It’s been sometime since discussing printing. I used to own a HP 44” GP Photo printer model Z3100 with a built in spectrophotometer. It was great. But it died from non use and two weeks ago I picked up this Epson ECOTANK Photo printer.
Wow. I mean, WOW. I paid $700 CAD or 505 USD. It is amazing. Check out the review from Keith Cooper on YouTube.
This thing makes amazing quality prints that will last a lifetime. Wow.
Have you been able to find any ICC Profiles from Hahnemuhle or Ilford? I see Canson, Moab, Red River, and Fotospeed have profiles available. I've sent inquiries but no replies yet.
EB-1 wrote:
How is the ink cost? Some of the cheaper printers have under sized cartridges for photo duty and per print costs can be ridiculous.
EBH
The 8550 is an ecotank printer with refillable ink tanks (5 dye + 1 pigment). The ink bottles come with 70 mL in them for $20 each at BH. I think the tanks in the printer hold about 50 mL, so ~$86 for a full set.
This Epson Ecotank printer prints up to 13" wide. It is really amazing. I have printed many photos. Up to 13X19" and quite a few 12"x24" panos recently and I still have more than half my ink left.
A full set of six inks will cost me about $145 when shipping is factored in. But each bottle is 70ml.
This is a printer EVERY photographer should own if they don't have one.
It will make you a better photographer. I really believe that.
For a guy like me I'd just be pissing money down a big black hole if I bought instead a Canon ImagePROgraph Pro 1000 or 1100 because they go through ink in cleaning and maintenance like a hot knife cuts butter. FAST.
I have owned many Epson printers and I stopped buying them because the heads would go bad if you didn't print often.
With this Ecotank printer something is different. The head doesn't clog so easily. Maybe its because the head is guaranteed to be always moist, I don't know.... but I've had zero clogs in 4 or 5 months.
I agree with Shutterbug.
I have had the 8550 for a little over a year.
Printed about 1000 images. Most are 5x7 notecards, while many were 13x19 prints.
Are the prints as good as my pro-1000 or pro-4100. Nope.
On glossy or semigloss media they are pretty darn close. I can tell the difference- my wife can not.
Without a direct comparison - I could be happy with the prints.
On matt surfaces the pigment printers do look better. But I print note cards on matt papers by the hundreds- and not a single person has noticed a difference. The differences are there- but they are small.
I have printed gloss, semigloss, luster, matt, stickers, pretty much anything I can get to feed through.
I just had to buy my 2nd set of ink- for about $90.
Will the prints last for 200 years? I have no idea- and I do not care. I would not sell a print off the 8550- I have 2 other printers for that.
This thing is terrific.
If you have ever thought about printing- this printer is a great way to get your feet wet.
If you later want to wander into deeper waters- like 12 color pigment printers, your beginners mistakes were all made on the inexpensive side.
Go for it.
gary
In terms of ink permanence (and the fact that there are no models available larger than 13") means these ET printers can't always replace pigment printers. Wilhelm did some permanence testing on the ET Claria inks and they have also done separate testing on the Epson Ultrachrome PRO10 pigment inks used in the P700 and P900. Note that both studies were commissioned by Epson:
The most exciting thing for me about the ET printers is that they indicate the technology could be ported to pigment inks, and certainly the printers can be adapted into a larger size (just look at the ET-8500). Really looking forward to what the future brings.
But the main reason I am back in this thread is that I have heard back from Hahnemüle via email and they say they are currently working on profiles for the ET-8550 and they should be available by the end of the year! Fingers crossed. Still have not heard anything from Ilford.
Edit: Ilford just replied saying that they never intend to provide profiles for the ET-8550 because "the printer does not achieve the desired effect when printing on the fineart papers".
Shutterbug2006 wrote:
The head doesn't clog so easily. Maybe its because the head is guaranteed to be always moist, I don't know.... but I've had zero clogs in 4 or 5 months.
Any idea how much a head replacement would cost in the event it gets clogged and self cleaning doesn't help?
Does Epson give any recommendations how frequent the printer should be run to keep the head moist?
js47 wrote:
But the main reason I am back in this thread is that I have heard back from Hahnemüle via email and they say they are currently working on profiles for the ET-8550 and they should be available by the end of the year! Fingers crossed. Still have not heard anything from Ilford.
Edit: Ilford just replied saying that they never intend to provide profiles for the ET-8550 because "the printer does not achieve the desired effect when printing on the fineart papers".
This is fantastic news from Hahnemüle!
I once came across some Reddit post offering to share some profiles someone made, which is already an option, but having official profiles by the paper manufacturer would be even a lot better (I expect them to have a lot better profiling hardware).
Got my 8550 earlier this week on a BF deal from the Epson website. Saved $300.00. So far so good. Got some matte greeting cards and ICC profiles from RedRiver. The prints look pretty good. Happy so far.
jwpstl wrote:
Someone said earlier they wouldn’t sell prints from this printer and I’m curious why. Longevity? Quality? Anyone disagree?
I'm not that person, but longevity would be my concern. Wilhelm Research has done studies with both the Epson Claria ET ink and Epson UltraChrome pigment ink. There is only one paper in common between the tests, but it suggests that bare prints made with a pigment printer such as the P600/700/800/900/5000/etc will last ~2.5x longer than prints made with the ET8500/8550 with their mostly dye inksets.
I posted the links above but here they are again (the ET test was updated last week):
js47 wrote:
I'm not that person, but longevity would be my concern. Wilhelm Research has done studies with both the Epson Claria ET ink and Epson UltraChrome pigment ink. There is only one paper in common between the tests, but it suggests that bare prints made with a pigment printer such as the P600/700/800/900/5000/etc will last ~2.5x longer than prints made with the ET8500/8550 with their mostly dye inksets.
Not long ago I purchased an ET-8550.
Before purchase I agonized some over the issues of dye vs pigment ink and probable print longevity that the ET-8550's ink set provides.
In the end - it became obvious to me that I have no need to make prints that last longer than what the 8550 provides.
My prints are intended mainly for personal display. Maybe some will end up with close family. If others would like to purchase my prints I'd happily print and mat it for them. I seriously doubt anyone will have issues with the 8550's probable print life when informed how to properly mount and install the print.
My stuff will likely get tossed out after I'm gone and never be missed anyway.
Myself certainly and I imagine many 8550 owners that are honest with themselves probably have no illusions of their prints winding up in museums or in the rarefied air of high-end print galleries and/or collectors. That's where pigment ink prints with 50-100+ year lives are de rigueur.
Thanks for the info. I guess the question is when selling a fine art photographic print what is the expectation for life expectancy? 89 years is still pretty good.
