epson site. When
    >I bought mine in March, there was an offer for half
    >price consumables which the re-seller knew nothing
    >about. At that time you could get 700 pounds
    >worth of ink and paper for 340 pounds.


    Thanks again, this is most helpful.
    >
    >Graham
    >
    >"nobody nowhere" <> wrote in message
    >news:eek:eC32UAclOJ$...
    >> Where did you get the beast? (I live in UK, London). Are you happy with
    >> it? Are the results visibly/much better than with the 1290?
    >>

    >
    >
    >



    Nobody
    nobody nowhere, Jul 28, 2003
    #11
  12. remove the ~ to reply

    Bill Hilton Guest

    >From: nobody nowhere

    >Would you regard the bronzing effect a small or
    >acceptable price to pay for longevity?


    I *think* what he's calling "bronzing" is what you see only with the Glossy
    paper like PGPP. You don't see this on semi-gloss or luster or the art papers.
    Bill Hilton, Jul 28, 2003
    #12
  13. remove the ~ to reply

    Paul Rubin Guest

    nobody nowhere <> writes:
    > Thank you very much, I regard £2K as very reasonable for what is
    > offered, in particular longevity of pics, and 50 per cent cheaper
    > consumables are tempting, however, it now seems that the most important
    > digital photo piece of equipment is... the size for the room or flat...


    You should get similar print longevity from a 2200P which is a desktop
    A3/Super-B sized printer (13x19"). To cut down consumables costs look
    at <http://www.continuousflowprinters.com> once it comes back online.
    Paul Rubin, Jul 28, 2003
    #13
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. nobody
    Replies:
    20
    Views:
    586
    Bill Hilton
    Mar 27, 2005
  2. Large format printers

    , Jul 20, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    13
    Views:
    408
    piperut
    Jul 21, 2005
  3. Wayne J. Cosshall

    New Hp large format printers

    Wayne J. Cosshall, Sep 22, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    367
    Wayne J. Cosshall
    Sep 23, 2006
  4. Wayne J. Cosshall

    HP announce new Z large format printers

    Wayne J. Cosshall, Sep 26, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    330
    Noons
    Oct 1, 2006
  5. Large Format Printers Any Opinions?

    , Apr 23, 2007, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    307
    tomm42
    Apr 24, 2007
Loading...

Share This Page