AirWalter Loc: Tipp City, Ohio

Just out of curiosity, what brand of ink are you using?

AirWalter Loc: Tipp City, Ohio

I have never had any problems with Canon printers in at least 20 years, and they sat unused for 2 or 3 years after I lost my Wife to cancer. When I started using them again I didn't even have to run any maintenance and they worked just fine and still are. Use Canon ink.

AirWalter Loc: Tipp City, Ohio

Oh, come on Jerry. You are always posting about printer problems.

AirWalter Loc: Tipp City, Ohio

Epson used to be the best printer that you could buy. Not anymore, people are complaining about Epson printers all the time on here. I use a Canon MG6120 and I've had it over 10 years, without any problems. Use Canon ink.

BigDaddy Loc: Pittsburgh, PA

Epson Ink. It's extremely cheap and lasts a very long time.

I must say reading the reviews on Epson 8550 it sounds great on first look. After reading deeper on the reviews on B&H those complaining have identical complaints that I have for the ET-2750. Everyone seems to have problems if you don't print routinely and go to the trouble of printing automatically about once a week to prevent clogs. This is my first Epson printer but I've been printing with HP and Canon printers for many, many many years and never had to clear a clog despite infrequent printing and never turning off my printer. I was considering buying the 8550 but after further investigation, I'm not sure I want to invest the money particularly when the few complaints I've found are very similar to the complaints I have on my printer.

I probably should add that my first color photo printer was an HP and it worked great, but also sounded smooth as silk when printing. This Epson sounds like an out of wack thrashing machine. It does do an excellent job printing text, including colors once you manage to get the nozzles unclogged, and it's been flawless on two sided printing. Still, cleaning the nozzles is a pain. I've learned to skip the nozzle check and just go straight to nozzle cleaning, which takes 3 minutes and uses very little ink compared to the deep cleaning which uses a TON of ink. I pretty much gave up trying to print photo's with it, even though I bought Epson paper just in case that was an issue.

terryMc Loc: Arizona's White Mountains

I'm happy for you, but mine was a doorstop after sitting a couple of months and nothing I could do would get it back. I never used anything but Canon ink, so your apparent inference that this was the problem is in error.

I, on the other hand, have never had a serious clogging problem with any Epson (4 of them.)

Drbobcameraguy Loc: Eaton Ohio

Look at Jtoolman videos on uTube. He is a Epson and Canon expert and very informative. Also you can use precision color inks. He has all the details on that also.

nealbralley Loc: Kansas

I have an Epson ET-8500, and so far it has been fine. I had an earlier model Epson and a Canon printer, both Eco-type printers, and both eventually had clogged printer heads that wouldn't clean themselves.

The Canon printer did not have an illuminated small monitor, and that was a total pain in the rear for sure. The Epson 8500 is illuminated, and I am much happier with it. I cannot address the 8550, specifically.

I print on various photo papers, and the results seem to be acceptable for my use. I am not in the professional sales category, so they more than meet my needs.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

I have an Epson ET-4700 office printer we bought in 2020. It works fine. I've only had to clean the heads one time since we bought it. I print something about once or twice a week, and it just works. It's not a true photo printer, but does a decent job on proofs.

The ET-8500 and 8550 are fine for what they are. Users DO report that printing borderless creates epic failure due to the ink overspray getting on the rollers and transferring to subsequent prints. My advice is to NOT do borderless printing on ANY Epson printer. I have never had an issue with dirty rollers unless I printed borderless or had a bad paper jam.

Epson's higher end printers using pigment ink are the giclée printing standard of the photo lab, service bureau, museum, ad agency, and art school businesses. Many high end professional studios use them. NO one I know in the photo lab or pro photography business uses HP printers any more. Canon, yes. Canon printers are great. They have a reputation for never clogging, and their color science is excellent. HP printers do find some uses in marketing departments of department stores and car dealers. But I've never been a fan of their color science.

Artcameraman Loc: Springfield NH

Yes, so true! Most of my printers are 8 to 12 colors or more and all are pigment. I believe pigment is made from rust?

starShoot

I can't make a comparison between your current printer and the ET 8550. However, I have an old Canon 9000 and the Epson ET 8550. Initially, I was concerned because the Epson has fewer inks than the Canon (the gamut question), but in my experience the ET 8550 has shown itself to be excellent in every regard. As an amateur, using only genuine ink, this printer performs wonderfully. Not having to purchase expensive cartridges (expensive), or refill cartages (messy) is really worth it. I now very seldom use the old Canon. Just one person's experience and opinion.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

No, pigments are stable, solid compounds that do not oxidize or break down easily in the presence of radiation. Dyes are generally made from oil and other organic compounds, are transparent, and can oxidize (rust) or break down under radiation, especially UV light sources (sunlight).

The best Canon and Epson OEM dye inks last around the equivalent of 100 years in accelerated aging tests. The best Canon and Epson OEM pigment inks can last 200 to 400 years.

Compare that with the chromogenic dyes in traditional silver halide photo papers, which last only 20-50 years with serious fading!

OTOH, the inks from some of the cheap Brother and HP office printers tend to fade in sunlight after only a few weeks. I had one of those HPs, and took it to be recycled six months after I bought the cheap POS.

I've produced quite a few honorary video "slide shows" of peoples' careers, and several "the way we were decades ago" slide shows. The black-and-white and Kodachrome images in them look good as new. The images copied from color prints and Ektachrome/Fujichrome slides look awful by comparison. While some color "restoration" is possible, that restoration isn't restoration, but rather, reducing the saturation of the predominant dye layers to the level of the one that faded the most. The result is more pastel than the original, and almost always lacking realism.

I have several Epson Ultrachrome prints from 2003 and 2004. They look as good as they did when new, as compared with the original digital images on a calibrated monitor. Most of the Epson Claria dye ink prints I made in that era also look good.

terryMc Loc: Arizona's White Mountains

I still have a handful of prints I made on my old Epsons from the late 90s, early 2000s (I had two, one pigment one dye ink; I don't remember the numbers on the printers) and they still look just fine. They were never masterpieces to begin with, but the ink has held up very well, in my opinion.

The 8550 on the other hand, is not intended to be a professional, gallery print-quality photo printer, and I don't use it for that. It is an excellent greeting card printer, however.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Prints from the 8550 on archival quality photo papers are still likely to outlast photo lab prints on chromogenic/silver halide color papers.

terryMc Loc: Arizona's White Mountains

No doubt, and as you pointed out earlier, dye inks have improved over time also.