Epson R1800

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 10:23:14 -0700, "Tim S." <tts1234@cox.net> wrote:

>I've been thinking about buying this printer and was curious if anyone
>has one yet and what your thoughts are about the build quality and
>images it produces?
>
>I have a old Epson Photo-1270 and have had the heads clog up on me but a
>little Windex has always cleared them for me and after years of use it
>still prints as nice as day one.
>
>I have read about how nice the Cannons are as far as prints go but the
>longevity of those prints concern me.
>
>Your thoughts please and thank you for your time.
>
>Tim



Most Photo People use Epson and the head out last any Canon head..

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:uKzce.3564$Gd7.2249@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
> Read reviews in PC Mag and PC World on the R800. It uses the same print
> engine.
>

There are reviews of the R1800 that may be more relevant though :-)

There are a number of differences.

http://www.photo-i.co.uk/Reviews/i [...] page_1.htm
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,1779210,00.asp
http://www.macworld.com/2005/04/re [...] /index.php
http://reviews-zdnet.com.com/Epson [...] 86093.html

But I don't think the OP was asking for review sites - he was asking for
actual user feedback.

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Walter wrote:

>I've had mine about three weeks now. Initially I had banding for a couple
>of first prints. I think I shook up the ink too much. But, now the prints
>are great. Everything jumps right out. My privious printer is the 780,
>similar to yours except the smaller version, same problem here with
>clogging, but great prints after windex. I almost went with he canon i9900,
>but permanance issues I heard about. I talked to a lot of people with the
>R800 and its been out over 6 months and no one with clogging. I have not
>had my R1800 long wnough to find out about clogs. Prints are great though!
>
>

Hope you plan on using Epson Ink.

>
>
>
>"Tim S." <tts1234@cox.net> wrote in news:44uce.311$%o.32@fed1read05:
>
>
>
>>I've been thinking about buying this printer and was curious if anyone
>>has one yet and what your thoughts are about the build quality and
>>images it produces?
>>
>>I have a old Epson Photo-1270 and have had the heads clog up on me but a
>>little Windex has always cleared them for me and after years of use it
>>still prints as nice as day one.
>>
>>I have read about how nice the Cannons are as far as prints go but the
>>longevity of those prints concern me.
>>
>>Your thoughts please and thank you for your time.
>>
>>Tim
>>
>>
>
>
>

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Caitlin wrote:

>"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:zHFce.3703$Gd7.1432@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
>
>
>>Walter wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>I've had mine about three weeks now. Initially I had banding for a couple
>>>of first prints. I think I shook up the ink too much. But, now the prints
>>>are great. Everything jumps right out. My privious printer is the 780,
>>>similar to yours except the smaller version, same problem here with
>>>clogging, but great prints after windex. I almost went with he canon
>>>i9900, but permanance issues I heard about. I talked to a lot of people
>>>with the R800 and its been out over 6 months and no one with clogging. I
>>>have not had my R1800 long wnough to find out about clogs. Prints are
>>>great though!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>Hope you plan on using Epson Ink.
>>
>>
>>
>Why? Do you personally have experience using other inks in the R1800? (Or
>using Epson ink for that matter?)
>
>No? Didn't think so....
>
>

Maybe you should use aftermarket inks in your Epson R1800. This printer
that uses pigmented inks has a much higher probability to clog when
using the vast majority of aftermarket inks.

>
>
>

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

I can't comment specifically about the R1800, because there is some
discussion as to if the inks have been reformulated from those of the R800.

Both have been tested in accelerated lightfastness testing my Henry
Wilhelm, and he gives them very positive results. You might wish to
review his results on his website.

I recently tested the R800 inks in regard to their compatibility with
the cleaning techniques and cleaners I recommend. I found a few
interesting things about them.

They are extremely slow drying. I suspect they have a large glycol
component in the ink. I am not suggesting that they have the appearance
of coming out of the printer wet, because that doesn't seem to be a
reported problem, and in fact, more problems have ben reported with the
2200 ink set with certain papers and smearing while exiting the printer
than the R800. I also haven't heard much of an outgassing issues with
the R800 inks. Some have suggested the gloss coating may help prevent
this problem.

This slow drying formulation is probably to help prevent clogging. The
longer the inks take to dry, the less likely they will cause a head
clog. And when I say slow, I mean slow. In my tests, placing a dense
surface of ink on a non-porous surface hadn't thoroughly dried in a
medium humidity indoor environment after over 4 weeks.

People with direct experience with the R800 may be able to tell you if
use of non-epson non-microporous papers causes any problems or not. One
thing is that the R800 uses high color load inks for the most part so it
probably uses less ink overall, and that may cause less problems with
drying because less ink volume is required on the paper for the same
color density.

Art

Tim S. wrote:

> I've been thinking about buying this printer and was curious if anyone
> has one yet and what your thoughts are about the build quality and
> images it produces?
>
> I have a old Epson Photo-1270 and have had the heads clog up on me but a
> little Windex has always cleared them for me and after years of use it
> still prints as nice as day one.
>
> I have read about how nice the Cannons are as far as prints go but the
> longevity of those prints concern me.
>
> Your thoughts please and thank you for your time.
>
> Tim