Epson 3800 and HP Z3100 printer reviews

Epson 3800 and HP Z3100 printer reviews

Hi All,

I've placed reviews of the Epson 3800 and the HP Z3100 on my printer
review page, and also a head to head comparision of their print quality
(not entirely fair, because they are very different printers, but hey :):
< * w w w .dimagemaker . com /specials/prttests.php>

Cheers,

Wayne

Wayne J. Cosshall
Publisher, The Digital ImageMaker, * w w w .dimagemaker . com /
Blog * w w w .digitalimagemakerworld . com /
Publisher, Experimental Digital Photography
* w w w .experimentaldigitalphotography . com
Co-moderator, Yahoo Canon-350D list
Workshops and seminars: * w w w .thedigitalimagemaker . com /
Personal art site * w w w .artinyourface . com /

Re: Epson 3800 and HP Z3100 printer reviews

Wayne J. Cosshall wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I've placed reviews of the Epson 3800 and the HP Z3100 on my printer
> review page, and also a head to head comparision of their print quality
> (not entirely fair, because they are very different printers, but hey :):
> < * w w w .dimagemaker . com /specials/prttests.php>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Wayne
>
> Wayne J. Cosshall
> Publisher, The Digital ImageMaker, * w w w .dimagemaker . com /
> Blog * w w w .digitalimagemakerworld . com /
> Publisher, Experimental Digital Photography
> * w w w .experimentaldigitalphotography . com
> Co-moderator, Yahoo Canon-350D list
> Workshops and seminars: * w w w .thedigitalimagemaker . com /
> Personal art site * w w w .artinyourface . com /

I'm sorry to say the reviews you made are very very very short on substance.
I really cannot have a view on either based on your review.

Re: Epson 3800 and HP Z3100 printer reviews

Smee R11S wrote:
>
> I'm sorry to say the reviews you made are very very very short on
> substance.
> I really cannot have a view on either based on your review.

The HP is a setup and initial use report, as it says.
I've changed the name on the 3800 from review to impressions, as it is
that, my impressions from use.

Cheers,

Wayne

--
Wayne J. Cosshall
Publisher, The Digital ImageMaker, * w w w .dimagemaker . com /
Blog * w w w .digitalimagemakerworld . com /

Re: Epson 3800 and HP Z3100 printer reviews

Wayne J. Cosshall wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I've placed reviews of the Epson 3800 and the HP Z3100 on my printer
> review page, and also a head to head comparision of their print
> quality (not entirely fair, because they are very different printers,
> but hey :): < * w w w .dimagemaker . com /specials/prttests.php>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Wayne

At risk of sounding rude... The commentary and adjectives used in this
"review" (3800) could be applied to just about ANY printer currently on the
market. -Nothing specific to this printer, and ZERO details about anything.

It was a nice thought, but I don't see how this would help a serious,
discriminating shopper make a decision about this fairly serious printer.

--
Images (Plus Snaps & Grabs) by Mark² at:
w w w .pbase . com /markuson

Re: Epson 3800 and HP Z3100 printer reviews

Mark² wrote:
>
> At risk of sounding rude... The commentary and adjectives used in this
> "review" (3800) could be applied to just about ANY printer currently on the
> market. -Nothing specific to this printer, and ZERO details about anything.
>
> It was a nice thought, but I don't see how this would help a serious,
> discriminating shopper make a decision about this fairly serious printer.
>
I've changed it from a review to impressions. Frankly I saw little point
in rehashing specifications, etc

Cheers,

Wayne


--
Wayne J. Cosshall
Publisher, The Digital ImageMaker, * w w w .dimagemaker . com /
Blog * w w w .digitalimagemakerworld . com /

Re: Epson 3800 and HP Z3100 printer reviews

Wayne J. Cosshall wrote:
> Mark² wrote:
>>
>> At risk of sounding rude... The commentary and adjectives used in
>> this "review" (3800) could be applied to just about ANY printer
>> currently on the market. -Nothing specific to this printer, and
>> ZERO details about anything. It was a nice thought, but I don't see how
>> this would help a serious,
>> discriminating shopper make a decision about this fairly serious
>> printer.
> I've changed it from a review to impressions. Frankly I saw little
> point in rehashing specifications, etc

Specifications wouldn't make it a review, either.
Normally, reviews include analysis and testing, with examples given and
results demonstrated (or at least detailed).

But your move to "impressions" is appropriate, I think.
-And good show...by not taking offense.
:)
-Mark²

--
Images (Plus Snaps & Grabs) by Mark² at:
w w w .pbase . com /markuson

Re: Epson 3800 and HP Z3100 printer reviews

How on God's earth can you expect to be taken seriously when you print
drivel like this? Where are the spectrometer results? And... What on earth
prompted you to even attempt to compare an industrial printer like the HP
with an Epson destined for the desktop?

I suppose you never thought to compare apples with apples? Next time you try
to gain some credibility, try testing two industrial printers instead of a
desktop and a free standing industrial machine.

Where too are the comparisons of ink tank capacity? Just because Epson put
"Pro" after the description of a printer doesn't make it an industrial
machine. 80 ml. is hardly enough to start a production run of full width
canvas panorama's is it?

You just went down 5 points in my assessment of your ability to even write a
credible report, much less a concise one.

--

Australian Wedding Photography between Kempsy, NSW and Sunshine Coast.
* w w w .photosbydouglas . com
Digital photos enlarged and printed on Canvas
* canvas.photosbydouglas . com
----------------------------------

"Wayne J. Cosshall" <wayne@dimagemaker . com > wrote in message
news:45b18606$0$2917$afc38c87@news.optusnet . com .au...
: Hi All,
:
: I've placed reviews of the Epson 3800 and the HP Z3100 on my printer
: review page, and also a head to head comparision of their print quality
: (not entirely fair, because they are very different printers, but hey :):
: < * w w w .dimagemaker . com /specials/prttests.php>
:
: Cheers,
:
: Wayne
:
: Wayne J. Cosshall
: Publisher, The Digital ImageMaker, * w w w .dimagemaker . com /
: Blog * w w w .digitalimagemakerworld . com /
: Publisher, Experimental Digital Photography
: * w w w .experimentaldigitalphotography . com
: Co-moderator, Yahoo Canon-350D list
: Workshops and seminars: * w w w .thedigitalimagemaker . com /
: Personal art site * w w w .artinyourface . com /

Re: Epson 3800 and HP Z3100 printer reviews

Douglas wrote:
> How on God's earth can you expect to be taken seriously when you print
> drivel like this? Where are the spectrometer results?

I don't do spectrophotometer tests. That does not make my impressions of
print quality, etc less meanful, just what they are, impressions and
observations from use. I've changed the name of the 3800 article from
review to impressions.

The Z3100 is called setup and initial use.

And... What on earth
> prompted you to even attempt to compare an industrial printer like the HP
> with an Epson destined for the desktop?
>
I did say in the first paragraph "This is not an even comparison, as the
Epson 3800 and the HP Z3100 are very different printers. But I could not
resist it. I’ll leave out the obvious differences in size and paper
handling and concentrate on the print quality." I think that spells it
out, these are the two latest printers from these two companies, they
were here at the same time and I wanted to compare PRINT QUALITY,
nothing else.

> I suppose you never thought to compare apples with apples? Next time you try
> to gain some credibility, try testing two industrial printers instead of a
> desktop and a free standing industrial machine.
>
Of course, and that's why I said I was only looking at print quality.

> Where too are the comparisons of ink tank capacity? Just because Epson put
> "Pro" after the description of a printer doesn't make it an industrial
> machine. 80 ml. is hardly enough to start a production run of full width
> canvas panorama's is it?
>
> You just went down 5 points in my assessment of your ability to even write a
> credible report, much less a concise one.
>


--
Wayne J. Cosshall
Publisher, The Digital ImageMaker, * w w w .dimagemaker . com /
Blog * w w w .digitalimagemakerworld . com /

Re: Epson 3800 and HP Z3100 printer reviews

Wayne J. Cosshall wrote:
> Douglas wrote:
>> How on God's earth can you expect to be taken seriously when you
>> print drivel like this? Where are the spectrometer results?
>
> I don't do spectrophotometer tests. That does not make my impressions
> of print quality, etc less meanful, just what they are, impressions
> and observations from use. I've changed the name of the 3800 article
> from review to impressions.
>
> The Z3100 is called setup and initial use.
>
> And... What on earth
>> prompted you to even attempt to compare an industrial printer like
>> the HP with an Epson destined for the desktop?
>>
> I did say in the first paragraph "This is not an even comparison, as
> the Epson 3800 and the HP Z3100 are very different printers. But I
> could not resist it.

Resist next time... :)
-On the other hand, don't take Douglas' rant too hard...since he has about
as much credibility around here as Milli Vanilli has for vocals.

--
Images (Plus Snaps & Grabs) by Mark² at:
w w w .pbase . com /markuson

Re: Epson 3800 and HP Z3100 printer reviews

Mark² wrote:

>> I did say in the first paragraph "This is not an even comparison, as
>> the Epson 3800 and the HP Z3100 are very different printers. But I
>> could not resist it.
>
> Resist next time... :)
> -On the other hand, don't take Douglas' rant too hard...since he has about
> as much credibility around here as Milli Vanilli has for vocals.
>
LOLOL Agreed (about resisting next time).
I've further revised the head to head to spell out just why and what I
was interested in.

There is an interesting side to this, and I'll do a followup piece on
it. And that is that I often see people on a couple of other lists I am
on debating whether they can get away with a printer like the 3800 (or
even 2800) or whether they need to go to something like the 7800 or
Z3100. Now of course there is really no comparison between the two: the
paper handling options, width, ink capacity and likely longevity and
ease of service make a Z3100 far superior. But in terms of print quality
they can be VERY close, so it depends on what people are looking for.

BTW the criticisms were mostly valid, so there was no point in taking
offense.

Cheers,

Wayne

--
Wayne J. Cosshall
Publisher, The Digital ImageMaker, * w w w .dimagemaker . com /
Blog * w w w .digitalimagemakerworld . com /

Re: Epson 3800 and HP Z3100 printer reviews

Wayne J. Cosshall wrote:
> Mark² wrote:
>
>>> I did say in the first paragraph "This is not an even comparison, as
>>> the Epson 3800 and the HP Z3100 are very different printers. But I
>>> could not resist it.
>>
>> Resist next time... :)
>> -On the other hand, don't take Douglas' rant too hard...since he has
>> about as much credibility around here as Milli Vanilli has for
>> vocals.
> LOLOL Agreed (about resisting next time).
> I've further revised the head to head to spell out just why and what I
> was interested in.
>
> There is an interesting side to this, and I'll do a followup piece on
> it. And that is that I often see people on a couple of other lists I
> am on debating whether they can get away with a printer like the 3800
> (or even 2800) or whether they need to go to something like the 7800
> or Z3100. Now of course there is really no comparison between the
> two: the paper handling options, width, ink capacity and likely
> longevity and ease of service make a Z3100 far superior. But in terms
> of print quality they can be VERY close, so it depends on what people
> are looking for.

I think the more ligical alternative to the 3800 is the 4800. It can use
110ml and/or 220ml ink carts, and is built to true industrial standards.

But of course the prints look very similar. -The 7800 adds ONLY width
capacity over the 4800, and shouldn't be expected to deliver better prints
at the same size.
--
Images (Plus Snaps & Grabs) by Mark² at:
w w w .pbase . com /markuson

Re: Epson 3800 and HP Z3100 printer reviews

Mark² wrote:
>
> I think the more ligical alternative to the 3800 is the 4800. It can use
> 110ml and/or 220ml ink carts, and is built to true industrial standards.
>
> But of course the prints look very similar. -The 7800 adds ONLY width
> capacity over the 4800, and shouldn't be expected to deliver better prints
> at the same size.
In fact I have a theory that within a printer range with consistent head
design, the highest print quality may be with the smaller printer,
assuming other things remain the same, like print head resolution, etc,
because you would expect they could make a printer more accurate when
the moving parts cover less distance. I'll setup a test and see.

Cheers,

Wayne

--
Wayne J. Cosshall
Publisher, The Digital ImageMaker, * w w w .dimagemaker . com /
Blog * w w w .digitalimagemakerworld . com /

Re: Epson 3800 and HP Z3100 printer reviews


"Wayne J. Cosshall" <wayne@dimagemaker . com > wrote in message
news:45b1b22c$0$9770$afc38c87@news.optusnet . com .au...
: Mark² wrote:
: >
: > I think the more ligical alternative to the 3800 is the 4800. It can
use
: > 110ml and/or 220ml ink carts, and is built to true industrial standards.
: >
: > But of course the prints look very similar. -The 7800 adds ONLY width
: > capacity over the 4800, and shouldn't be expected to deliver better
prints
: > at the same size.
: In fact I have a theory that within a printer range with consistent head
: design, the highest print quality may be with the smaller printer,
: assuming other things remain the same, like print head resolution, etc,
: because you would expect they could make a printer more accurate when
: the moving parts cover less distance. I'll setup a test and see.
:
: Cheers,
:
: Wayne

-------------------------
You are right about the size/quality issue Wayne. I have several HP
designjets and 2 Epson photo printers. The r2400 does a way nicer print than
the 7800 but then it is an absolute pig at handling roll paper and it costs
about 60% more for ink carts on a ml/dollar basis and absolutely pours it on
to boot. I only use it in one instance now and this year is slated to be
replaced with a chemical printer.

The single most economical printer I have owned in the past 4 years is a HP
designjet 130. This machine was a dye ink printer but it produced colour as
good as any Epson of the day. It too had woeful paper handling.

The Canon 44" I bought last year lasted a mere 3 month before getting dumped
in favour of another designjet. The 7800 Epson spits ink all over a page
just as it gets to the last few inches of a 6 feet long print, ruining it in
the process. The single most expensive to run, wide format printer I have
ever owned.

Drop in to one of my print centres if you ever come to Queensland and see
first hand which ones are the cheapest to run... Use my measuring gear to
check the prints scientifically too.

Mark square head is typical of every American I have ever met. Over bearing,
outspoken, ill informed and unwilling to accept that anyone outside the USA
has ever had an original idea or can do anything as well or better than a
yank.

Yankee go home should read Yankee stay home in his case. He's an
embarrassment to the male of his species (whatever it is and it sure isn't
human) and his country.
--

Australian Wedding Photography between Kempsy, NSW and Sunshine Coast.
* w w w .photosbydouglas . com
Digital photos enlarged and printed on Canvas
* canvas.photosbydouglas . com

Re: Epson 3800 and HP Z3100 printer reviews

<snip>
>
> The Canon 44" I bought last year lasted a mere 3 month before getting
dumped
> in favour of another designjet. The 7800 Epson spits ink all over a page
> just as it gets to the last few inches of a 6 feet long print, ruining it
in
> the process. The single most expensive to run, wide format printer I have
> ever owned.

I have both the Epson 4800 as well as the 9800 - to control the ink, I use
a ColorBurst rip. ->> * w w w .colorburstrip . com /cbpro.html

Re: Epson 3800 and HP Z3100 printer reviews

Douglas wrote:
> "Wayne J. Cosshall" <wayne@dimagemaker . com > wrote in message
> news:45b1b22c$0$9770$afc38c87@news.optusnet . com .au...
>> Mark² wrote:
>>>
>>> I think the more ligical alternative to the 3800 is the 4800. It
>>> can use 110ml and/or 220ml ink carts, and is built to true
>>> industrial standards.
>>>
>>> But of course the prints look very similar. -The 7800 adds ONLY
>>> width capacity over the 4800, and shouldn't be expected to deliver
>>> better prints at the same size.
>> In fact I have a theory that within a printer range with consistent
>> head design, the highest print quality may be with the smaller
>> printer, assuming other things remain the same, like print head
>> resolution, etc, because you would expect they could make a printer
>> more accurate when the moving parts cover less distance. I'll setup
>> a test and see.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Wayne
>
> -------------------------
> You are right about the size/quality issue Wayne. I have several HP
> designjets and 2 Epson photo printers. The r2400 does a way nicer
> print than the 7800 but then it is an absolute pig at handling roll
> paper and it costs about 60% more for ink carts on a ml/dollar basis
> and absolutely pours it on to boot. I only use it in one instance now
> and this year is slated to be replaced with a chemical printer.
>
> The single most economical printer I have owned in the past 4 years
> is a HP designjet 130. This machine was a dye ink printer but it
> produced colour as good as any Epson of the day. It too had woeful
> paper handling.
>
> The Canon 44" I bought last year lasted a mere 3 month before getting
> dumped in favour of another designjet. The 7800 Epson spits ink all
> over a page just as it gets to the last few inches of a 6 feet long
> print, ruining it in the process. The single most expensive to run,
> wide format printer I have ever owned.
>
> Drop in to one of my print centres if you ever come to Queensland and
> see first hand which ones are the cheapest to run... Use my measuring
> gear to check the prints scientifically too.
>
> Mark square head is typical of every American I have ever met. Over
> bearing, outspoken, ill informed and unwilling to accept that anyone
> outside the USA has ever had an original idea or can do anything as
> well or better than a yank.

Quote me, Douglas. I've NEVER asserted such an idea. Never. I'd be the
first to admist that the US has no corner on genius. -That's just the
little green man in your head talking again...

> Yankee go home should read Yankee stay home in his case. He's an
> embarrassment to the male of his species (whatever it is and it sure
> isn't human) and his country.

Ha ha! Oh Douglas... Surely America isn't the only country with people who
call it as they see it...which is what I did in your case. You heavily
slammed the OP, and I gave you a small bit of your own medicine. Can't take
it? -Don't dish it, chum.


--
Images (Plus Snaps & Grabs) by Mark² at:
w w w .pbase . com /markuson