p.2 #2 · How do prints from the Epson 8550 compare to higher-end pigment printers?
I have over 3000 prints on my 8550, and going strong.
Also print with the pro1000 and 4100.
Prints look good on glossy paper and ok on luster/satin. Do they look as good as my higher end printers- NO. But they are close. Closer than I would have expected. Casual viewers- meaning everyone but other photographers- would never notice the difference.
As I noted in another thread- the dye inks do fade a little after a year in the sun without glass or protection. My pigment prints do not fade in the same environment.
B/W glossy looks pretty good.
B/W matte is harder. I print 1000's of note cards on the 8550- and they are all matte papers. I used to print these on a pigment printer. The 8550 is just so much easier. The matte prints are "OK". Make sure you use settings that use the pigment black ink- that does make a difference.
But no one- and I really mean no one including other artists I have sent these to, have noticed any differences even when I ask.
The 8550 has been a great machine for test prints, give aways, etc. I have a couple prints 2 yrs old in scrapbooks that look great, but sun will fade them a little over time.
I would buy another one.
gary
p.2 #3 · How do prints from the Epson 8550 compare to higher-end pigment printers?
I received my printer and in the processing of testing. The profiles from Northlight Images have been very helpful. So far what I am seeing from Epson Premium Luster Phot Paper look pretty goo but the Canon Pro Luster seems richer to my eye. Looking for something with even a little more of the look of pigment printing on Red Rivers Palo Duro Softgloss Rag but I understand these papers can pick up marks and I have yet to find a profile for them Any similar paper, Baryta Rag type would be of interest if anyone has any experience with this. I have also tried the Epson Exhibition Fiber Paper using Epson's profile but this appeared a little dull.
p.2 #4 · How do prints from the Epson 8550 compare to higher-end pigment printers?
jmmaher wrote:
I received my printer and in the processing of testing. The profiles from Northlight Images have been very helpful. So far what I am seeing from Epson Premium Luster Phot Paper look pretty goo but the Canon Pro Luster seems richer to my eye. Looking for something with even a little more of the look of pigment printing on Red Rivers Palo Duro Softgloss Rag but I understand these papers can pick up marks and I have yet to find a profile for them Any similar paper, Baryta Rag type would be of interest if anyone has any experience with this. I have also tried the Epson Exhibition Fiber Paper using Epson's profile but this appeared a little dull.
On the Canon Pro Luster (which I have a lot of) are you using the profile for Epson Premium Luster or a profile specifically for the Canon Pro Luster on the 8550?
p.2 #5 · How do prints from the Epson 8550 compare to higher-end pigment printers?
gchappel wrote:
I have over 3000 prints on my 8550, and going strong.
Also print with the pro1000 and 4100.
Prints look good on glossy paper and ok on luster/satin. Do they look as good as my higher end printers- NO. But they are close. Closer than I would have expected. Casual viewers- meaning everyone but other photographers- would never notice the difference.
As I noted in another thread- the dye inks do fade a little after a year in the sun without glass or protection. My pigment prints do not fade in the same environment.
B/W glossy looks pretty good.
B/W matte is harder. I print 1000's of note cards on the 8550- and they are all matte papers. I used to print these on a pigment printer. The 8550 is just so much easier. The matte prints are "OK". Make sure you use settings that use the pigment black ink- that does make a difference.
But no one- and I really mean no one including other artists I have sent these to, have noticed any differences even when I ask.
The 8550 has been a great machine for test prints, give aways, etc. I have a couple prints 2 yrs old in scrapbooks that look great, but sun will fade them a little over time.
I would buy another one.
gary...Show more →
How well does it work to go from test prints on the 8550 to a final print (presumably on different paper with a different profile?), on the 1000/1100?
p.2 #6 · How do prints from the Epson 8550 compare to higher-end pigment printers?
I find the test prints from the 8550 work well.
With correct profiles- the brightness and general appearance are spot on.
The color is close enough to be useful.
I usually print a test print and live with it for a week. If it passes that test- it gets printed larger on the 4100.
gary
p.2 #7 · How do prints from the Epson 8550 compare to higher-end pigment printers?
chiron wrote:
On the Canon Pro Luster (which I have a lot of) are you using the profile for Epson Premium Luster or a profile specifically for the Canon Pro Luster on the 8550?
using the profile from Northlife Images for the 8550
p.2 #8 · How do prints from the Epson 8550 compare to higher-end pigment printers?
I have had my ET-8550 for over a year, I have printed plenty, my gf used it too for printing all her work documents, B&W and color. I have put hundreds of images through it, just finally added some ink on the Gray!
With the sale price it is now just grab one! I have been able to purchase 6 bottle ink sets off of FB Marketplace for 35-45 because many buy it to do Dye Transfer Printing for T-shirts and they sell off the ink that comes with it. I have three complete sets of ink for $125! I have no issues at the setting for 'standard' print quality, it is a huge amount faster and if there is any difference it is negligible on most any image to what I see or don't see
I have done plenty of 13x19 prints, extremely happy with any medium I have used.
Give Red River Papers a shout or scour their website, they heavily support the Epson printer and have plenty of tips to offer. I have never had such outstanding service either as what they have offered me.
I was/am intimidated with the cost of running one of the high end printers as well as the initial cost either. I also don't feel I am educated enough to warrant such a printer on all the parameters for printing to get those 'spectacular' images.
p.2 #9 · How do prints from the Epson 8550 compare to higher-end pigment printers?
How are skin tones with the 8550? Amazingly, this hasn’t been addressed in the reviews that I’ve seen.
More specifically, are there particular papers where skin tones look best? I ask because my choice of camera has a lot to do with skin tones out of the camera via RAW. I realize that the color gamut is more limited with a five (six) ink printer, so skin tones might suffer a bit.
p.2 #10 · How do prints from the Epson 8550 compare to higher-end pigment printers?
A couple of general observations as a fan of matte prints, particularly B&W. Note, my experience is from a Canon printer perspective. First, I never was able to achieve a matte B&W print that met my expectations (ie at least in the realm of the B&W matte gelatin silver prints I made in my darkroom days) from my PRO-100, dye printer, while color and B&W prints on most any decent semi-gloss to glossy paper were generally good to great. No, I did not get into custom profiles, which may have helped. That situation was been resolved by switching to a PRO-1000, which uses all pigment inks.
There may be some hope with the 8550, since it at least has a pigment black ink. Still, would not be surprised to find matte paper results to be less than desired.
Finally, try Canon's Premium Matte paper. I've tried matte papers from many vendors, and the Canon is the best, reasonable cost, matter paper that I've found. Yes, it does have OBA's, but most papers do until you get into 'fine art' type papers.
p.2 #11 · How do prints from the Epson 8550 compare to higher-end pigment printers?
Taperwing wrote:
A couple of general observations as a fan of matte prints, particularly B&W. Note, my experience is from a Canon printer perspective. First, I never was able to achieve a matte B&W print that met my expectations (ie at least in the realm of the B&W matte gelatin silver prints I made in my darkroom days) from my PRO-100, dye printer, while color and B&W prints on most any decent semi-gloss to glossy paper were generally good to great. No, I did not get into custom profiles, which may have helped. That situation was been resolved by switching to a PRO-1000, which uses all pigment inks.
There may be some hope with the 8550, since it at least has a pigment black ink. Still, would not be surprised to find matte paper results to be less than desired.
Finally, try Canon's Premium Matte paper. I've tried matte papers from many vendors, and the Canon is the best, reasonable cost, matter paper that I've found. Yes, it does have OBA's, but most papers do until you get into 'fine art' type papers....Show more →
I would think that printing on a Matte (Art) paper is best left for pigment printers and not an imposter that uses one pigment ink. I also suspect that having 12 inks is a big plus when trying to render subtle skin tone transitions. Like many here I’m trying to avoid pigment printers. I have two, likely dead, Pro-1000 printers. I packed them up almost five years ago for a move and doubt that they are recoverable. Minimizing ink cost with a Canon pigment printer really means moving to a Pro-2600 and using large ink cartridges, but daily printing just isn’t a possibility for me, so ink use, once again, would be high. I would think that there would be a good number of Amateur photographers that would like a 10-12 ink dye printer, but that is unlikely to happen, so the choices are 8550 and put up with reproduction compromises, or 2600 and live with high ink prices. I would not move to the 1100 given the small ink reservoir.. like my Pro-1000.
I was considering an Epson Selphy printer, but the 8550 is a much better choice.
We have long ago left the era of drug store prints, but it seems to me that this is the niche that the 8550 fills.
p.2 #12 · How do prints from the Epson 8550 compare to higher-end pigment printers?
Not surprisingly, there appears to be a lot of interest in the 8550. If you are looking for a bargain go to the Epson Renewed site where they have the refurbished 8550’s for $479. For a while I was in the market before taking advantage of the very attractive Black Friday pricing and went with the Canon 1100. But 8550’s are not always available so you really have to look for them….but they are available today.
p.2 #13 · How do prints from the Epson 8550 compare to higher-end pigment printers?
I’ve started printing with an Epson Luster paper and a Canon Matte..soon to follow.
With Keith Cooper’s profiles, the Luster paper looks great and skin tones look good. I like saturated colors with some material and the printer can accomodate, whereas I like subtler colors with skin tones and again things seem to work out if I do my part.
Again, for those working on a Mac, make sure that you install the full Epson print driver and don’t let the operating system choose the system Air driver.
Anyway, I think that this printer will do what I need it to do. I’ll be printing 81/2”x11” prints and boxing them for a given year. That will be my alternative to printing a top quality 12”x12” album with MPIX. I’m thinking of a protective spray on the matte paper might be best for loose prints that people handle.
I discovered a large cache of papers from my previous incarnation. Using Red River profiles, their Polar Gloss Metallic 255 looks phenomenal. Even skin tones look great.
p.2 #14 · How do prints from the Epson 8550 compare to higher-end pigment printers?
Paper choices appear to be the key here. So far skin tones look great as do the few b&W samples I have tried. I think the biggest drawback of this printer is that it does not work well with papers that have a soft surface. For example baryta papers. On gloss, luster and matte it seems to excel.
p.2 #15 · How do prints from the Epson 8550 compare to higher-end pigment printers?
As of today, the ET-8550 is widely available for $499.99 (Epson, Best Buy, etc.). The usual list price is $749.99.
Wanting to get back into printing, I recently bought one at the local BB (to minimize any shipping damage issues) for $599.99, based on positive comments on FM, and after considering Keith Cooper's comments in his on-line review and YT videos.
I am very pleased with the test print output so far. Keith Cooper's setup information is helpful and I've used both Epson and Keith Cooper's profiles successfully. Keith's discussion of the VFA profile was especially helpful for getting prints I liked.
Three issues had delayed my purchase: concern about archival-ness, size (only 13"), and B&W. I resolved these as follows: (1) At my age, it is pretty academic whether a print will last 200 years or 40 years, and the prints won't be hung in bright daylight. Important work samples will be boxed just in case anyone cares in 50 years. (2) I realized I am unlikely to want or need 17" prints. Back in darkroom days 11x14 was a huge luxury. A matted 13" is big enough for the wall; a 13" is big enough to box for those hypothetical future viewers. Even I really need bigger prints, I can use a lab. (3) Keith Cooper's B&W comments were reassuring, and a few test prints so far (after Silver Efex Pro 3 conversion) have been fine. I haven't yet had time to print anything with deep blacks on matte, but even here Keith's comments are reassuring, and the VFA profile may be critical.
In short, my experience so far has been very positive. The new lower price might be an additional incentive for anyone on the fence.
There was another consideration: the printer would be unattended for three months every year, and the hybrid system is potentially more likely to avoid clogs than full-pigment printers.
p.2 #16 · How do prints from the Epson 8550 compare to higher-end pigment printers?
Bob49 wrote:
As of today, the ET-8550 is widely available for $499.99 (Epson, Best Buy, etc.). The usual list price is $749.99.
Wanting to get back into printing, I recently bought one at the local BB (to minimize any shipping damage issues) for $599.99, based on positive comments on FM, and after considering Keith Cooper's comments in his on-line review and YT videos.
I am very pleased with the test print output so far. Keith Cooper's setup information is helpful and I've used both Epson and Keith Cooper's profiles successfully. Keith's discussion of the VFA profile was especially helpful for getting prints I liked.
Three issues had delayed my purchase: concern about archival-ness, size (only 13"), and B&W. I resolved these as follows: (1) At my age, it is pretty academic whether a print will last 200 years or 40 years, and the prints won't be hung in bright daylight. Important work samples will be boxed just in case anyone cares in 50 years. (2) I realized I am unlikely to want or need 17" prints. Back in darkroom days 11x14 was a huge luxury. A matted 13" is big enough for the wall; a 13" is big enough to box for those hypothetical future viewers. Even I really need bigger prints, I can use a lab. (3) Keith Cooper's B&W comments were reassuring, and a few test prints so far (after Silver Efex Pro 3 conversion) have been fine. I haven't yet had time to print anything with deep blacks on matte, but even here Keith's comments are reassuring, and the VFA profile may be critical.
In short, my experience so far has been very positive. The new lower price might be an additional incentive for anyone on the fence.
There was another consideration: the printer would be unattended for three months every year, and the hybrid system is potentially more likely to avoid clogs than full-pigment printers....Show more →
Regarding B&W:
Using Keith Coopers better profiles with Epson Ultra Premium Luster and Canon’s Premium Matte PM-101, I’ve not had a problem with shadows, nor with any residual color tint. I did find that using the printers B&W setting resulted in prints without any color tint, but shadows were blocked up.
p.2 #17 · How do prints from the Epson 8550 compare to higher-end pigment printers?
Bob49 wrote:
As of today, the ET-8550 is widely available for $499.99 (Epson, Best Buy, etc.). The usual list price is $749.99.
Wanting to get back into printing, I recently bought one at the local BB (to minimize any shipping damage issues) for $599.99, based on positive comments on FM, and after considering Keith Cooper's comments in his on-line review and YT videos.
I am very pleased with the test print output so far. Keith Cooper's setup information is helpful and I've used both Epson and Keith Cooper's profiles successfully. Keith's discussion of the VFA profile was especially helpful for getting prints I liked.
Three issues had delayed my purchase: concern about archival-ness, size (only 13"), and B&W. I resolved these as follows: (1) At my age, it is pretty academic whether a print will last 200 years or 40 years, and the prints won't be hung in bright daylight. Important work samples will be boxed just in case anyone cares in 50 years. (2) I realized I am unlikely to want or need 17" prints. Back in darkroom days 11x14 was a huge luxury. A matted 13" is big enough for the wall; a 13" is big enough to box for those hypothetical future viewers. Even I really need bigger prints, I can use a lab. (3) Keith Cooper's B&W comments were reassuring, and a few test prints so far (after Silver Efex Pro 3 conversion) have been fine. I haven't yet had time to print anything with deep blacks on matte, but even here Keith's comments are reassuring, and the VFA profile may be critical.
In short, my experience so far has been very positive. The new lower price might be an additional incentive for anyone on the fence.
There was another consideration: the printer would be unattended for three months every year, and the hybrid system is potentially more likely to avoid clogs than full-pigment printers....Show more →
Thanks Bob. I purchased the printer while it was on a lesser promotion a few weeks ago. I contacted B&H and thanks to you, they provided me with the additional discount and $130 refund.
