The 7900 and 9900, which have maximum print widths of 24 inches and 44 inches, respectively, use Epson’s new 10-color UltraChrome HDR inkset, which adds two new ink colors—orange and green—designed to give the printers the widest possible gamut available in inkjet printing today. According to the company, the new inkset, in conjunction with improved screening algorithms, will produce “greatly enhanced photographic print quality with exceptionally fine photographic blends.”

Both units incorporate a 10-channel micropiezo printhead with an ink-repelling coating (also found in the Stylus Photo R1900 and R2880) designed to reduce clogs and improve ink efficiency. The 10-channel head also lets you switch on the fly between matte and photo black inks.

Another first for Epson is the inclusion of an optional spectrophotometer from X-Rite, the SpectroProofer, designed to provide a streamlined color-management process for prepress and proofing situations.

The Epson Stylus Pro 7900 and 9900 will be available in November for $3,995 and $5,995 respectively. We hadn’t received pricing for the optional spectrophotometer at press time; we’ll pass that information along as we receive it.

Epson is billing the 7900 and 9900 printers as the ultimate inkjet printers for packaging, signage, and other commercial applications, as well as the top-of-the-line photographic printer on the market today. From the limited number of prints we’ve been able to see, we think that the company has once again taken a leap ahead of the competition in terms of print quality and performance. We’re hoping to get our hands on a unit to test: we’ll keep you posted.

The Z3200 is the successor to HP’s the Designjet Z3100 Photo Printer, which, when it first shipped late in 2006, was one of the most innovative photo printers we had seen in a long time. The Z3100 utilized 12 pigment-based inks (including a gloss optimizer) to produce high-quality, gallery-ready prints, but it was the printer’s embedded spectrophotometer (from X-Rite) and seamless integration with networked Macs and PCs that set it apart from competitors like Epson and Canon. HP spent considerable effort streamlining the process of printing: everything from unboxing the device to profiling and adding new paper types had been thought through by HP’s hardware and software engineers. The result was a printer that created top-quality prints and was a joy to use, day in and day out.

We’ve had a production version of the 24" PostScript model, the Z3200ps, for about three weeks, and have tested it fairly thoroughly with a variety of papers and applications. Overall, we’re very impressed with the printer’s performance: HP is obviously determined to keep the pressure on Epson—the market leader—in the pro photo space. As was the case with the Z3100, we think that the Z3200 should be looked at by anyone seriously evaluating a wide-format device to create salable prints.

Seeing Red

Not wanting to make too many changes in an already solid product, HP kept most of the Z3100’s feature set when designing the Z3200, keeping (for the most part) the 12-ink Vivera inkset, the same paper-handling options, spectrophotometer, and on-board OS. Most of the Z3200’s enhancements are inside the printer. In fact, aside from the nameplate on the front of the printer, you would be hard-pressed to find a cosmetic difference with the Z3100. The biggest change is in the ink: to expand the printer’s color gamut, HP has swapped out the red ink found in the Z3100, replacing it with a newly formulated red ink, called Chromatic Red. According to HP, this new ink significantly widens the printable gamut, producing much richer color that is more true to life.

For designers, the ink change is also important. With the Z3200ps, the model with Adobe PostScript 3 built-in, HP claims that it can reproduce nearly 95 percent of the Pantone color library, and the printer includes a number of features for dealing with Pantone spot colors in layouts, as well as a utility for creating Pantone swatch books directly from the printer’s front panel.

In our comparison testing, the Z3200’s output was very similar to that of the Z3100; the reds were definitely more pronounced with many images, although other prints showed little differentiation. This isn’t surprising; we are now in an age where the generational changes in print quality are truly incremental. Prints made with desktop inkjets are of such high quality that the average consumer is more than satisfied. Professionals, however, continue to look for even the smallest improvements that will realize their artistic vision, and changes like those in the Z3200 ink set are the things that they’re looking for.

To us, the ink change in the Z3200 mirrors Epson’s change to the Vivid Magenta and Vivid Light Magenta inks last year. As was the case with HP, Epson claimed that the two new inks increased the color gamut of their Stylus Pro printers, but they also admitted that many customers wouldn’t be able to detect the changes between the old inks. We’ve seen a number of test prints from the Stylus Pro 7880 that show similar sorts of improvements in color rendition and fidelity to those we’ve seen in the Z3200.

Other improvements

While HP hasn’t done much to the paper-handling features with the Z3200, they have made some small usability enhancements throughout. Loading cut sheet media is a bit easier than before, thanks to some adjustments to the feeder. (We do wish, however, that HP would add a paper guide for feeding sheets.) And, when creating paper profiles with the integrated spectrophotometer, among the parameters you can now set is the height of the ‘starwheels’ that hold the paper in place while the printhead is laying down ink. This is another intelligent solution to a problem that can come up when you’re using thick fine-art papers.

Speedwise, the Z3200 was significantly faster than its predecessor in our testing, showing more than 20 percent faster print speeds at times. For example, a 24" by 36" image took only 16 minutes to print on the Z3200, while the same image took more than 22 minutes on the Z3100. For high-production shops, this alone will help sell the Z3200.

The whole process of adding a new paper type to the Z3200 print driver is (thankfully) identical to that of the Z3100. You simply put the paper in the printer, and, via the HP Print Center utility, tell the device to print and scan calibration and profiling charts. Depending upon how much time you want to wait for paper drying times, you can be up and printing with your new paper in as little as 30 minutes (we generally dry our papers overnight and profile them the following day). In the Z3200, HP has added the capability to export paper presets, which include hardware settings, profiles, gloss enhancer settings and more.

HP is also announcing new media types with the Z3200, including a fiber-based paper called HP Baryte Satin Art Paper, and two lower-priced photo papers, HP Everyday Pigment Gloss and Everyday Pigment Semigloss. The Baryte paper is especially nice, and initially will be available only in roll format. (It reminded us of Canon’s Polished Rag—another of our favorite fiber papers—in feel and weight.)

How will it play?

As we’ve indicated, the Designjet Z3200 is more of an incremental upgrade than a ground-breaking new model, but that’s not a bad thing. HP is playing the game the way that it needs to be played. With Epson’s well-deserved hegemony at the top of the pro-printer market, HP has to continue to innovate and make substantive changes to be perceived as a true competitor, and we think that the Z3200 does just that. We know that some photographers felt that the Z3100 wasn’t as good in the reds as Epson’s comparable printers, and the Chromatic Red should go quite a ways towards alleviating those complaints.

The Z3200 has some strong attributes that should appeal to the pro photographer, but its best attribute is its print quality, which—for both color and black and white images—rival those made by Epson’s Stylus Pro wide format printers. When you add the advanced paper-profiling and usability features, the Z3200 becomes a very compelling printer for this key market segment.

While we think HP has the goods, they still need to execute, and, in the U.S. at least, it’s been a tough road for them. In addition to Epson’s well-earned reputation for products, they are firmly entrenched in the professional photo retail channel, and have a much greater mindshare among professional photographers and artists than HP and Canon combined.

In the coming months, we expect that Epson will make a U.S. announcement of the Stylus Pro x900 series, which include the Vivid Magenta inks, a 9-channel printhead that eliminates the matte- and photo-black ink swapping, printhead improvements and—like HP—an optional spectrophotometer. Given Epson’s position in the market, we have high expectations for those models, and HP needs to use any lead time it has to push the Z3200 hard in the market, and make sure that there is ample support in the channel.

As we repeatedly say, competition and change is a very good thing, especially at the high end of the market. As print quality becomes less and less the differentiator between products, other factors— usability, price, ink efficiency, and so on—enter into the equation, which help drive innovation. And, as innovation sticks, key features move on down the line to the consumer space, where an even greater group benefits.

The Designjet Z3200 Photo Printer will ship in October, priced at $3,395 for a 24" model ($4,695 with Adobe PostScript 3) and $5,595 for a 44" model ($6,795 with PostScript).

What’s new?

What does the R2880 have that sets it apart from the R2400 (and its competition)? Here are some of the primary advantages:

• An improved version of the UltraChrome K3 inkset used in Epson’s flagship Stylus Pro printers, incorporating the Vivid Magenta inks;
• A new color-matching technology, Radiance, designed to improve color constancy, reduce grain and improve ink efficiency (also found in the new Stylus Photo R1900);
• New mechanisms inside the printer that are designed to reduce head clogging and ink buildup;
• A tray for printing on inkjet-printable CDs and DVDs;
• Two USB ports, on different circuits, allowing multiple computers (PC or Mac) to be connected to the printer simultaneously; and
• Faster performance.

While the R2880 has plenty of enhancements, it also inherits one unfortunate trait from the R2400: the need to physically swap matte and photo black ink cartridges when you switch paper types. Given that both Canon and HP have been able to engineer ink delivery systems that incorporate both black ink types, this is a big disappointment, and one that puts Epson at a competitive disadvantage. For many photographers, this fact alone will eliminate the R2880 from consideration, regardless of the print quality or other strengths. We don’t think this is a fatal flaw, especially given the excellent print quality, but it is a major drawback.

UltraChrome K3 Vivid

Epson added the vivid magenta and vivid light magenta inks to its Stylus Pro wide-format line in September 2007, claiming that the new inks offered a wider gamut and improved black-and-white performance over the previous K3 inkset. In conjunction with the new inks, Epson is using a new color technology called Radiance, developed in conjunction with the Rochester Institute of Technology, that purportedly provides more efficient ink usage, higher quality images, and improved color constancy when viewing prints under different lighting conditions. (If you’re interested in a bit deeper discussion of Radiance, we recently covered some of the technology behind it.)

Attacking the clogged nozzle issue

Clogged print nozzles are a fact of life with inkjet printers from every manufacturer, and the R2400 seemed to be one of those printers that had more than its fair share of problems in this area. With the R2880, Epson is incorporating some new technology to try to eliminate the problem entirely.

The biggest culprit in creating clogs is time. It’s quite simple: if you leave your printer primed and unused over a significant period of time, some ink deposits can solidify and block nozzles. This is one of the reasons that most printers will run a cleaning cycle occasionally if the device hasn’t been used. Of course, this wastes ink, and it doesn’t guarantee that there won’t be clogged nozzles, but we’ve found that it does help.

Epson has added two features to the R2880 designed to reduce clogging: an ink-repelling coating on the printhead, and the addition of tiny glass beads to the ink cartridges. The coating keeps ink from building up on the printhead, theoretically lowering the chances of blocked nozzles, and the glass beads help ‘stir’ the ink while the printer is in use, keeping the viscosity optimal.

The company has also implemented an ink-collection technology that is designed to reduce the stray ink buildup that occurs inside every inkjet printer on the market—tiny amounts of ink that never make it to the paper. (These enhancements are also found in the R1900.)

If you use an inkjet printer long enough, you’ll notice that ink deposits and tiny amounts of paper fuzz can accumulate underneath the printhead’s carriage. This can often lead to paper jams and ink smudges on prints, and Epson representatives say that the R1900’s mist collection system, which uses a special electric charge to capture any ink overspray, is one more little feature that will help reduce printing problems over time. It won’t reduce the tiny amounts of paper dust that slough off a page as it goes through a printer, but it should reduce the sludge that builds as a result. (This is a problem that has begun to plague owners of HP’s Photosmart Pro B9180; for more, check this field report from our colleague Duncan Davidson.)

While we will want to see longer-term reports from the field on the anti-clog features in the R2880, we can say that, having printed more than 1,500 images on the R2880—and another 800 or so on the R1900—we have yet to see a clogged nozzle. We left the printer on for five weeks, with only intermittent printing, and never had a problem, something we couldn’t say with our Stylus Photo R2400 or our Photosmart Pro B8850. (We also left the R1900 on for eight weeks, printing a page here, and a page there, without running into any clogs.)

Setup

Like most inkjets today, the R2880 sets up quickly and with minimal effort. The 11ml ink cartridges snap easily into place, and the only real choice you need to make is what type of paper you’ll print on; Epson includes both matte and photo black cartridges with the printer. It doesn’t come with a USB cable, though, so you’ll need to pick one up.

Because it is a large-format printer—capable of printing up to 13" wide—you’ll need a large enough space for the printer to reside upon, but the top-loading paper tray and the output tray fold nicely out of the way when you’re not using the printer. It also helps keep dust and dirt out of the printer, which is another plus. This design was first used in the R1900, and we like it much more than the one found in Epson’s Stylus Photo 1400, R1800 and R2400: those models’ spring-loaded output tray was flimsy and poorly designed.

The printer has two rear-feed paper slots, one for rigid media, the other for standard photo and matte papers. Like most of Epson’s printers in this class, you can also use roll paper; the attachment isn’t the sturdiest, but it works well when set up. It would be nice to have a built-in paper cutter, however.

The R2880 comes with print drivers for both Mac OS X and Windows (XP and Vista). In addition to the drivers is a background application that displays the printer’s ink levels every time you print, an ink-reminder utility (that can be disabled), and PrintCD, a program for creating DVD and CD labels. The drivers for Mac and PC are almost unchanged from those used by the R2400, although the R2880 does add 16-bit printing support under Mac OS X 10.5.

Print quality

At this level of the market, the thing that matters most is print quality, and frankly, the R2880 offers the best prints of any desktop inkjet printer we’ve used. The addition of the vivid magenta inks does appear to create a slightly wider gamut, but it also helps increase the quality of black-and-white output, especially in the shadows. No matter what the type of image, or the paper chosen, viewers consistently picked the R2880 output over the R2400, the R1900, HP’s B9180 and B8850, and Canon’s Pixma Pro9000 and 9500.

The R2880 did a great job regardless of the paper type. On glossy papers, prints exhibited minimal gloss differential (sometimes referred to as ‘bronzing’), and papers like Epson’s own Exhibition Fiber (Amazon link) or HP’s Professional Satin (Amazon) produced stunning, richly detailed prints, with vibrant colors. On matte-style papers, the R2880 did an excellent job of reproducing deep, rich blacks and a fairly broad tonal range. Nearly all of the fine-art papers we threw at the R2880 reproduced well, including Epson’s Ultrasmooth Fine Art (Amazon) Red River’s Aurora Natural and Moab’s Somerset Photo Satin. It’s also worth noting that none of the R2880 prints—on matte or glossy media—exhibited any signs of scuffing or ‘pizza’ tracks, which is important to anyone interested in selling their work.

For anyone interested in black and white printing, the R2880 is a stunner. On both matte and glossy media, the R2880’s output is drop-dead neutral, with the widest tonal range of any printer we’ve seen under $1,000. In fact, its black-and-white prints can rival printers more than twice its price. For example, when comparing R2880 prints with those made with the Stylus Pro 3800—our favorite overall printer in the under-$2,000 category—viewers couldn’t find noticeable differences in most color prints. But, with black-and-white prints, most observers felt that the R2880 did a slightly better job than the 3800. On some fine-art papers, like Hahnemuhle’s Photo Rag, the R2880 was able to hold detail much better than the 3800. Overall, this isn’t surprising; part of the reason Epson went to the vivid magenta inks was that it would help increase the tonal range in black-and-white printing (even when using Epson’s Advanced B&W printing mode, some color inks are used), and the R2880 is Epson’s first large-format inkjet to use the new inks.

All of this should come as no surprise; Epson has long focused on quality, and the company has spent untold sums in improving their printheads and screening algorithms, all in the quest to produce the highest-quality prints. We feel that it’s worth noting that the improvements we found in the R2880’s print quality won’t be noticed by many consumers: the R2400, R1900, Photosmart Pro B8850, B9180 and Pixma Pro9500 all produce very good prints on a variety of media types, especially if they’ve been profiled properly. However, if you’re looking for the best possible color and black-and-white prints in a sub-$1,000 device, then the R2880 is your printer.

Ink life

We’ve spent a lot of time this year dwelling on the topic of measuring ink cartridge life in an everyday setting (as have our friends at Red River Paper). One of the knocks on every vendor is the cost of ink, and while we really don’t want to fuel the ink-consipracy theorists, we think it is important for people to get a sense of what it will cost to print. Using a methodology similar to that of our initial testing (and that of Red River’s), we printed 200 8" by 10" pages of Bill Atkinson’s Profile Test image on the R2880, and, using the weight of full and empty ink cartridges, were able to come up with a measurement of the total ink used, and a cost per print (of ink only).

Using this data, we can derive an ink cost per square inch, which lets us come up with an estimated cost per print size, as shown below:

While we’re still in the process of measuring a wide range of printers, we can say that the numbers for the R2880 are comparable to those of HP’s Photosmart Pro B8850 and other printers in this class. We want to be careful in setting expectations: the primary function of these tests is to give a comparable set of metrics across a broad range of printers from competing vendors, with a freely available test chart. Depending upon the type of photos you print, the number of copies and print quality levels, you might find that you’re using more or less ink than we are.

Performance

Looking at print speed, the R2880 is a very good performer, showing a modest improvement over the R2400, and leaving its primary rivals, HP’s B9180 and Canon’s Pixma Pro9500, in the dust. As we regularly note, speed is rarely at the top of our list for choosing a printer in this class, but it should be a consideration, especially if you believe print quality is relatively comparable across the different vendors’ units.

The first chart, shown below, displays the times (in seconds) for prints at the printers’ default photo modes. This is the setting most people will use, and one that produces very good results for snapshots and everyday use. As might be expected when looking at the newest member of the class, the R2880 is the speediest performer. (Click on the image to see a full-size PDF of the results.)

The second chart shows the print speeds at the highest resolution setting, the one that produces the most optimal prints, but which also uses up more ink. We rarely use this setting except for when we’re dealing with problematic images, ones with wide dynamic range, or when we want to create gallery-quality prints. Here, the R2880 continues to do well, although the gap is not as wide as it is at the lower quality setting. (Click on the image to see a full-size PDF of the results.)

The rough spots

For the most part, the R2880 really shines as a high-end, consumer-level photo inkjet, but there are a few things that prevent us from making the printer an unqualified, “must buy”:

• First and foremost is the ink swapping. After nearly six years of using separate black ink cartridges (dating back to the Stylus Photo 2200), we shouldn’t have to swap inks when changing paper types. HP and Canon have been able to engineer printheads with separate channels for the matte and photo black inks, and yet Epson—the originator of this market segment—has yet to come out with an affordable inkjet printer that incorporates similar technology.
• We also think that a large-format inkjet, capable of printing 13" by 19" borderless prints with ease, should have larger-capacity ink cartridges. HP’s ink cartridges for the B8850 and B9180 are more than twice the capacity of the R2880’s 11ml cartridges, and, while they are both comparably priced when you factor the cost per ml., you’ll need to purchase more cartridges sooner than you will with the HP printers. As a point of reference, we had to purchase eight additional ink cartridges (which cost nearly $110) to complete our 200-page ink use test on the R2880, while we had to purchase two cartridges (at a cost of $72) for the same test on our B8850.
• Epson continues to provide no mechanism for easily adding new papers to the print driver. If you use a third-party paper, you have to remember which comparable Epson paper type was used to profile the paper (whether you did it, or you’re using the paper manufacturer’s profiles). This is a usability issue, and, as print quality improves, photographers are going to demand much more user-friendly tools. Epson should be a leader here.
• Related to the driver/paper problem, Epson doesn’t even include a driver setting for their flagship Exhibition Fiber paper, which the company claims is optimized for the UltraChrome K3 ink set. The ICC profiles for the paper aren’t even on the Epson Web site; you need to go to the Pixel Genius site to download them. While it’s great that a third-party is producing high-quality profiles, Epson really should have them in the box with the printer.

With the exception of the ink-swapping issue, these really are minor problems that mar an otherwise excellent printer. We can—and do—live with them as small annoyances in our quest to produce the highest-quality prints. And, if you are like most photographers, you’ll gravitate to a few paper choices, all of which will be either matte or photo, and ink changes won’t be a concern. But if you want the widest flexibility in media choice, you’ll either have to choose an alternative printer, or put up with the lost ink used when switching (which we estimate at roughly $1.75 to $2 per ink change).

Conclusions

The Stylus Photo R2880 is a bit of a conundrum. The steps forward Epson has made in print quality and reducing clogs are hamstrung by the continued necessity to swap black inks. If Epson had eliminated the cartridge-swapping issue with this printer, it would be a nearly perfect product; as it is, it’s a remarkable printer with one significant drawback. In the end, if you’re looking for a printer in this class and price range, and print quality is your overarching concern, there is almost no reason not to go with the R2880. As much as we wish that Epson would improve some of the rough edges in their consumer-level printers, the R2880’s prints speak for themselves.

Epson R2880 Large Format Photo Printer (C11CA16201)

Epson 2008, Electronics, Too low to display

The new printers, which are priced at $300 (Artisan 800) and $200 (700), are six-color inkjets (with individual ink tanks) using Epson’s Claria dye-based inks. Other features include:

• dual paper trays, one for paper up to 8.5" by 14", the other for 4" by 6" and 5" by 7" photo paper;
• integrated tray for printing on optical media (printable CDs and DVDs);
• built-in card readers for most popular formats (CompactFlash, SD, xD-PictureCard, Memory Stick);
• significant PC-free printing features, including photo restoration, customized photo layouts, photo notepaper, and school project items;
• scanning to computer, memory card or USB-based flash drive.

The Artisan 700’s scanner has a maximum hardware scan resolution of 2400 dpi, while the Artisan 800 has a maximum hardware scan resolution of 4800 dpi. The 800 also includes fax capabilities and a 30-sheet document feeder.

We’ve tested and used Epson’s previous photo all-in-ones, the RX595 and RX680, and have been generally impressed. The Claria inkset, which is also used in the Stylus Photo 1400, is very good, and it offers excellent print longevity, according to Wilhelm Research’s data (click the links for reports on the RX595, RX680 and 1400). The addition of WiFi and Ethernet is a good one, and is necessary at these higher price points. HP has done especially well with the Photosmart C7280, and it’s been clear that Epson has needed to beef up its all-in-one offerings. One area where we’ll be very interested to see how well Epson does is in the wireless computer-printer connection; HP’s software is quite good, and it’s relatively painless to remotely scan documents directly to multiple PCs on a network from the C7280.

Both devices will work with Mac OS X (10.3.9 and higher) and Microsoft Windows XP and Vista and come with a two-year limited warranty. They’re slated to ship in September.

Over the weekend, Red River’s Drew Hendrix posted their latest results, covering Canon’s Pixma Pro9500 and Pixma Pro9000 inkjets. Their results show that the dye-based Canon Pixma Pro9000 offers roughly the same cost per print as the pigment-based R1900, while the Pixma Pro9500 has a slightly better cost per print than Epson’s R2400. (The Stylus Photo R2880, which was introduced in June, is probably much closer to the 9500 in cost per print, based on our tests, which use the same test image and similar methodology to Red River’s.)

We’re currently testing the HP B8850 with some slightly different methodology, but one that we hope will give us slightly more accurate results. Stay tuned—we think this is pretty important stuff.

This report addresses concerns and arguments about the true cost of ink in desktop photo printing. Using the Epson R2400 and Epson R1900, we conducted a series of print tests to determine how much ink is used in a full coverage 8”x10” print. From that figure we extrapolated ink usage per square inch. The objective is to share a realistic cost per print vision with inkjet users. The choice to pursue photo inkjet printing is in the end an individual economic choice.

We think this is pretty important stuff, and it’s good to see others working on similar tests — the data regarding the R1900 is especially welcome, and it looks like Red River’s results on the R2400 are very similar to ours, which speaks well to this style of test’s repeatability. If you’re interested in this topic, it’s worth going through the report.

Based on some of the comments we’ve received, we think there are a few tweaks we can make to get the test methodology a bit more secure, and be extended to HP and Canon printers. Stay tuned.

“in our initial testing, we were able to print nearly twice as many photos using the same amount of ink on R2880 as we were able to do with the R2400.”

Our results — which were based on observations from our second round of installed ink cartridges — weren’t done with any specific methodology in place. It was based on our general performance testing, alongside standard print quality test prints that we generally use. Since then, our initial findings haven’t held up, and while we stand by what we saw in that specific round of printing, it was obvious that we needed to look at this issue a bit deeper.

In the past week, we have spent a fair amount time trying to come up with some type of test methodology to give a realistic sense of ink usage on the new printer. This week we ran some initial tests, and we’ve gotten some interesting data, but this is an issue bigger than the R2880. We wanted to share our results as a starting data point for a wider discussion of ink yield in photo printers.

The ink problem

Determining ink yield isn’t an easy task; there are a number of variables that come into play that make it hard to come up with a reliable number that works in the real world. Some of the variables aren’t just built into the printer. They also include how the printer is used. Here are a few of the factors that are involved (in no particular order):

• The range and type of images you print. If you print more portraits, or in black and white, you might find that you’re using a much narrower set of inks more frequently than others.
• Print quality settings. If you print using your device’s highest quality setting, you’ll use more ink than you would at a lower quality level.
• Print output size. Relatively speaking, the larger the paper, the more ink that gets laid down on the page.
• Cleaning cycles and maintenance; some printers perform regular printhead checks that use small amounts of ink. (HP posted a firmware update earlier this year that reportedly fixed a problem related to overzealous cleaning of the printheads.)
• The swapping of matte and photo black ink cartridges (in the case of the Stylus Photo R2880 and R2400); this also wastes ink.

Measuring — and comparing — ink yield

We could just say that it’s hard reliably to determine ink yield and leave it at that, but this is a hot-button topic. And, with increased competition among the printer vendors, who are producing much higher quality photo printers, people will turn to other factors when evaluating a printer. It’s reasonable to expect that people would want to know how much ink they’ll go through over the course of time. But looking at the variables involved, it’s darn near impossible to tell someone what they’ll get.

What makes this more frustrating is that, even if you were able to develop a test that will reliably tell someone how many prints they can expect from a particular printer’s inkset, it doesn’t help you compare one printer against another. Each company uses different sized cartridges throughout their printer line, and none of those capacities match up with cartridges from their competitors. So, one can look at getting lots more prints out of an HP Photosmart Pro B8850 from a set of ink than they would from the R2880, but the latter printer’s inks are much smaller (and cheaper) than the HP device. This is one of the reasons we’ve been reporting cost per ml of ink in our reviews, but that doesn’t help people with ink yield.

What everyone wants is number that measures the cost per page, and that’s what we’ve thinking about. The question is how realistic it is to expect an answer that means something.

In looking at this issue specifically for the R2880 review, we wanted to be clear, and we wanted to be accurate. Our remark in the first look was counter to that reported by Vincent Oliver in his R2880 review on photo-i, and we didn’t want to add any more confusion to the market. (We think having many independent reviews of a product is a good thing.)

Our intent in this instance was to compare the efficiency of ink usage between the older R2400 and the newer R2880, which was complicated by the fact that the ink capacities and prices of the cartridges used in the two printers was different: 13ml for the R2400 (currently $14.24 on the Epson online store) and 11ml for the R2880 ($13.29 on Epson.com). There’s been a lot of invective online about the shrinking size of the R2880 (and R1900) ink carts, but Epson representatives have told us that they’re working on technology to make ink usage more efficient, so one would expect to see some improvement in this area.

The test

The question was how to come up with a test that made sense, and would be repeatable by others. We ultimately decided that printing with a freely available test chart was a good place to start. We would use one representative page, with a good balance of photos and test ramps, printed over and over until we ran out of ink. For our first tests, we chose an image (Profile Test Images) that Bill Atkinson has graciously made available “for free download to assist other artists.”

So we set up a test bed with the R2880 and the R2400, loaded them each with new, full ink cartridges, and resized the Profile Test Image file to 8" by 10" in output size at 240 dpi. We felt that this size was a decent compromise, and would also give people a better idea of how ink usage would scale as you increased page size. We printed each page from Photoshop CS3 in 10- or 20-copy batches until we ran out of our first ink cartridge. We then replaced that ink cartridge and printed until we had to replace the second cartridge, and stopped there.

During the process, we took screen captures (at a size of 200%) of the ink levels at 10-page increments. While we know that the capacity levels aren’t entirely accurate, it was a better option than ripping the cartridges apart and measuring the ink left in them. Using Adobe Illustrator, we built a grid that let us come up with an estimate of ink used in each cartridges. Again, we know that isn’t necessarily the perfect solution, it was better than no data at all, and added a crucial data point to the cost per page metric.

The findings

We found that, contrary to our initial results, the R2880 and R2400 ink yields were actually pretty similar, with a slight edge to the R2880. The R2400, with the bigger ink tanks, ran out of both yellow and light magenta inks at 90 pages exactly. The R2880 ran out of yellow ink after 74 pages (the second cartridge to go out was vivid light magenta, at 96 pages). Using Epson’s current prices for ink, the R2400 used approximately $70.72 worth of ink before we had to replace any cartridges, resulting in a cost per print (of ink only) of roughly 79 cents. The R2880 used approximately $54.40 of ink before requiring a swap, for a cost per print of 74 cents. At 90 pages, the R2880’s cost per print was approximately 75 cents; given the margin of error here, we’d consider it roughly the same.

Does it mean anything?

The point of this post is not that the ink yield of the R2880 is slightly better than the R2400 — that’s something we’ll cover in the final review. We are comfortable with this test for these two printers, and we think this is interesting data, but we’re on the fence about how useful it is. And we’re not even sure that it’s repeatable from vendor to vendor. We do think there is something there, and we’re hoping to get feedback from you regarding this test.

We know that there are plenty of holes in the way we tested this, and we’re thinking about how we would do this in a more varied environment. Ideally, when we tested, we would extract all of the ink from the existing ink cartridges and measure it carefully, but breaking into cartridges, dealing with sponges, ink sacs and other containers is problematic.

Using the ink gauges for the vendors doesn’t make much sense either; at the entry level especially, the gauges are off by a few percentage points, and they’re certainly not going to be consistent from vendor to vendor. On the other hand, it might be good enough as another, albeit inexact, data point that helps you determine whether a printer is the right one for you.

As we noted at the beginning of this lengthy post, ink cost is a hot topic, and we know that reliable, repeatable data that helps determine ink efficiency and yield would be a useful thing. But, as we deal with larger-capacity printers, the time and costs associated with testing every new printer at a deep level becomes prohibitive to us, and we’d like to hear from you on this. Weigh in on the comments below or drop us an email if you have thoughts on the matter.

We know that speed is usually a secondary or even a tertiary consideration when looking at photo printers, but, with today’s increased competition, it can be a factor for some people when they’re choosing an inkjet. Below are two charts, noting the print speeds for six different print sizes, ranging from 4" by 6" to 12" by 18" on the R2880 and the other three printers.

The first chart, shown below, displays the times (in seconds) for prints at the printers’ default photo modes. This is the setting most people will use, and one that produces very good results for snapshots and everyday use. As might be expected when looking at the newest member of the class, the R2880 is the speediest performer. (Click on the image to see a full-size PDF of the results.)

The second chart shows the print speeds at the highest resolution setting, the one that produces the most optimal prints, but which also uses up more ink. We rarely use this setting except for when we’re dealing with problematic images, ones with wide dynamic range, or when we want to create gallery-quality prints. Here, the R2880 continues to do well, although the gap is not as wide as it is at the lower quality setting. (Click on the image to see a full-size PDF of the results.)

The Stylus Photo R2400 was a fairly speedy printer in its own right, and, the R2880 shows a decent — not spectacular — performance improvement over the older model. It adds a little more of a performance gap with the B9180. It also leaves Canon’s Pixma Pro9500 in the dust, which is surprising (given the fact that a hallmark of the Canon photo printers is often print speed), but the Pixma Pro9500 is an unusual beast in and of itself, and is a bit long in the tooth.

As we noted, we should have a comprehensive review in the coming week, but we thought this was a snapshot worth sharing.

Ink cartridge size (a hot topic these days) is quite large — 350ml and 750ml — and Epson claims that the 7900 and 9900 offer significant speed improvements over the existing Epson wide format devices.

Also notable in the new printers is an optional built-in spectrophotometer from X-Rite, called the Epson SpectroProofer, which provides “automatic color measurement data to the printer, allowing user profiling and linearization, enabling professional color management while at the same time reducing labor costs.”

The Stylus Pro 7900 and 9900 are expected to ship this spring in Europe and Australia, although pricing was not announced. Epson America representatives stressed that this announcement was made by Epson Europe, although we would assume that ultimately the new printers and inks would reach the U.S. and Canada at some point not long after they ship elsewhere.

[Source: Print21, an online publication produced by the Australian trade association, Printing Industries.]

Here are some of the Stylus Photo R2880’s key features:

• Borrowing from the Stylus Pro line, the R2880 uses nine inks, based on the UltraChrome K3 Vivid Magenta ink set: cyan, vivid magenta, yellow, light cyan, vivid light magenta, photo black, matte black, light black and light light black. The Vivid Magenta inks were released in mid-2007 for use in Epson’s wide-format printers, the Stylus Pro 4880, 7880, 9880 and 11880, and feature a wider color gamut than the original UltraChrome K3 inks. Like the R2400, you still need to swap the matte and photo black cartridges when changing paper types, but Epson claims that the R2880 is much more efficient in managing ink usage and waste than its predecessor.
     (The R2880’s print longevity should be identical to prints made with the Stylus Pro printers that use the Vivid Magenta inks: roughly 85 to 108 years for most Epson papers when framed under glass, according to testing conducted by Wilhelm Research.)
• The R2880 is the second Epson printer (after the R1900) to use the company’s new Radiance color-matching technology. Radiance was co-developed by Epson and the Rochester Institute of Technology’s Munsell Color Science Lab to produce an advanced color gamut with better ink efficiency, reduced grain and more consistent color under variable lighting conditions (to help avoid a phenomenon known as metameric failure).
• The printhead in the R2880 is the same one found in the Stylus Pro printers, incorporating both an ink-repelling coating (also found in the R1900) designed to minimize clogged nozzles and a sensor that regularly checks the nozzles and maintains proper head alignment. According to Epson, the R2880 printhead also undergoes a precise colorimetric calibration at the factory, obviating the need for regular calibration of the printer.
• The printer has two USB 2.0 ports, allowing for two simultaneous computer connections. Unlike the R2400, the R2880 doesn’t have a FireWire port, but it does have a PictBridge port on the front that supports direct printing from a compatible digital camera. (While some people will lament the absence of FireWire, our testing has shown that there is no discernible print speed difference between the two interface types.)
• As befits the top of the Stylus Photo line, the R2880 has excellent paper-handling capabilities. It can print photos from 4" by 6" to 13" by 44" in size, on glossy, semigloss, matte, fine art and canvas media types. It has a top-loading paper tray that can hold up to 30 sheets of photo or matte paper, a rear slot for loading single sheets of thick media, a straight paper path for thick media, and a rear-feed mechanism for printing on roll papers from 4" to 13" in width. The straight paper path — which can handle media up to 1.3mm thick — also includes a separate tray for printing on inkjet-capable CDs and DVDs. (Epson includes a utility for disc printing with the R2880’s software bundle.)

Our take

At first glance, the Stylus Photo R2880 doesn’t seem like a huge leap forward, at least in print quality, but that’s largely because the R2400’s print quality was already pretty darn good. The Vivid Magenta inks definitely add incremental improvements in gamut and tone, but most users aren’t going to see big differences between the original UltraChrome K3 inks and the Vivid Magenta inks. Where we think people will notice a difference however, is in the small details: the things that Epson has done to improve upon the experience of printing.

We’ve made no secret of our disaffection for the Stylus Photo R2400, especially as HP and Canon have come out with more competitive inkjets. The R2400 produces excellent prints, but printing with the Stylus Photo R2400 can still be a frustrating experience. Many of us have had regular trouble with clogged nozzles on our R2400s, which require frequent (and costly) head cleanings, and, if you want to switch between the matte and photo black inks, you often run into the “drained cartridge dance,” a process that seems to drain more than just the black inks, requiring you to change other cartridges just to get your unit in a state where it can print.

We have been printing with a release version of the R2880 for a short while, and our initial feeling is that it actually is quite an improvement over the R2400. The print quality has been superb on both semigloss and matte/fine art papers (the R1900’s HiGloss ink set produces the best color output on glossy papers), and the extra light-black inks give the R2880 an advantage in black-and-white printing over any printer priced under $1,000. Black-and-white printing was always the hallmark of the R2400, and the R2880 seems to kick it up slightly, producing rich, neutral prints with excellent shadow detail and beautiful tonal range.

In the short time we’ve had our R2880, what has impressed us most though is its ink efficiency. According to Vincent Oliver, who reviewed the R2880 for his photo-i site in the U.K., the R2880 cartridges have an 11ml capacity, which is 2ml less than the R2400. (The R2880’s ink cartridges are also priced a dollar lower than the R2400’s, at $13.99.) This works out to approximately $1.27 per ml, roughly similar to HP’s Photosmart Pro B9180 and B8850 and Epson’s R1900, but still considerably higher than the Stylus Pro 3800.

However, despite the smaller cartridge size, after two complete ink changes and some careful comparison with our in-house R2400, the advancements Epson has made in the R2880 were readily apparent. Unlike the R2400, ink life was fairly consistent across all of the colors, and even with extremely low ink levels, we didn’t have to replace cartridges when swapping between photo and matte black inks. In our initial testing, we were able to print nearly twice as many photos using the same amount of ink on R2880 as we were able to do with the R2400, results that were even better than we had anticipated. [see our update on this topic here.] While some of this can be directly related to the advanced ink-mixing technology in Radiance, we think that there’s probably more technological improvements under the hood that Epson isn’t specifically talking about.

The reality though, is that we really don’t want to have to swap the matte and photo black inks; even with minimal ink waste, it costs some amount of ink to change the black cartridges. This is where HP and Canon have it over Epson, but it’s worth noting that this is as much a legacy of those manufacturers coming late to the party as it is intelligent design. Printhead development is complex, and each printer company has invested vast resources — in research, development and manufacturing — into their technology. As a result, printhead advancements are measured in years, and companies are often forced to use variations of a single printhead design for quite some time in order to see a return on their initial investment. It was only last year when Epson released a new printhead design with separate channels for matte and photo black inks, and that was for their 64" wide-format printer, the Stylus Pro 11880. Without possessing any inside information, we estimate that we won’t see the benefits of that printhead, which required new production and manufacturing processes, in consumer-level printers until 2009 or 2010.

We’ll have a full review very soon that discusses the R2880’s strengths and weaknesses in much greater depth. On the surface, however, the Stylus Photo R2880 appears to be well worth considering if you want top-quality color and black-and-white output at a lower price than you’ll pay for a printer like the Stylus Pro 3800. When you look at the photo printers that Epson has announced at this level in 2008 — the R1900 and the R2880 — it’s clear that they have no intention of ceding their position at the top of the market to anyone.

[Updated May 28, 15:00 PST to add correct ink cartridge capacity data, courtesy of Epson UK.]