[alt-photo] Re: Fwd: Epson printer 3880

[Diana Bloomfield]

So how does that work exactly?

On Jun 14, 2011, at 4:46 PM, Jacques Augustowski wrote:

> The best cleaning solution I have ever used is ammonia.
>
> On 14-Jun-11 2:24 PM, francis schanberger wrote:
>> There is a company called FixYourOwnPrinter (I think) that makes an  
>> inkjet
>> head cleaning solution. I bought it two years ago to correct a  
>> stubborn
>> clogged magenta ink jet head on a 2200. It didn't clear up the last  
>> missing
>> gap on the test pattern but the solution helped me avoid the  
>> numerous clean
>> head, print pattern, clean head, print pattern routines that ended up
>> killing the (non) service tank on my first 2200.
>>
>> They provide you with a syringe with which you squirt the cleaning  
>> solution
>> onto the pads near the inkjet heads. The printer is then allowed to  
>> sit
>> overnight and the following day you commence the cleaning / print  
>> test
>> routine.
>>
>> While I was using it with the second 2200 (with QTR) it seemed like  
>> the the
>> heads didn't need to be cleaned as often. Currently I am using an  
>> Epson 4800
>> exclusively and my last 2200 is gathering dust in the basement  
>> waiting for
>> the next time I do a workshop.
>>
>> I found their url: http://www.fixyourownprinter.com/
>>
>> -francis
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 12:11 PM, Diana Bloomfield<
>> dhbloomfield at bellsouth.net>  wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Kerik,
>>>
>>> Thanks so much.  And, yes- exactly the same thing-- clogging with  
>>> the
>>> magenta inks, and also some clogging with one of the blacks.  I  
>>> did several
>>> cleanings, along with a "power cleaning," and it just never got  
>>> any better.
>>>  One day it worked great, and the next day (when I needed it the  
>>> most, of
>>> course), it just stopped.  I didn't really check with anyone, but  
>>> I assumed
>>> something needed replacement that would cost more $$$ than it was  
>>> worth.  I
>>> did buy it when it first came out, so it's been a great printer  
>>> for all that
>>> time-- but, like most printers and computers, seems to have a  
>>> definite
>>> end-life (of about 5 years).
>>>
>>> So thanks again, Kerik-- very helpful information.  It looks like  
>>> B&H has
>>> the 3880 for about $1100, so that's where I'm headed next  
>>> (online). :)
>>>
>>> Diana
>>>
>>>
>>> On Jun 14, 2011, at 11:55 AM, kerik at kerik.com wrote:
>>>
>>>  Diana,
>>>> First, I'm wondering what happened to your 3800. Mine had clogging
>>>> problems with the magenta inks that couldn't be resolved without  
>>>> replacing
>>>> the print head ($$$). I've heard similar magenta problems from  
>>>> other 3800
>>>> users. So, I replaced it with a 3880 in November. I am getting  
>>>> great digital
>>>> negatives with the 3880 and QuadTone RIP. It's easy to get plenty  
>>>> of UV
>>>> density without resorting to a highly colorized negative. As far  
>>>> as I can
>>>> tell, the only difference between the 3800 and 3880 are the  
>>>> magenta inks. I
>>>> don't know if the dithering has changed but the negatives print  
>>>> beautifully
>>>> in platinum and gum and it makes great inkjet prints.
>>>>
>>>> One interesting thing I stumbled on while calibrating the 3880:  
>>>> If you use
>>>> the front feed slot to load your transparency material to avoid  
>>>> pizza wheel
>>>> marks, the UV density of the resulting negs is lower in the  
>>>> densest parts of
>>>> the negative (about 0.3 log density) than if you use the regular  
>>>> sheet feed.
>>>> This effect was also confirmed by a user of a 3800. Very strange.
>>>>
>>>> Kerik
>>>> www.kerik.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>  FROM: Diana Bloomfield
>>>>>> DATE: June 14, 2011 5:48:00 AM PDT
>>>>>> TO: alt-photo-process-list at lists.altphotolist.org [2]
>>>>>> SUBJECT: [ALT-PHOTO] EPSON PRINTER 3880
>>>>>> REPLY-TO: The alternative photographic processes mailing list
>>>>>>
>>>>>  Hi all,
>>>>>> I've had an Epson 3800 printer for several years now-- love it,
>>>>>> never had a
>>>>>> problem with it-- until now. So I'm thinking of upgrading to the
>>>>>> 3880, but
>>>>>> I remember someone here (Chris?) having trouble with their 3880,
>>>>>> specifically in making digital negatives. Is that correct, or  
>>>>>> did I
>>>>>> dream
>>>>>> that? I'm assuming that the 3880 is comparable (better than?) to
>>>>>> the 3800,
>>>>>> especially when making negatives. Any advice here? Is there  
>>>>>> another
>>>>>> printer that would be better? I'm not interested in going larger
>>>>>> than the
>>>>>> 17" carriage.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Diana
>>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Alt-photo-process-list | http://altphotolist.org/listinfo
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Alt-photo-process-list | http://altphotolist.org/listinfo
>>>
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Alt-photo-process-list | http://altphotolist.org/listinfo