Re: Digital negatives for gum printing-Epson 1160

[Ender100@aol.com]

In a message dated 8/4/01 2:07:31 AM, jseigel@panix.com writes:

<< CIS is also wont to leaks, spills, tilts, air bubbles, spits & fits -- not
a LOT maybe, but risk is always there.  And if your space is tight, I
believe you need more surface to set the set on, and it's got to be at the
right level... no layering or high rises. Advice has been, unless you're
into production printing, the CIS is overkill.  However, if the piezo
quads are indeed as fine as Joe & others say, that would again change the
equation. >>

The fact that the 1160 is a four ink printer is a real advantage.... it may 
be the last one we see from Epson, since, as you say, they seem to be set on 
the 6 ink printers.  The 1160 also has the maximum printing area of the 
"desktop size" printers.

One problem with the 1160 of course is that it is no longer being 
manufactured and very hard to find.  Once you do find one, you have to 
understand that it is not a sure thing that it will work properly.  You may 
get one of those individual printers that is prone to "microbanding".  In 
this case I am referring to the microbanding that is caused by the inaccuracy 
of the paper feed, not a blocked jet... I have an Epson 2000p and the prints 
from it are beautiful...I never get microbanding, regardless of the paper I 
use.  There are some possible fixes for this, such as ordering different 
tension springs for the printer (I think John Cone offers these), using a 
paper with a different thickness, prayer....

For the above reason, I would suggest that if someone wants to try quadtones, 
they should locate an 1160 first and then:

1.  test it with the Epson inks on the papers you want to use...see if you 
get any microbanding, clogs, etc...if it looks ok....then go to step 2.  
(Remember that these desktop printers, regardless of what company, have a 
certain percentage of failure rate.  With Quad inks, Piezography, CIS system, 
different papers, you are increasing the chance that the printer will fail.  
Since the 1160 is in such short supply you have less chance of finding a 
replacement.)

2.  Try a quadtone inkset.....if you are going to try the Piezography 
system... (www.inkjetmall.com)

3.  Order the Piezography driver with just the Piezography cartridges.  If 
that works....

4.  If you want to save money and plan to print a LOT...get the CIS 
system.... it really does work pretty well and it is not that difficult to 
set up and is pretty easy to maintain.  Some people have had problems with 
the "pressure" of the ink in the lines, which they adjust by raising or 
lowering the bottles a few inches.  The CIS system is neat... you can save a 
LOT of money by using it.  Once you have used all the ink in the bottles, you 
have already paid for it by not having to buy expensive cartridges.

5.  If all goes well, then pray the 1160 lasts a long time, because you 
probably will not be able to transfer the driver and CIS system to another 
printer...unless it is an 1160 due to the 4 ink system... so maybe buy 2 of 
them if you find some.  Also, be sure you have the most recent driver from 
Epson for the printer.... they can be downloaded from Epson.  Don't assume 
because you have purchased a new printer that it has the most recent 
driver...it may have been sitting on a shelf somewhere for a long time.

I think if I were going to get a desktop printer for making digital 
negatives, I would get an Epson 1280 and start there.  Epson is a good 
product and considered the best in the price range for photo reproduction.

Actually the expert in all this is right on this list... Dan Burkholder.  He 
has experimented more than anyone I know of and, as you know, written the 
book on it.  I think he is about to come to some conclusions on the value of 
the Piezography system and quadtone inksets in making digital negatives.  
Maybe just wait to see what he says.

I am still curious about what difference using dye based inks vs. pigment 
inks might have on rendering a negative.  Is it possible that a dye based 
inkset might make better negatives for some alt processes while pigment based 
inksets might work better for others?  Are dye based inks more translucent?  
Would this issue relate to the recent discussion about laser printer 
generated negatives working better with gum printing?

Mark Nelson

PS:  Is anyone going to the APA trade show at Rosemont, IL this coming week?  
A lot of these vendors will be there.  I'm not a member, but hope to attend 
and see some of the latest toys and ask some of the digital imaging gurus 
there some questions.  I'll buy you a cup of coffee.