Is there an A3 version of the R300?

Just wondered if there is an A3 version of the R300, that also takes the
same ink carts.

Thanks

Mikey

I have no idea whether it takes the same cartridges, but the R1800 takes A3
paper, as does the R2400.

http://www.epson.co.uk/products/prod...jets_Photo.htm
--
Cari (MS-MVP)
Printing & Imaging



"Mikey" wrote in message
...
Just wondered if there is an A3 version of the R300, that also takes the
same ink carts.

Thanks

Mikey

I have no idea whether it takes the same cartridges, but the
R1800 takes A3 paper, as does the R2400.

Cari... the r200/r300 take dye ink where the r1800 and r2400 take
ultra-chrome pigment ink. Also while physicaly similar both tanks are
chipped. Further not only is the drop size smaller with the
r1800/r2400 the color compliment is different between these printers

r200/r300 6 tank C M Y K pC pM
r1800 8 tank C M Y K pK R G Gloss
r2400 8tanks (out of 9) C M Y pK mK lK llK pC pM

p=photo m = matte l = light ll=light light

But to answer the parents question... the only thing close that i'm
aware of in a3+ is the r2400, which I imagine one "could" if they so
desired use the ink from the r200/r300 in it... but one might have
issues with the different chips. You can bypass this with a set of
chips from the r2400 which can be reset and resuse but you're still
stuck with the fact that the r2400 has extra blacks. I don't know for
a fact the r2400 would reject dye inks from the r200/r300, nor do I
know if the ink is filtered to a degree that would be acceptable to the
1.5pl nozzles. But if you gotta have dye and must have a3 and an
epson.. the only real viable solution other than swapping chips is
going with 3rd party inks.

But near as i'm aware there isn't any equilivent to the r300... with
the screen and card slots in a3/a3+ at all.

There are canons and HPs that are a3/a3+ that are dye, in fact Canon
doesn't even offer pigments at all unless you go with their wide
models... a1 and above IIRC.

zakezuke wrote:

I have no idea whether it takes the same cartridges, but the
R1800 takes A3 paper, as does the R2400.


Cari... the r200/r300 take dye ink where the r1800 and r2400 take
ultra-chrome pigment ink. Also while physicaly similar both tanks are
chipped. Further not only is the drop size smaller with the
r1800/r2400 the color compliment is different between these printers

r200/r300 6 tank C M Y K pC pM
r1800 8 tank C M Y K pK R G Gloss
r2400 8tanks (out of 9) C M Y pK mK lK llK pC pM

p=photo m = matte l = light ll=light light

But to answer the parents question... the only thing close that i'm
aware of in a3+ is the r2400, which I imagine one "could" if they so
desired use the ink from the r200/r300 in it... but one might have
issues with the different chips. You can bypass this with a set of
chips from the r2400 which can be reset and resuse but you're still
stuck with the fact that the r2400 has extra blacks. I don't know for
a fact the r2400 would reject dye inks from the r200/r300, nor do I
know if the ink is filtered to a degree that would be acceptable to the
1.5pl nozzles. But if you gotta have dye and must have a3 and an
epson.. the only real viable solution other than swapping chips is
going with 3rd party inks.

?
The R1800 has 1.5pl drops, the R2400 larger (3 or 3.5pl?). Apparently
it uses quite a bit more ink per print than the R1800.
Why would anyone want to use dye ink in a pigment ink printer?
If you don't want or need the main advantages of pigment (longer print
life on a wide range of media, including matte and fine art papers),
then the dye ink printers cost less and are probably cheaper to run
(unless you use OEM premium papers to get some assurance of a reasonable
print life).

Why would anyone want to use dye ink in a pigment ink printer?
If you don't want or need the main advantages of pigment (longer print
life on a wide range of media, including matte and fine art papers),
then the dye ink printers cost less and are probably cheaper to run
(unless you use OEM premium papers to get some assurance of a reasonable
print life).

I stand corrected on the drop size on the r2400, it's 3.5pl, rather
than the r200/r300 at 3pl IIRC. I naturally assumed since the r2400
costs more than the r1800 that it would have at least the same or finer
head, my mistake.

Keep in mind the OP was looking for an a3 version of the r200/r300,
which well doesn't exist exactly, the only thing close in terms of
colors is the r2400 in terms of colors except they are pigment and have
extra blacks.

The only reason I can think of using dye in a pigment printer is if you
want dye and they don't sell a wide dye printer. Lots of people like
dye... just ask anyone who prints in HP vivera inks :P

"frederick" wrote in message
news:1123106054.914076@ftpsrv1...
zakezuke wrote:

I have no idea whether it takes the same cartridges, but the
R1800 takes A3 paper, as does the R2400.


Cari... the r200/r300 take dye ink where the r1800 and r2400 take
ultra-chrome pigment ink. Also while physicaly similar both tanks are
chipped. Further not only is the drop size smaller with the
r1800/r2400 the color compliment is different between these printers

r200/r300 6 tank C M Y K pC pM
r1800 8 tank C M Y K pK R G Gloss
r2400 8tanks (out of 9) C M Y pK mK lK llK pC pM

p=photo m = matte l = light ll=light light

But to answer the parents question... the only thing close that i'm
aware of in a3+ is the r2400, which I imagine one "could" if they so
desired use the ink from the r200/r300 in it... but one might have
issues with the different chips. You can bypass this with a set of
chips from the r2400 which can be reset and resuse but you're still
stuck with the fact that the r2400 has extra blacks. I don't know for
a fact the r2400 would reject dye inks from the r200/r300, nor do I
know if the ink is filtered to a degree that would be acceptable to the
1.5pl nozzles. But if you gotta have dye and must have a3 and an
epson.. the only real viable solution other than swapping chips is
going with 3rd party inks.

?
The R1800 has 1.5pl drops, the R2400 larger (3 or 3.5pl?). Apparently
it uses quite a bit more ink per print than the R1800.
Why would anyone want to use dye ink in a pigment ink printer?
If you don't want or need the main advantages of pigment (longer print
life on a wide range of media, including matte and fine art papers),
then the dye ink printers cost less and are probably cheaper to run
(unless you use OEM premium papers to get some assurance of a reasonable
print life).


Well, it seems you have never used OEM ink on an Epson 2100/2200. OEM
pigment ink causes Bronzing which in my book is quite unacceptable when
printing photo's, in my view a photo printed from a digi cam and printed on
an up market Photo printer should look the same as a photo from a film lab.

You say it's an advantage to have a print last 60 years plus, I will, in
that time be dead and gone but my work can still be re-printed on a printer
60 years in the future, or at any other time in between. So as long as I
have my 2100 I will use third party dye ink and enjoy the suburb finish I
get with that combo. Believe or not I pay £1.66 per cart and an OEM would
cost me over £12.

zakezuke wrote:

Why would anyone want to use dye ink in a pigment ink printer?
If you don't want or need the main advantages of pigment (longer print
life on a wide range of media, including matte and fine art papers),
then the dye ink printers cost less and are probably cheaper to run
(unless you use OEM premium papers to get some assurance of a reasonable
print life).


I stand corrected on the drop size on the r2400, it's 3.5pl, rather
than the r200/r300 at 3pl IIRC. I naturally assumed since the r2400
costs more than the r1800 that it would have at least the same or finer
head, my mistake.

Keep in mind the OP was looking for an a3 version of the r200/r300,
which well doesn't exist exactly, the only thing close in terms of
colors is the r2400 in terms of colors except they are pigment and have
extra blacks.

You've lost me here. The R1800 or the R2400 are both in an entirely
different league from the R300 in colour gamut. The R800 uses C M Y K
pK R and Blue, plus GO. The Red and Blue (as well as CMY and K) get used
in photo printing.
The R2400 uses three black cartridges - and is understandably better for
B&W prints in terms of colour cast and metamerism. But there is no free
lunch, it uses more ink per print, and wastes ink when you change black
cartridges when switching between gloss and matte media.
There is some discussion of user comparison for colour output he
http://www.photo-i.co.uk/BB/viewtopic.php?t=637


The only reason I can think of using dye in a pigment printer is if you
want dye and they don't sell a wide dye printer. Lots of people like
dye... just ask anyone who prints in HP vivera inks :P

Shooter wrote:

"frederick" wrote in message
news:1123106054.914076@ftpsrv1...

zakezuke wrote:


I have no idea whether it takes the same cartridges, but the
R1800 takes A3 paper, as does the R2400.


Cari... the r200/r300 take dye ink where the r1800 and r2400 take
ultra-chrome pigment ink. Also while physicaly similar both tanks are
chipped. Further not only is the drop size smaller with the
r1800/r2400 the color compliment is different between these printers

r200/r300 6 tank C M Y K pC pM
r1800 8 tank C M Y K pK R G Gloss
r2400 8tanks (out of 9) C M Y pK mK lK llK pC pM

p=photo m = matte l = light ll=light light

But to answer the parents question... the only thing close that i'm
aware of in a3+ is the r2400, which I imagine one "could" if they so
desired use the ink from the r200/r300 in it... but one might have
issues with the different chips. You can bypass this with a set of
chips from the r2400 which can be reset and resuse but you're still
stuck with the fact that the r2400 has extra blacks. I don't know for
a fact the r2400 would reject dye inks from the r200/r300, nor do I
know if the ink is filtered to a degree that would be acceptable to the
1.5pl nozzles. But if you gotta have dye and must have a3 and an
epson.. the only real viable solution other than swapping chips is
going with 3rd party inks.


?
The R1800 has 1.5pl drops, the R2400 larger (3 or 3.5pl?). Apparently
it uses quite a bit more ink per print than the R1800.
Why would anyone want to use dye ink in a pigment ink printer?
If you don't want or need the main advantages of pigment (longer print
life on a wide range of media, including matte and fine art papers),
then the dye ink printers cost less and are probably cheaper to run
(unless you use OEM premium papers to get some assurance of a reasonable
print life).



Well, it seems you have never used OEM ink on an Epson 2100/2200. OEM
pigment ink causes Bronzing which in my book is quite unacceptable when
printing photo's, in my view a photo printed from a digi cam and printed on
an up market Photo printer should look the same as a photo from a film lab.

Bronzing is solved with pigment inks with the R1800 using a gloss
optimiser, and reduced to insignificance by the ink set in the R2400.
The quality of output from either exceeds that which you will get from a
film lab.

You say it's an advantage to have a print last 60 years plus, I will, in
that time be dead and gone but my work can still be re-printed on a printer
60 years in the future, or at any other time in between. So as long as I
have my 2100 I will use third party dye ink and enjoy the suburb finish I
get with that combo. Believe or not I pay £1.66 per cart and an OEM would
cost me over £12.


60 years are the sort of figures that testers come up with for tests
based on archival storage conditions. If you do as I do, and put photos
on display behind glass, then you can soon see that supposedly
long-lasting media (my experience has been with Cibachrome) don't last
very long at all - a few years at best in the harsh UV in New Zealand.
I'm not looking for 60 (or 200) years - just a few years, and although
I'm not certain, I doubt that any dye ink is going to make the grade.

Bronzing is solved with pigment inks with the R1800 using a gloss
optimiser, and reduced to insignificance by the ink set in the R2400.
The quality of output from either exceeds that which you will get from a
film lab.

I was under the impression that the inks, at one K and the CMY were the
same between the R2400 as the r1800, and the only major difference was
the r1800 offered different colors and the r2400 offered the light
inks. I agree that the bronzing with the epson inks can be solved with
a clear layer whether it be the gloss from the r1800, shallaque if you
want a fast dry or spar urathain if you want long lasting and don't
mind a slight blueing if fresh, or a slight yellowing if hummid.

But all of this is accidemic... some people just like dyes, whether it
be brozing or want something that looks like water color on fine art
paper. I have no clue why the OP wanted the r200 in a3, I naturaly
assumed they prefered dye which in epson near as i'm aware isn't an
option unless you hack something on one of their a3+ printer.

I'm not certain, I doubt that any dye ink is going to make the grade.

Assuming the application is archival prints, which I assume not since
they are looking at the r200, something like the hp vivera inks are
rated at 82+ years. I'm too lazy to drag up the see wilhelm-research
test. I've not tested these personaly but the output looks fab esp
with the 99 grey cart the shadows are top notch. The new canon inks
are reported to be an improvement over the old, but their high number
year mark is noted as being stored in an album, not behind glass.
Generally speaking your average pigment does outlast your average dye,
but there are excpetions to this generalization and many people my self
included prefer the look of dyes on glossy papers.

zakezuke wrote:

Bronzing is solved with pigment inks with the R1800 using a gloss
optimiser, and reduced to insignificance by the ink set in the R2400.
The quality of output from either exceeds that which you will get from a
film lab.


I was under the impression that the inks, at one K and the CMY were the
same between the R2400 as the r1800, and the only major difference was
the r1800 offered different colors and the r2400 offered the light
inks. I agree that the bronzing with the epson inks can be solved with
a clear layer whether it be the gloss from the r1800, shallaque if you
want a fast dry or spar urathain if you want long lasting and don't
mind a slight blueing if fresh, or a slight yellowing if hummid.

There isn't bronzing with the R1800 or R2400. You don't need to apply a
lacquer. That was an issue with the R2100.
They have a completely different ink set. The R2400 ink has (for lack
or a better definition from me) "inbuilt" gloss optimiser. Serious
informed comment seems to be that there is a difference between the
colour output from the R2400 and R1800, a slightly larger gamut on blues
with the R1800, and yellows and reds with the R2400. I haven't seen
gloss output from an R2400. R1800 prints with GO are not quite as
glossy as output from a dye printer like a canon iP9950. It's not a
huge difference. The pigment inks are no good with swellable polymer
extemely high gloss papers - not that I would want to use those papers
even with a dye printer because they have terrible durability.

But all of this is accidemic... some people just like dyes, whether it
be brozing or want something that looks like water color on fine art
paper. I have no clue why the OP wanted the r200 in a3, I naturaly
assumed they prefered dye which in epson near as i'm aware isn't an
option unless you hack something on one of their a3+ printer.


I'm not certain, I doubt that any dye ink is going to make the grade.


Assuming the application is archival prints, which I assume not since
they are looking at the r200, something like the hp vivera inks are
rated at 82+ years. I'm too lazy to drag up the see wilhelm-research
test. I've not tested these personaly but the output looks fab esp
with the 99 grey cart the shadows are top notch. The new canon inks
are reported to be an improvement over the old, but their high number
year mark is noted as being stored in an album, not behind glass.
Generally speaking your average pigment does outlast your average dye,
but there are excpetions to this generalization and many people my self
included prefer the look of dyes on glossy papers.

IIRC, some of the dye inks from Canon are rated at around 100 years when
used on their premium paper. If Vivera inks on certain media are rated
at 82+ years, then be assured that is also under archival conditions.