|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
The Epson 2200 |
|
||||||||
|
I've been waiting some time for this printer, which I hoped would be a nice compliment to Canon's D60 camera. Finally it has begun trickling into the Denver area, although the only available one in the area was in Boulder (a 30 minute drive). Walked into the CompUSA there, and nabbed one of the only two that they had.
After obtaining this printer, I rushed home to see what my $700 bought me (actually $770, including CompUSA's two year warranty. Am I a fool?). The box that the 2200 comes in is pretty huge (12"x15"x29"), and unpacking it mostly consisted of setting aside the unrecognizable pieces that came with it; these turned out to be the basket (for catching cut photos), the "automatic roll paper cutter", and two well-wrapped ends to stick in a paper roll for the back of the printer. Epson included a quick start guide, a regular manual, and some 8.5x11" sample paper.
Initial Impressions: I began by loading some 8.5x11" Hewlett-Packard premium glossy paper (even though I have a couple of hundred dollars worth of Epson paper that I'd bought in anticipation of using the printer). Failure! This first print stopped about 1/4 of the way through, and didn't continue coming out. Tried canceling the print job, but that didn't work either. Ended up ejecting the paper, and rebooting the computer in case some part of the software "didn't take". Finally I try some of the Epson paper that came with the printer. Voilá! The print was top notch, but that's an opinion from this amateur's perspective. I immediately took a high resolution (3072x2048 pixel) D60 image, "rezzed" it up to 300 dpi at 12x18" printable, and pushed PRINT again - nice. These much larger images look nearly as good - that is, as high an apparent resolution - as their 8.5x11" counterparts. These would be at 171 dpi, if I hadn't done the bicubic resolution enhancement in Adobe Photoshop (see the article on Canon D60 image quality with the 2200). On Further Use: The Epson software is able to center the print perfectly on the paper, which is something I hadn't been able to do till now. Adobe Photoshop (and PS Elements) along with the Epson print preview provide for EXACT placement of the image on the paper. This is nice when your paper is running about $2.00 a sheet (and the ink ain't cheap either). The "light" colors - magenta, cyan, and black - are used the most (for typical prints). Color profiles: There is a lot of talk about color profiles (for example, the printer forum on Digital Photography Review). I am red-green colorblind, but I can still compare: the challege is one of precision: To match the printer's color representation to what I see onscreen. I have configured a profile using Photoshop's color management, and in the workflow, optimized each image for color, contrast, and brightness using the various "levels" and "curves" in PS. The final print approximates the color that these strange eyes experienced, and yes, my non-colorblind friends agree (accuracy). Obviously, this isn't too much a concern for B&W prints. So far, I'm doing well using no other monitor calibration other than what was delivered in PS, and besides, I really don't want to pay $200 (or more) for profiling software. Gray Balancer: The Gray Balancer software gives you control over the tonality of black and white prints. However, this software is not shipped with the 2200 (which is the U.S. version of the printer)! The non-U.S. version of the 2200 - the 2100 - does include the software. This missing software is a sore spot in the relationship that 2200 owners have with Epson. Luminous Landscape has written extensively about it and exactly what control 2200 owners are missing in their own black and white work. Through InkJetGoodies, in Moab, Utah, I found a link to information and access to the Gray Balancer software for the Epson 2200: Go to http://www.fors.net/2200. There, you can pick from the Russian or French versions, from Epson's sites for those countries. The 121-page manual is included in the download. What you don't get is the reference card that ships with the software. Paper (and other media): Epson makes an "archival matte" and "matte paper - heavyweight". I'm not sure that I can tell the difference easily...the archival matte paper has an Epson logo on the back, while the less expensive heavyweight paper doesn't. In fact, that lack of distinction led to some confusion on my part when I thought my prints were turning bad (lacking contrast and sepia-looking)...I was printing on the more yellow side of the heavyweight paper. While you may not be able to easily distinguish the printable side, this printer can. Now, after using the Epson 2200 for a few months, I've gone to matte black ink, and am routinely using Epson's archival matte paper. And as the Epson 2200 drinks ink, I am making fewer prints; with seven cartridges, it seems that one color or another is always on the verge of being used up. However, how much would a gorgeous 12x18" photographic enlargement cost you at a commercial photo lab?
I've been hearing - and I don't know whether this is true - that with an inkjet printer, the print will look best when resampled for a dpi figure that is at some fraction of the native print head resolution. For example, with the Epson 2200 set to print at 1440 dpi, a 240 dpi print resolution would be used because it is evenly divisible by the print head itself. I've yet to do a side-to-side comparison of, say, a 300 dpi image next to one printed at a "proper" 240 dpi. Judicious use of the "unsharp mask" (USM) can also provide dramatic improvements to the sharpness of the image. USM should be applied after resampling, as extrapolation of the USM-induced halo will occur. In the past few months, the images from the D60 I've been printing on the Epson printer have met my expectations. On occasion, I've noticed slight banding on solid color regions of the print; this appears to be taken care of by cleaning the print heads.
Articles on the Epson 2200 and the 2100 (the non-American version) abound.
|
|||||||||
