Canon Pro-1000 A2 printer: considering buying this beast

mikling said:

The Pro-1000 should NOT be your first printer. It is really for the perfectionist at heart and has the expertise to wring out what it can provide. It is possibly best suited for the user who has owned at least two photoprinters. It is definitely a printer for the person who has mastered color management and understand what is necessary to accomplish the best prints. If you've owned earlier dye printers, owned an Epson K3 machine and then want to see what is beyond then consider this machine.
It is not that I have vested interests because I also have a K3/HD Signature Inkset for the Epson machines as well and also soon a EV6 Signature ink which addresses the black issue and provides excellent color matching with Epson OEM Claria not seen before. Additonally, if you want to push the boundaries of pigment ink with Gloss/Chroma Optimizer then this machine should be considered. If you are anxious about running costs then this machine is not for you. Even for those who want to stick with OEM because they simply want the best. There is a solution that can reduce running costs and give up NOTHING in performance when refilling.

The Pro-1000 is misunderstood, it is actually a desktop sized wide format machine for the printing aficionado. If you purchase a high performance sports car and asks if it requires premium, then the machine is not for you. Premium allows more performance because it has a denser caloric content to begin with.

The other thing is that any machine that has more nozzles will require more maintenance ink volume it is simple as that. That applies to Epson as well as Canon. Imagine you have ONE nozzle per channel, to maintain that nozzle will require far less ink than if you had 512 nozzles. Does that make sense? I thought so. Why more nozzles? to provide more combinations among all colors allowing smoother gradations. Remember that color management math assumes you have an infinite number of combinations and thus an infinite number of nozzles. The math does not know you are working with a limited number of nozzles. More nozzle combinations - better images- because you are following the math closer and like any machine....there reaches a point where there are decreasing returns and to push the boundaries requires higher requirements hardware wise and higher costs. This machine is pushing boundaries.

Canon will not explain that but that is where this machine is at. The Pro-10 can give you close to the performance for a lot less money a fraction of the cost. Therein lies the aspect of diminishing returns, the Pro-10 is better suited for most people. For some, they gotta HAVE it. It's like High End Hi Fi it is simply not worth the cost until you experience it and can afford it.

The irony to this printer is thus, it is simply so easy to refill that nearly anyone can do it. It is even easier to refill than a $29 printer and you can get OEM ink to do it as well.
So even for those wanting to stick with OEM, why would you not refill if you are a refiller at heart?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JBFb0GRS32o

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vzUPvqQ_gnI

Click to expand...

I like and understand the analogy to High End Hifi when referring to the pro 1000. Have both . As you say you have to experience it, afford it and may I also add “appreciate it”. Perhaps that is why I have a Fiat and not a 911 !

Flying Scotsman said:

@mikling The landscape has changed dramatically since the fall of 2017. There is refilling and there is serious refilling.

Could you please expand on this statement I am always looking for the best ink when I am refilling. I would like to find ink that doesn't suffer from fading and all the other problems you find when using 3rd party inks. I think i am serious about refilling so am I missing something.

Click to expand...

Well I am getting older and nearing a time I should think about when I call it quits and when that day approaches, I want to leave behind something that was done properly. So what changed in 2017. I got tired of excuses for aftermarket ink. Inspired by Jose R. who informed me of potential chips in the near future for the Pro-1000. I collaborated with the ink lab I had been working with to embark on an inkset for the Pro-1000. I then started to look at how this printer actually works and how it operates. The inklab provided the building blocks for the inkset via generic inks and components and thereafter it was me the mad scientist in the lab.

Thereupon I uncovered aspects to this printer that even Canon does not disclose for fear it would possible cut into the sales of it higher machines.

At this time there was NO SOLUTION for the Epson P800. Epson had done exactly what I had described was likely happening. Even the famous Cone Inks had not figured out what the situation was and they were Epson specialists! So essentially at that time, the only possible solution for 17" carriage desktop printers was that the Pro-1000.
Canon has a built in densitometer in this machine. It is not disclosed why and only by asking higher levels of Canon support did they disclose yes it was indeed I think the same one as in the Pro-2000. Why would they do that? Hmmm... At the given prices Canon is charging for this machine, it is a similar situation of them buying market share. It is worth more than the price they have ascribe to it. Really. It's a complicated machine is a compact package ( relatively compact) When I took delivery of a Pro-1000, it was delivered via a truck with a powered tailgate.! The lack of panorama is an intentional thing from a product planning marketing aspect...they want you to move to a Pro-2000 for roll feed for panoramas. If they offered panorama on a 1000, it would decimate the volume on the 2000. The 1000 is like a teaser machine for Canon.

Next thing was that the instructions warn about placing on a level surface and indeed there are built in level AND inertia sensors on this machine. It also warns about moving after the machine has been initiated. Why? intermediate ink tanks that are open to the atmosphere and holding substantial amounts of ink INSIDE the printer.

What are the implications? Well. ...that thinking that using colors that simply think they should be close enough and then profiling away would fix everything. ( As it turns out, that thinking is actually incorrect even in other normal printers as we shall come to see. You will note that like HiFi, you only apply feedback or correction signals AFTER you have made a good performing circuit. Applying LOTS of feedback in an effort to correct a poor circuit is simply wrong. Same story in printers, you can make good profiles BUT if the inks do not closely follow the RIP that is built into the printer, your output will suffer. I learnt that the hard way via 3 years with the Pro-10.) The Pro-10 was also at the same time bothering me. It is simply NOT my style to have half ass solutions. Never did that in life and in my studies. I always strived to be a perfectionist and I always want to win contests and in my endeavours I mostly met thos challenges. So I also wanted to fix the solution to the Pro-10 as well.

So knowing that the inks were mixing continually INSIDE the printer and having a substantial amt in there meant that the inks going in would have to be dam_ close or else what's the point of messing with a printer like a Pro-1000.

To date NO ink maker had been successful in making very close matching inkset to the OEM. There is a reason why? It takes a lot of work and effort and time is money and guess what? All other ink makers were not close anyways so they always tell you you HAVE to reprofile.
I was not taking that SH_t. I was going to do it. Irregardless of the effort because mikling is mikling. I want near perfection and I'm in for the challenge. Months and months of work went figuring out how to match colors and determine adjustments to individual colors. Even then HUNDREDS of prints were made to come figuring out the adjustments necessary and these fell sometimes into less than 1% formula changes.
Essentially, if I were to charge my lab time out and compare that to the profits of the inks. It would not pay. Simple as that. I did it because i was a madman. My wife told me to stop.....it is aftermarket ink afterall, what do you expect?

In the end I had come to certain conclusions, if you want it done properly, sometimes you just GOTTA use OEM if comparable was not on the shelf. As it turns out that indeed was the case for certain colors and I ended up with that.

So to cut a long story short. At the end after I introduced the Signature Edition inksets and there is reason why I called it that. Because in all likelihood there will never be anything that will surpass it unless it is the real OEM itself. I am putting my reputation on it.

The same challenges actually lie in store for Epson printers as well, the pigment one especially because those tubes ARE in fact intermediate tanks and guess what new colors rolling into those tubes do NOT wash away the OEM colors immediately AND they don't arrive at the same time either. So even if you get a profile, for say a P800, P600, 3880 and R3000. When you introduce that ink, it takes a while to flush out the OEM and in the meantime, that profile ain't worth nuthin. So I decided to make a Signature Edition for the Epson K3 and HD printers as well, you can see Jose R. tests of it in youtube . That is the only proper solution IF you are serious about better photo printers. So essentially in 2017, I remade the story of what one should expect in refilling IF you are serious about your image quality.

So does that answer your question about "serious". I truly believe that If the Signature inkset does not fulfill your needs then you have to revert back to OEM. The other reason is that I am getting old and I do not wish to mess around with inksets too much anymore. I feel I will have put out some serious inksets for the users of the better photoprinters and I will begin to mess with other things.....like firebottles. Audio vacuum tubes.

When I was younger this was something I could not bother it. Yearly changes of tubes and tube rolling. I stuck and experimented with Solid State but before I leave this earth. I want to mess with these vacuum tubes, even if they are costly and need maintenance. So like the Pro-1000, reliability is not everything. Sometimes performance is all that matters regardless of cost.....to a degree. Because once you are a refiller, you are a refiller even if you CAN afford OEM because it gives you kicks. ( that is a 70s term,)

WilsonLaidlaw said:

A number of the large format Canon printers are notorious for feed drive line problems, failing gears and other small parts, often made from nylon or other plastic. There is a reason most professional photographers stick to Epson for large format printers, notwithstanding the head blocking problems. The mid format Canons are known for excessive ink use on cleaning cycles and unlike the Epson Stylus Pro and Surecolor printers, they don't have user replaceable ink dumps/service tanks. Again I would say stick to Epson, with whom I have no connection other than a satisfied customer.

Click to expand...

I have no vested interest in Canon. Yes, I sell a lot of Canon aftermarket stuff but do know that I also own the whole Canon ProDesktop range, the Pr0-1000, Pro-1, Pro-10, Pro-100, Pro9000, and Pro 9500MkII as well as the complete Epson Range of Desktops as well. The P800, P600, Pro-3880, R3000, R2880 as well.

In fact last rememberance day, I took my Epson P600 to a photoshoot for war vets and their families and together with 2 other phtographers we were making free portraits for them and their families. In such a situation the P600 was much better suited ( twice ink capacity) rather than the Pro-10 etc. ( Why? I could reset ALL the chips and have full carts for the whole day and not worry about refilling on the fly!) There are times when Epson is better suited.

In the past Canon did not build great wide format printers and they were known to fail more often than Epsons. There was mainly Epson and OEM machines by Mutoh etc and a whole bunch of others based on the Epson chassis. Canon did not take printing very seriously back then. Are they comarable today in the wide format area? I don't know but it is a fact they were more trouble in the past.

BUT you are also missing something very important. I always said, you need to know who you are. I also smile when I see people ascribe performance to what the PROS are using. Yes. Here's an example. Audio again. I apologize. You sometimes see folks who say look the Pros are using a certain brand of amplifiers or speakers so they must be the best and I will buy those same or similar items with the same brand. They must be the best or pros would not use them. Right? Wrong.
The Pros in sound reinforcement or sound systems do not always value the highest fidelity. The most important attribute to them is reliability. Plain and simple as a pro- you cannot afford to have a system fail during an event. This is far more important than the fidelity...which in reality sucks. Sorry but it is true. They want low noise and reliability. So they choose rugged components that are of low noise on sensitive drivers and are easy to transport.

It is somewhat the same reason why I chose to use the P600 in the event because it is reliable enough but the important attribute was the cartridge capacity. Would it produce a superior photo than the Pro-10. Not likely because of the gloss differential and both have similar photo quality for portraits. Similarly, if support for Canon is lacking in a town, it is more likely that a Pro should choose an Epson if more support is available.

Now before I leave this topic. At the end of 2017, my prior R2880 died when the mainboard failed. I took it to Epson Authorized Service Center to be repaired and declined the offer for repair. The cost? No absolutely not because of that. They wanted $300 to replace the mainboard. So why did I not choose to go that route. Because the Authorized Epson Service Center, despite having FULLY trained Epson technicians are unable to repair the printer to a state similar to a machine leaving the factory. I require a machine as "average" as possible so any profiles I create will work with the pool of R2880s in the real world.

If a mainboard of printhead needs to be repaired or changed in an Epson printer, the service center will be unable to return the machine in a state that is what the factory specs. Reread that statement. When a mainboard or printhead is replaced, it needs to be recalibrated. These are separate from the calibration voltages marked on the printhead itself. These voltages are entered back into the NVRAM on the mainboard but after that the printer needs to be recalibrated using specific papers and a factory program.

I was able to verify that this last piece of the puzzle is NOT done by Epson in NA. This program is inside some software that they have but do not use or it is simply not available which was the case for the R2880. The service manual clearly states and gives reasons why it should be performed but Epson does not do it.

So how does this relate to the Pro-1000. Well it has a removeable printhead. So if a new printhead ( which is very costly BTW) is needed the printer will self recalibrate the printing parameters and bring the machine back to a specified state and this is user invoked but the process is automatic. This should be done periodically even with a perfectly running Pro-1000.

Why? you might ask? Well in my previous post you will note I spent a ton of time on understanding the real world performance of inks in 2017. I actually discovered why Canon provides this. We know that paper batches can affect color output. Well, this calibration will take of that WITHOUT re profiling to a very large degree. So similar to monitor calibration to which there really are two stages, calibration and then characterization. Characterization is really the profile. I know many profiling packages do not distinguish two stages but they are taking a shortcut. Ok, back to the printer. When inks are made there are in fact a whole bunch of factors that determine what gets printed out and ink WILL vary. Even OEM ink. How much and is it noticeable. Depends on how picky you are about it. Canon knows that the purchasers of the 1000 are going to be picky. When they provide this level of precision, they are not messing around. I ran into this when I uncovered jetting characteristics of ink in my development. This is something the chemists in the ink labs have no clue about. No wonder prior canned inksets from ink companies sucked in the past and the only solution is to profile and then I explained before, profiling is not the total solution. It helps immensely toward excellent results but before profiling the inkset should give pretty good results before profiling.

Now Epson printers are ALSO subject to jetting issues as the piezo material will slowly degrade over time and the electronic circuits AND the ink itself will drift. But Epson keeps their mouth shut or folks have never realized this. Ignorance is bliss I suppose. Only in their most expensive models will this be accomodated. But hey remember the 1000 is competing against the P800 which does not address this issue.

Well of the Epson I currently own, my 3880, P800 and R3000 (replaced twice by Epson) all needed service the3880 was out of warranty and the P800 was replaced. I thank my lucky stars that the P800 through the help of the tech at the service was replaced with a new machine because those refurbed machines are NOT NECESSARILY factory spec if the mainboard or printhead had been replaced. So yes, problems do occur on new machines and it is best to keep them unmodded during their warranty period especially with Epson since they want their defective machines back. Canon does not want their machines back...even the Pro-1000.

This is long but yeah, as Hat says I have too many friggin printers and yes that is true. But I need it and I have learnt a LOT by having all these machines. If I have a 17" wde panorama, I have the 800. I keep the 3880 for PK, the P800 on MK and similar situation for the R3000 and P600 to minimize the use of that autoswitch wil WILL eventually fail. They ALL do on Epsons.

So again, which printer is for you? it depends on you and what you want out of it and who you are. There is no BEST. Anyone proclaiming a best doesn't get it.

jgperry said:

I like and understand the analogy to High End Hifi when referring to the pro 1000. Have both . As you say you have to experience it, afford it and may I also add “appreciate it”. Perhaps that is why I have a Fiat and not a 911 !

Click to expand...

Well there are FIATS and there are FIATs. Hey when I was young I used to go with my priest who hosted a Sunday softball game. A bunch of us would climb into his FIAT 500 and he would take us to the game. Like this one
http://press.moma.org/2017/06/acquisition-fiat-500/
This was circa 68-71. Not the new FIAT 500. But then again there was the really outrageous Fiat 128s that won rallies in the 70s and then there was the ABARTH models of these carrs. I remember the hot fiat 128s equipped with Campagnolo Magnesium Wheels and Abarth Free flows with headers with some nice Webers ( Not barbeques). Way back then. Yeah I know some FIATS but the FIATS most remember was when they were called "Fix It Again Tonio". No racist overtones here OK?
I'd love to have an old Fiat 500 today. It would be so cool except could I still fit into it? Hmmmm....

About the HiFi. This year about to build myself a souped by Tube Mosfet Hybrid Preamp. I took out my Statement Power Amp build from 1985...had everything you could throw into a power amp. I retired it 1994 when I found its brother I built in 1989 was just as good. Until this year when I recapped it and then started listening with much better DACS and it was easily easily so much better. Why? the source was not a much superior DAC. So when I compared the two in 1996. The source sucked and they did not sound different. But with a better source today. No comparison.
That's why one needs to review what they used to compare. Today's cameras can capture a lot that we were not paying attention to before.

Gamut plots and volumes are somewhat like using distortion specs and frequency response to compare products which as you know, once you reach a certain level becomes irrelevant and somewhat meaningless and actually wring. It's what we perceive that really counts.

Today's 911 are as you possibly hinted at are softened. The older ones were more visceral and you wore the machine. Maybe one day I will get what I yearned for and experienced so little that I could not afford it. But today I want something soft and truth be told, as you get older, comfort becomes more important than performance. So when a young relative asks what is a good car, I look at him and smile because what I consider good to me now is utterly unsuitable for him. I just tell him, enjoy what you get. Life is all experiences, don't always take the safe road.

@mikling are you sure you wouldn’t be better off contributing to some other forums that cater specifically for Cars and Hi-Fi’s.

You do remember this is the printer knowledge forum, because we oldies like nice short posts, otherwise by the time we get to the end, we’ve forgotten what the post was all about...

mikling said:

It's what we perceive that really counts.

Click to expand...

I ask other people now and then about prints - quality - look - etc and get a wide range of comments, one person may step back by 3 feet from a poster and comments that it is a nice motive - good contrast and a shot just at the right time by the second, and somebody else may take off his glasses, gets closer and closer and tells me that it must have been printed on a Canon as he judges it by the dithering pattern - o.k. - I told him I printed it on an age old Epson Pro 7600.....there is more than technical data, measurable details , most of it goes along personal preferences , but there are other comments which can be related back to technical details - like a small contrast , colors don't really look well-saturated on flower images, if it's not a problem in the image
itself it can be a small gamut by a wrong combination of inks and paper for this image in question, so knowing something about the technical details can help understanding some of such comments.

Reviving the topic... I was also considering the Canon Pro-1000 printer for hobby printing with rather small workload (about 20 A3/A2 prints per month). Does such a printer make sense for such a workload? Besides of the cleaning routines, which is OK for me as long it ensures the perfect quality, I have concerns that I just wouldn't consume a whole set of inks in 6 months, which is a recommended period for using up an open ink tank. What do you think? Can the ink be used also for longer period?