Epson ET-18100 /L18050 Metallic, gloss & baryta papers review testing update: how well do they work

[@MrBlubb80]

Very interesting. Thanks! Which patch reader do you use for profiling and do you have videos specifically on profiling? I have some strange results with my profiles.

[@KeithCooper]

I use an i1iSis XL which takes a 3k patch A3+ sheet in one go. I made this [30 mins] overview of my profiling process kzbin.info/www/bejne/gpyQcph4msZqrJo I'll add this to the notes...

[@MrBlubb80]

@@KeithCooper Thank you very much for the quick reply! I'll have a look! (I had a typo in my comment - "very interesting", not "dry interesting" ;-))

[@KeithCooper]

It's kit a bit beyond what many will use, but that's a benefit of having done development testing for X-Rite a few years ago...

[@SiZNArt]

Keith, thx for the great review! I wonder, compared to ET8550 how is the color differenc? I know 18100 has more color tanks, but how apparent is the color difference?

[@KeithCooper]

None with good profiles that most people would ever see Read the proper [i.e. written] reviews www.northlight-images.co.uk/epson-et-18100-printer-review/ www.northlight-images.co.uk/epson-et-8550-printer-review/ Note the specific paper limitations for the 18100

[@aqdrk]

Wasn't there a similar video for the ET-8550? I vaguely remember it not "liking" baryta papers much...

[@KeithCooper]

Similar, but not qute the same The main problem with the 18100 is thickness and marking of papers, so it also performs less well with art papers as well. The 8550 ink set is weaker in performance with some baryta style papers - but because of the ink-set, not the physical issues. Baryta papers in general seem better suited to pigment ink sets

[@Bassbarbie]

Thanks - a shame about those dents, but look forward to more of your findings. Regarding the user replaceable roller - do they perish and not feed the paper through eventually. Is this why it's a good thing? Regarding the ink differences between this and the 8550 - I wonder if one is more lightfast than the other? The 8550 uses Claria I see, and for this, the Epson site just says dye inks. I'm not familiar with their inks.

[@KeithCooper]

The roller replacement is not something I have experience of in other printers - I'll cover more of this in the main [written] review. As to lightfastness, few know - there is little reliable/meaningful info, since different Epson sites say different things... Suffice to say, if true archive capabilities mattered, I'd use a pigment ink printer, archival media and keep my prints in the dark... ;-)

[@ytuberization]

Thanks, Keith! Does any from the Metallic papers make sense for a pigment printer like the P900, specifically papers like the Permajet Titanium Gloss Metallic 300 or the Permajet Titanium Lustre 280? Others to consider? With older papers I had the impression, that the pigment inks lead to a coating which takes the typical character of such papers and the prints look quite „blunt“…

[@KeithCooper]

I've tested this paper in several printer reviews and it varies. Some images work, some don't. I'd need to go back through the written reviews to check everything - I remember the Ti300 looked quite good on the PRO-300...

[@creambun1963]

hi great vid again , looking for photo papers that youve tested that dont leave any marks on them , which was the best please

[@KeithCooper]

Sorry, I don't remember - this review was a while ago. Most photo papers worked fine. This varies between individual printers - the only way of being absolutely sure is with a sample

[@creambun1963]

@@KeithCooper ok many thanks will try a few different ones out

[@fredwestinghouse2945]

1) How often must something be printed so the print head does not become clogged? 2) Are there replaceable print heads supplied by Epson? When the time comes, can the print head be changed easily by a layman?

[@KeithCooper]

Ah, questions of a type I am regularly asked, but sometimes based on generic fallacies or out of date 'forum wisdom' ;-) 1: no-one knows. This is a consumer printer so should not be bothered by gaps of a couple of weeks. All new printers tend to be better in this respect. 2: Replaceable heads - no, another non problem

[@jefffenske1958]

Keith has a GREAT video on this! After three months of not being used, this 8-ink dye printer was fine after running a cleaning cycle. Video is called: "Leaving a printer unused: Canon PRO-200 after 3 months" Apparently, it's only the pigment ink printers that have to be used every week or so. *Another advantage of the 18100 over the 8550* (that has one pigment ink), perhaps.

[@mondomicio]

@@jefffenske1958 The PRO-200 has all pigment inks...

[@jefffenske1958]

@@mondomicio You're thinking of the Pro-300, which is all pigment.

[@creambun1963]

hi seem to have lost some profiles having reset my pc can i have some profiles please what gloss / lustre do you recemend with the 18100 many thanks

[@KeithCooper]

Installing the printer driver again should install the Epson profiles [from epson.sn] The specific profiles I created are listed in my main written review www.northlight-images.co.uk/epson-et-18100-printer-review/

[@creambun1963]

@@KeithCooper many thanks looking to use Fotospeed Legacy Gloss or PermaJet Titanium Gloss 300 what do you think is the best one for this printer with no roller marks to use please

[@befo1968]

In your video you say that voor baryta papers you need a better printer. If you had to trade up in the Epson line, which printer would suffice?

[@KeithCooper]

I currently use a P5000 - I'd prefer a P20000, but my house isn't big enough... :-(

[@befo1968]

@@KeithCooper That's not a step up but a mountain up!

[@jefffenske1958]

Much appreciated, Keith! These 13 inch printers are apparently the largest size currently available for consumers at a low enough price point that use dye ink, which allow the reflectivity of the paper to transmit through the ink to the viewer, unlike pigment inks, which stop transmission. This may be a main reason why metal prints are so popular, which are also printed with dye inks. That's why I'm thrilled about these, because I'm not a metal fan, and am looking for an alternative. Hopefully, larger printers will become available. Great to see the no gloss differential here. Regarding color gamut, I'm now leaning towards Canon's Pro-200, which you've reviewed, because it has two additional inks, a gray and light gray: Y/M/C/PC/PM/Gy/LGy/BK. Ink costs would be more expensive, but if less colors are out of gamut, if we can print more of the colors our cameras capture, that's the one for me. Unless Epson can somehow do wonders here with less inks. I'm thinking that tonalities in skies especially can really benefit from the light gray especially. And you've said the grays are mixed with colors to achieve more color tones. Many photographers, including myself have shied away from dye inks because of less longevity than pigment, but then these same photographers sell prints on metal that are made with dye inks! Many people don't light prints they buy, so reflectivity helps prints come alive in non-gallery lighted homes. Regarding longevity of dye prints, one review of the Canon Pro-200 (Photo Review) says: "To the best of our knowledge, ChromaLife100+ inks are rated for about 10 years fade resistance when displayed without any protection or about 40 years when displayed behind glass. Prints made with these inks are said to be able to last for more than 200 years in a photo album, which makes this printer ideal for photo book printing. However, it’s worth noting that durability depends on the paper they are printed on." If prints are hit by direct sunlight, 10 years when displayed without any protection is not going to happen without significant fading, a KZbinr showed. So if they're kept out of the sun, even unprotected dye prints can last a long time. In 2008, Willhelm Imaging Research's tests showed that Epson Claria Inks 'Permanence' is 98 years framed under glass. So dye inks may be a logical tradeoff that gains reflectivity with reflective papers like luster and metallic, and still have enough longevity for most people. Keith, I'd be interested in how the 18100 and 8550 compare with Canon's Pro-200 too, since it has two more inks, despite ink costing more, based on your memories of how the Canon performed in your tests. THANKS!

[@KeithCooper]

Ah, I have a longstanding (~20 yrs) review policy of not comparing brands... If you wanted to email me directly... ;-) Unfortunately I'm not expecting any larger tank based printers any time soon...

[@jefffenske1958]

@@KeithCooper I see. Makes sense. You definitely are a great ambassador for Canon and Epson both! I would love to email you perhaps after you're done testing this 18100. Thanks!

[@rm2xy]

Thanks for telling the issue with baryta papers, so it's no choice for me. At all I think the printer is manufactered very cheaply.

[@KeithCooper]

Thanks, but I don't really agree about 'cheaply' - I've seen 'cheap printers ;-) The marking is an issue on softer, thicker art and baryta papers. I suspect the giveaway is that there is but just the one 'matte' paper setting. If I wanted to print bright colourful glossy prints - this is a very good printer. The metallic papers look particularly good. However if you want something else...