[Leica] Epson 3800 whose GOT THEM?!?!?!?!

[mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner)]

On 2/15/07 6:44 PM, "Jeff Moore" <jbm@jbm.org> typed:

> So where did all this 3800 fever spring from all of a sudden?  Just a
> few months ago, it seemed as if THE printer everyone was waiting to be
> released was the HP B9180 Pro -- my girlfriend did a workshop with
> fine-digital-printing guru Stephen Johnson, who complained about the
> terrible job their lab's Stylus 2400s did feeding fat rag paper, and
> raved about the B9180 he'd been working with a prerelease sample of.
> Blogs, reviews -- all B9180 raves.  Next I hear, everyone's ignoring
> that and gobbling up every Epson 3800 they can make.  Whassup?
> 
What's up is that there is no real give and take back and forth between
Epson printing use and HP. Epson has %99.99 of the market sewn up of serious
print makers. Printers for fine art. Commercial photographers. HP is years
behind and not just almost starting to catch up. So is Canon who is a bit in
front of HP. So I don't know who you're talking to it sounds like you're
talking to HP reps. I've never heard of Steven Johnson I now look up up and
see he's building some kind  of a cultist digital inkjet empire to put Fred
Picker of Zone VI to shame from a previous age.

LAST YEAR both HP and Canon both introduced their FIRST pigment inkjet
printers.
LAST YEAR.
2006
Its been 2007 now for only a month and a half.

Epson's newest cutting edge printer is a bombshell to an extent few markets
have ever seen in a product introduction before. The size, weight and price
of a 13 inch printer almost - it prints 17 inches. And its cutting edge in
image quality and efficiency.
Normally if 7 months goes by and Epson comes out with a new printer its a
whole new ballgame from what was happening before. These guys don't fool
around.
This one competes with the 4800 which is twice the price size and weight.
I anticipate the gap between Epson and it's non competitors pigment or
otherwise to widen not tighten in the next months and years. Yes HP and
Canon have plenty of money and you'd think if they put their heads down to
the grindstone they'd compete;
But they don't.
Epson invented it. Perfected it. Have picked up and ball and ran with it.
The others seem to be in a daze.
This is not an I like Nikon you like Canon kind of thing.

But there are these Inkjet guru's perhaps your Stephen Johnson is one of
them it sounds, Michael Richman who I generally do like; who have their
fingers on a whole lot of pies and who own a whole lot of printers and they
like Popular Photography and consumer magazines make it seem like its still
somehow still all up for grabs,
If they didn't they'd have a whole lot less going on.
They have to even the field to say in business and keep those toys rolling
in. 

I cant talk to wedding photographers maybe they're even using dye sub I've
no care but if you to to a gallery, museum or a studio of a commercial
photographer which a fine art aesthetic; in other words one of the good ones
you are going to see:

MATT 100% rag PAPER from the European companies who've been at it doing
pretty much the same thing for 400 years.
PIGMENT INK
EPSON PRINTER.

Not necessarily in that order.

The glossy stuff is baloney the paper is cheap, not rag or archavial and
tries to look like a darkroom print in which its both NOT
And should be a superior process to. Especially in the realm of color.

Its pigment ON paper.
Not immersed in gelatin or anything else.
There's no reason for it to be gloss.
And just looks too classy and at home with itself its own natural matt self.

I walked into Calumet in New York last week and all I see for the first 40
feet of the whole store left to right is European inkjet paper. Matte.

The entire back left corner of Adorama. Two or three aisles.

And both have large darkroom sections too.



Mark Rabiner
New York, NY
40?47'59.79"N   
73?57'32.37"W

markrabiner.com