|
EPSON Stylus Photo R2880
review
by Thomas Berg
username
twberg
Nikonian in Germany
Tell a friend about this Epson R2880
review
|
6. My
conclusions
To start with a reminder, three wisdoms of printing need to be kept
in mind all the time:
1: prints are not self-luminous, hence never reach the contrast of
luminescent panels and they are subject to the quality of
illumination (intensity and spectral distribution)
2: never judge a print immediately after printing, just like with
wall paint the truth comes to shine after drying, which can take a
day...
3: the best coincidence between monitor image and print image
appears at a monitor luminance as low as 100 candela/m². 160
cd/m² can already be too much unless you observe prints under
strong daylight (e.g. reading a newspaper, this is why the value of
160 cd/m² is often referred to by press professionals).
6.1. Subjective
print quality impressions in relation to expectations
Given that points 1 to 3 are settled and engraved in the brain of
the observer, one can now dare judging images not only for their
emotional aspect, but more for their technical quality. Not limited
to the five image specimens presented with this review, I can
confidently say that the EPSON R2880 exhibited only one flaw (see
below) that the printer's technology could be blamed for.
I consider the very rare appearance of dust on the media to be a
common issue of all printers (regardless of brand) that are capable
of processing Fine Art media, because this sort of media is much
more likely to deposit traces of fibres and abrasion inside the
printer than the mainstream media.
In my opinion, the full magic of printing with EPSON UltraChrome K3
inks starts to shine only if you work with image processing
software which is capable of simulating properly the
characteristics of the print media prior to printing. Fully. Gamut
and paper white.
Kudos to EPSON, I consider the profile quality for softproofing and
paper simulation exemplary for good implementation! Under Photoshop
CS4 (older CS versions will probably perform similar) the
simulations were in stunning agreement with the actual print. Kudos
again!
This enables the advanced users to edit the images such that some
of the gamut limitations of the selected media can be neatly masked
and achieve a colour rendition that finally matches the appearance
of the version created for monitor/projection display.
Although the effective print resolution of my A4 size prints was as
low as 200 ppi, the tonal transitions were not affected at all and
there were no undesired blur effects at all. The reproduction of
the image as seen on the screen in softproof view appears perfect
to me, I cannot ask for more.
Let me express it that way: you don't get the printout that you
expect - the problem is most likely not on EPSON's side. Users of
software that cannot fully mimic paper characteristics (gamut and
paper white) are partly excused and should perhaps consider
adjusting their workflow or reduce highest expectations.
Writing this review taught me several lessons. Admittedly, my
self-evaluated photographic talent is a tad better than mediocre as
far as capturing emotional images is concerned and probably upper
midfield as far as technical skills are concerned. To a degree, I
come to this conclusion from the process of image specimen
selection and how they finally appear on paper. Initially, I
thought the selected images would leave a “wow”
impression with me after printing, instead I did not experience
much more than a friendly warm “not bad” feeling.
Once more the striking simple truth is that upgrades in technology
do not make images better, in contrary, better equipment just
renders the photographer's limits with sharper contours.
Why I tell that? Dear reader, we both do not believe that a better
printer makes any of our images better, do we? However, if you are
capable of capturing/creating really good (emotional, striking,
extraordinary) pictures and you want them to shine, then, this
generation of EPSON printers and ink technology will hardly set
unsurpassable limits to your creativity. I dare to say that because
I took photographs under lighting conditions that eventually fell
into the remote corners of the AdobeRBG colour space gamut and were
very difficult to print properly, but I did manage to transfer
colour and emotion into printed matter. That's why I consider
myself qualified to make such statements and write such a
review.
6.1.1.
Undeniable Gloss Differential
The principle of depositing pigmented ink onto the
surface of a media which, in itself, cares for the glossy
appearance of the final print, bears the inherent risk for what is
called “Gloss Differential”. This depicts the
observable differences in degree of gloss versus density of
deposited ink. Obviously, this effect is most prominent for the
extreme highlights, where fundamentally no ink deposition is needed
at all. RGB 255/255/255 corresponds with ink 0/0/0/.../0.
The effect of gloss differential strikes the eye only when an EPSON
print is viewed under a fairly flat angle of incidence. A typical
viewing scenario would e.g. be a large wall-mounted print is viewed
by an observer who rests rather parallel to the picture. The more
the observer moves to a perpendicular viewing position, the less
noticeable is gloss differential.
I would like to point out two things: firstly, as for the EPSON
prints that I made, gloss differential appeared only for blown
highlights and secondly, I remember gloss differential from old
B&W photographs of my parents but there the matte parts were
the saturated shadows...
After all, gloss differential is neither something new nor
something specific to digital print technology. But it can be
annoying.
In order to minimize gloss differential for B&W prints, EPSON
recommends activating a special option in the printer driver:
Highlight Point Shift. Effectively this sprays a very subtle layer
of LLK ink (the lightest grey) over the areas that are
characterized by luminosity near 255, which is the bare paper
white.
Highlight Point Shift may be activated in the driver only, not
within the Print Plug-In tool. In the “Main” tab,
select “Media Settings – Colour” to
“Advanced B&W Photo” and tick “Mode:
Custom”. Then select “Advanced”, which opens
another pop-up window where “Highlight Point Shift” can
be activated to become effective for either the entire page
or the image area only.
This workaround leaves a bad taste in my mouth. In practical terms,
it means that all photographers who love to produce large format
glossy or semi-glossy prints will either need to manipulate their
images beforehand such that fully saturated highlights are avoided
or accept the fact that the Highlight Point Shift trick manipulates
the highlights in a way that is hard to predict. Regardless which
option one selects, the perceivable dynamic range is reduced.
In my opinion, a careful balance of pro and contra should be made
before spoiling the highlight tonality in the range above 245.
Without Highlight Point Shift I observed traces of gloss
differential even at the luminosity level 245 on Premium Luster and
Premium Glossy paper, unfortunately. I observed this first with the
FaceInTree picture and you can't really blame that for excessive
highlights.
With Highlight Point Shift enabled, gloss differential in a
FaceInTree print diminished to an almost unperceivable level. I
needed to be in quest for this issue in order to see it, however
images containing much larger and homogeneous patches of highlights
might again tell a different story.
EPSON needs to address this issue, I think.
For the time being, the user needs to make a decision on which
deserves priority: subtle highlights in large prints under normal
viewing angles? Or complete lack of gloss differential under weird
viewing angles?
It should be clear that the pigmented ink technology, in its
present EPSON incarnation, cannot serve both masters, whereas dye
ink technology can.
It should also be clear that gloss differential will hardly be
perceivable once a print is presented behind glass.
Ultimately, whether or not you consider gloss differential an issue
or negligible, remains up to you. It exists and I have to report
it.
Advantage: dye ink.
6.1.2.
Undeniable precision in resolving power
Has dye ink technology, by principle, an advantage in
lack of gloss differential, the EPSON pigmented ink technology has
a noticeable advantage in resolving power. I avoid with good reason
the expression “resolution”, since I just made straight
visual comparisons of few images printed both on the EPSON R2880
and my private iP6700D printer which I cannot transpose in
figures.
Each time, one neatly processed DIN-A4 image was sent to the
printers. Observation: each print from the EPSON 2880 exhibited
better defined details, sharper contours, more three-dimensional
impression. Simply crisper, simply better. No loupe required to see
that.
For curiosity, I printed both the up-sampled A3+ version and the
lower resolution version of the FaceInTree picture with the R2880
on A4 sheets and examined them with my good old Rodenstock
6x-Loupe. Wow! With the bare eye the difference between both prints
is hardly noticeable, but under the loupe one can easily see why
300dpi is recommended for top quality prints.
Advantage: EPSON piezo and pigmented ink technologies.
6.1.3.
Undeniable advantage in Black&White printing
Not unexpectedly for a print technology that employs three
different intensities of grey-scale ink, the B&W prints turn
out very well defined and very neutral. It is definitely unfair to
compare a technology that utilizes two different black inks plus
two levels of grey plus five colours to compose an image against a
technology that uses one glossy black ink plus 5 colours and
targets at glossy and semi-gloss prints only. Therefore, I will not
dive any deeper than saying that this conceptual advantage of the
EPSON R2880 and its stablemates becomes visible in each and every
B&W print. Period.
Pair that with properly processed files of 360ppi image resolution
and you will be rewarded with stunning B&W prints!
Advantage: EPSON pigmented ink technology.
6.1.4.
Bronzing (or the lack of, to be precise)
Bronzing is a flaw that may show up when viewing a print under
slanted angles. I have seen it in sample prints provided by EPSON,
so I know how it looks and what to look for. However, bronzing just
did not appear at all in the prints that I made with the R2880.
Flawless!
Advantage: EPSON pigmented ink technology.
6.1.5. Colour
Inconstancy – what a phrase!
Someone at EPSON possibly created this phrase to condense the
difficult depiction of colour shift versus illumination
characteristics into something handsome for the marketing
department. Admittedly, what it depicts is not 100% exactly the
same as Metamerism, but it is pretty close.
From my print inspections under varying light conditions, ranging
from early morning daylight over halogen spots to energy saving
discharge lamps, I never had the feeling that the colour balance is
distorted to an extent that attracted attention, or should I say
distracted attention?
However, the same holds true for my private iP6700D prints.
Maybe I miss the related history of experience, but, really, I
cannot see why EPSON stirs up this Colour Inconstancy business.
UltraChrome K3 is no self-adjusting chameleon ink and reflective
media are subject to the laws of physics. All of them, until
someone brews chameleon ink.
|
