Been out the game for a while...whats the latest and greatest ink jet?

[Mark @ Hurricane Printing]

I made an ealier post about my epson 3000 im working on getting back up and running....but I wanted to make another post asking, whats the latest and greatest ink jet printer a screen printer should have for printing out films? 6 years ago when I got into it, it was the Epson 3000, so I picked one up and also bought FastRip. The 3000 was considered the industry standard and was the workhorse of screen printers.

But that was 6 years ago..technology changes at a rapid pace and I literally have been out the loop for 6 years.....so has a printer replaced the 3000 as the industry standard? If so which one is it? or which ONES are they?

I'm afraid my epson 3000 been sitting for 6 yrs collecting dust and it might not function properly for all I know.....so incase it doesnt and I have to replace it I want to know what I should be looking at.

[mk162]

a lot of people still run the 3000.  It's a good printer.  The 1400 is good as well.  I don't see myself switching from the 3000. it's a workhorse.

[Mark @ Hurricane Printing]

a lot of people still run the 3000.  It's a good printer.  The 1400 is good as well.  I don't see myself switching from the 3000. it's a workhorse.

all i recall about my epson was i had to baby it for sure....for a workhorse it sure was sensitive.

[JayzTeez]

i have no complaints from my hp9800

[alan802]

We've used an R1800, 1400 and 4800 for film output and really the most bang for the buck is the 1400 I think.  The 4800 is much faster and I'd recommend it if you are going to be churning out 20 screens a day, but if it's a couple pieces of film a day then the 1400 will suit you fine.  It's so damn cheap, with rebates I think we got ours for $220.  We also used to use the fastrip and it was probably the version from 6 years ago and there are better RIPs out there for sure now days.  We abandoned our fastrip when my artist tried accurip for the first time.  I don't know if this is true but he just told me those older versions of fastrip didn't allow much if any manipulation to the resolution or droplet weight so our film was not as good as it is now.

[sportsshoppe]

3000 it is a workhorse!!!

[mk162]

I use a bulk ink system with mine, and I get a lot of bang for the buck.  It's about due for a rebuild.  It's been around 6 years since my last one.

They just wear out after a while.  If you get the heads unclogged, you'll be fine for a while with it.

[Donnie]

Epson 3000, GD tank!

Speaking of which and not to hijack the thread, but is anyone running an Epson 3000 on Windows 7?

[mk162]

I may or may not be.  What's your question?

[Shawn (EIP)]

I pulled the pizza cutters out of my 1400 and tossed them now it smears the last 2 inches of the film... I have to cut out a 13 x 20 sheet if I want to print out 13x18. If you get one leave them in, theres a purpose for them!

[mk162]

funny, I removed them and mine has printed great.  I did however roll mine up in a little baggie and tuck them in the cartridge housing just in case.  If they fit, I can mail them up to you.

[Shawn (EIP)]

funny, I removed them and mine has printed great.  I did however roll mine up in a little baggie and tuck them in the cartridge housing just in case.  If they fit, I can mail them up to you.

If you got a 1400 it should? I was just thinking about getting another... 

[mk162]

I have a 3000.  Let me know, you might be able to cross reference the part numbers.

[RICK STEFANICK]

if money was not the issue i would go for a epson 4880 and wastach rip...i have a epson r1800 with screeners choice rip that i picked up used as a package for 300 bucks delivered. it gets me thru.. 

[blue moon]

I just recently switched to a 4800 from a 3000. I will say that the 4800 with the right ink has superior dMax and slightly better dot. If the money is tight, I'd stick with the 3000 for a while. And "for a while" can easily be years if you desire so. On the other hand, I have to say, I could not be happier with the 4800. On top of the films being twice as dark (dMax of 5.5 vs 3.05), it is also so much easier to print from a roll (no paper handling to start with and then nesting reduces the number prints). The time spent handling the printer is about a quarter what it used to be. As busy as I am being able to save 10-15 min each day is huge!

pierre