Saturday, 13 August 2011

Photographer for the Day plus Photo Books

I am now available for daily hire for that special event.  No matter what the event you can get me to record it from start to finish, setting up to packing up.  I will follow your brief throughout the day taking candid and posed shots of everything that makes the day special.  Once done I will add copies of all the images* to a DVD for you to keep.  You can use this DVD to select as many images as you like to be included in the layout of a Jessops photo book.  The layout design will be professionally designed, tailor made to suit the occasion and the images selected.  The layout fee for one layout is included in the daily rate and you can use this to order as many books as you like.  The books will be charged as cost price so the prices you see on the Jessops web site are the prices I will charge you.  Should you wish more than one layout, either because you want different images in a separate book or you want books of different shapes, that can be arranged for an extra fee.  
Apart from photo books, you can also use the images on the DVD to order prints, large canvases, pet portraits or any of the products offered by Sally Jane Photographic Art.  
All images on the DVD will measure 700 pixels along their longest edge making them more than suitable to share on the internet.  Please reference the images as taken by Sally Jane Photographic Art if you do out of courtesy. 
For further information and prices visit the Sally Jane Photographic Art web site.

Labels: , , ,

Tuesday, 19 July 2011

Jump Up Media cold call con

Foreword

I have added this paragraph after this mater has been successfully resolved  as it is important you know this before reading the rest.  All the following paragraphs were added shortly after each event. Jump Up Media t/a Talking Fast Ltd may well be a genuine company, I cannot prove otherwise.  However my involvement with them left a lot to be desired.  If you do get involved with this company I would advise you to take the following precautions;
  • Don't agree to pay any money on the first call.
  • Make a note of the names of everyone you speak to and document it.
  • Make sure they send you detailed information of the service they will supply you with including a complete list of the key phrases that will be used either in writing or via e-mail BEFORE you pay them any money.   Credit card companies won't do anything unless you can provide written proof.
  • Shop around and check out Google's other authorised partners under Google adwords. 
Please Note: I cannot vouch for the authenticity of any of the third party comments on this blog.
    The Story from the beginning

    I don't normally buy anything from cold callers full stop but today I got caught.  I had been looking for ways to further advertise my Pet Portrait Service and had had friends recommend giving Google a try on several occasions but I had always dismissed the idea.  Today I got called by someone who I shall refer to as 'CJ', who said he was calling on behalf of Google.  He was offering top ranking for my web site for a period of 31 days for 5 key word phrases for just £99.  He seemed to know a bit about my web site and made it sound very convincing.  What he was selling;
    • I was told that within 48 hours my web site would be placed at the top of a Google search page for my 5 key phrases and if it didn't I could get my money back.  
    • I would be able to change those key phrases at any time for free should I wish.  
    • He also assured me that he would be my personal Google account manager and I could ring him at any time should I have a question or problem. 
    • After the 31 days if I wanted to continue I would just need to let them know but it would not automatically renew.
    • All for just £99.  (I wasn't too convinced about the 'just' as it seemed a lot of money for a month but he pointed out I should easily be able to recoup that amount by increased sales.)
    Against my better judgement I decided to give it a go.  It then transpired he was not from Google itself but a company called Jump Up Media t/a Talkingfast LTD a Google Certified Partner.  I checked out their web site which initially seemed genuine enough and even checked that their company was registered with Companies House which it had been for a couple of years.  He said he needed to take payment over the phone but that I would get an invoice e-mailed to me with all the details straight after the call. I agreed to pay by credit card where-upon the price automatically went up by £10 to pay for 'Google inclusion'.  I told him "you said it would be just £99" and he replied that this was a one off free that Google make and he had already explained that to me.  I told him he hadn't said anything about that and as he was now producing extra hidden fees I didn't want anything to do with this and wanted to cancel the whole thing.  He spoke to his manager and they agreed to wave the £10.
    I went ahead with the purchase.  How stupid is that???

    After nearly 2 hours I had not been e-mailed an invoice as promised so I phoned the Jump Up Media back but was told 'CJ' was on the phone so I asked the person about the invoice.  I was told that 'CJ' should not have told my t would be sent straight away as it can take up to 2-3 days but she agreed to get one sent out today.  When it arrived the £99 had gone up to £118.80 as vat had been included.  There had been no mention of vat during my conversation with 'CJ' and I had taken "just £99" to mean just that.  I am not vat registered so cannot claim that back. 

    I got back on the phone to Jump Up Media but once again 'CJ' was not available.  I voiced my concern and was put through to someone I shall refer to as 'AW' in customer services.  I told him I wanted to pull out of the whole deal and get a refund.  He said he could not do that and I should have expected them to charge vat on top of the price quoted but he would listen to the tape and if it was the case that vat had not been mentioned he would, "as a gesture of goodwill" refund my vat.  He promised to get back to my by 5pm tonight.  He also said that for future months I would only be charged £99 inclusive of vat should I decide to stay with them.  I told him there was no chance of that.

    Jump Up Media may well be a genuine company and my site might get top ranking for 31 days but if that is the case why do they need to employ such sharp selling techniques?  Unfortunately there is no way of contacting Google in the UK to confirm their credentials as Google don't supply a contact e-mail or phone number.  Google do supply a postal address in London but by the time my letter had found it's way to the correct department and I had received a reply my 31 day period would probably be almost up.  It remains to be seen if I do get my vat back but I will let you know either way.   In the mean time, if you do get contacted by Jump Up Media steer well clear.

    ooOOOoo

    17:30hrs - No call came from Jump Up Media so I contacted my credit card company.  I was informed that as the transaction had not fully been processed onto my account they could not do anything at this stage but I should call them back in 3 days time.  By then the details of the transaction should be on my account and I can report it to their complaints team for investigation.  He told me that I had a case as I only authorised a withdrawal of £99 and they took more.  He said any hidden charges should have been made clear no matter what they were for.  If I don't get any satisfaction from Jump Up Media before hand I will contact the credit card company back on Friday.  Watch this space for updates.

    ooOOOoo

    Wednesday 20th July - Still nothing heard from Jump Up Media so I rang them again this morning about 10:30.  I asked to speak to 'AW' but was told he was on a call but that he would call me back straight afterwards.

    15:30 - Still no call back from 'AW' so I phoned again.  He was apparently still on the phone but I was invited to hold if I wished.  I said I would but when no one got back to me after 25 minutes I hung up and rang again.  I spoke to the same lady receptionist who said she was sitting next to 'AW' and he was still on the same call.  She said she would pass the message on to phone me back as soon as he finished his call which she expected to be in the next 10 minutes.

    No phone call came!

    ooOOOoo

    Thursday 21st July - Well it's been over 48 hours now so my web site should now be coming up at the top of any Google UK search  for each of my key phrases, but it's not even appearing on the first page for any of them!  'CJ' did say if this happened I would get a full refund.  I phoned Jump Up Media and spoke to the same receptionist again who's name I now know and will refer to as 'B'.  She told me 'CJ' was unavailable as he was on the phone.  I explained to her that he told me when he convinced me to sign up with Jump Up Media that he would be my personal Google account manager and I could phone him if ever I had a problem.  She said that as he is in sales he is always on the phone so very difficult to get hold of.  I then explained that it had been over 48 hours and my site was not top of any Google UK page.  'B' said she would have to discuss the matter with tech support and would get back to me by the close of play today.

    In the mean time I have gone through Jump Up Media's terms of service that they sent me.  It states there that they will renew the service each month unless I write to them giving them 30 days notice!  This is contrary to what I was told on the phone before I agreed to the service.

    I have now written a letter to the company pointing out that they are in breach of contract on the 48 hour front and demanding my money back as promised.  I have also informed them I will not be renewing so they are not authorised to take any more money out of my account.  Letter to sent by recorded delivery very shortly.  I am also writing to my credit card company to keep them fully appraised.

    Result!...tentative :-)
    14:55 hrs 'B' phone back (well that was a result in itself).  She told me that the reason my site had not gone live was because 'AW' asked the tech team to put a hold on it as he was investigating the possibility of refunding my money in full.  She then said that she could confirm a full refund would be available if that is what I want but it would need to be via a cheque.  I asked why it couldn't simply be put back on my credit card but she said they did not have that facility.  I accepted the refund via cheque.  She told me it would be put in the post either by end of play today or first thing tomorrow morning.  I thanked her for her help.  Of course, I won't fully believe it until it is in my hands but at least I feel I am getting somewhere.  In the mean time the letters have gone out to Jump Up Media and my credit card company as stated above and I was in the process of composing a letter to Google UK but I'll put a hold on that one for the time being.

    ooOOOoo

    Friday 22nd July - contacted my credit card company again to appraise them of the current situation and to see if my letter had arrived. They did not yet have my letter but would open the case in the mean time.  They would be in contact with me once the letter arrives to see where to take it from there and check to see if Jump Up Media did indeed send the cheque.  They also told me there was nothing to stop Jump Up Media refunding the money back onto the credit card.

    I have just searched Google for Google Certified Partners, which Jump Up Media claim to be as shown on their web site, but Google returned no results for Jump Up Media or for their t/a name of Talkingfast Ltd.   This is where I searched https://adwords.google.com/professionals/search/
     You might like to try it yourself.

    This is looking more and more like Jump Up Media t/a Talkingfast LTD might be a spoof company.

    ooOOOoo

    Saturday morning  - a cheque arrives from Jump Up Media!...the cheque has been written out incorrectly.  The cheque is written for £118.80 in words but the figure in the box is £118.00.  There is a covering letter with it from a person I shall refer to as 'RM' from the Retentions Department. The letter doesn't say much other than to say there is a cheque enclosed for £118.80.  I took this and the cheque to the bank but they won't accept the cheque even for £118 and told me I'd have to get back in contact with the company to ask them to send out a new one.  This could be a genuine mistake but I think this was probably deliberate as a stalling method, after all, there was no reason for them not to simply put the money back on my credit card.

    Looking closer at their web site this company is looking more and more like a fake.  The testimonials page has 3 testimonials with the clients name and web address.  The first testimonial was by a Mr Akay Arnold for a Pan-Asian restaurant in Manchester but the phone number on the web site is not in use so I can't check that one out. There is a e-mail address for Akay but as Jump Up Media also build web sites this restaurant web site might also be fake along with any e-mail addresses.  The second is for The Amblehurst Hotel, also in Manchester and the person leaving the testimonial was Mr A Hussain.  I phoned the hotel, they had never heard of this person but there was no one there to confirm if their hotel had had any dealing with Jump Up Media and suggested I phone back on Monday.  The last was from a Mrs N Dean - B Inspired, a chocolate company but their web site simply doesn't exist.  Draw your own conclusions.

    ooOOOoo

    Monday 25th July 2011 09:04 - Phoned Jump Up Media again and spoke to 'B'.  She is actually 'RM' the  person who sent the letter and cheque.  I pointed out the mistake and she said she would have to get in touch with her manager 'R' as he signed the cheque and would have to write another.  I cannot read the signature on the cheque so I'd just have to take his word for it.  I told her that the credit card company said there is no reason to prevent you simply refunding the money back onto my card.  She said she didn't know why they didn't do that but they never had.  she said she would mention this to 'R' when he came in but he was not in the office yet.  I asked her to get him to call me if he was unable to refund the money back onto my card.

    09:20 - Phoned my credit card company but the charge back department were not open yet.  The lady I spoke to said my letter was still not on my account either although the notes were.  She said if the letter had been posted on Thursday it probably would not get entered onto my account until Tuesday so I should ring back then.  I explained to her the events over the weekend and she advised me to photocopy the letter and cheque and send that into them as this provides stronger proof for the claim, she would update the account accordingly.

    14:25hrs - Still not been phoned back by Jump Up Media so I rang again and spoke to 'RM'.  She said that 'R' had still not been into the office or answered any of his calls but she had left a message on his mobile for him to ring her about this.  She said that she would keep trying but that if she did not hear from him by 3 o'clock she would try and get another manager involved.

    16:00 hrs - I phoned Jump Up Media again and spoke to 'RM'.  She said that 'R' had still not turned up but she was expecting him in soon.  She then said she would make some enquiries in the accounts dept and put me on hold.  When she came back to me she said that 'R' wasn't back you but the dept had already issued another cheque and posted it to me.  I said I was not happy with that as I wanted it put back onto my card.  She apologised and said she had told them that.  I voiced my concerns over the testimonials not checking out and the fact that Google didn't seem to have any record of their company being a Google Certified Partner.  She insisted the company was legit and if I wished I could be put through to a manager to have that confirmed.  I could not see much point in that.  She also told me the web site was in the process of being rebuilt so many of the links were disabled.

    ooOOOoo

    Wednesday 27th July  - I am now in possession of a second cheque with covering letter.  This time it looks OK, it remains to be seen if it gets cleared.  Funnily enough, despite being told that 'R' was not available and this cheque had been issued by someone else in the accounts department also without 'RM's' knowledge, the cheque was signed by the same person who signed the original and the letter was apparently from 'RM'.  Things still don't really add up but as long as this cheque clears I'll be happy.  If I get it paid in today it will still be at least a week before I know for sure.  I will update this blog accordingly either way.

    ooOOOoo

    Friday 8th August - The bank has now had 7 working days to clear this cheque and it is appearing OK on-line so I guess that means it's gone through OK.   Looks like they delivered on their promise after all but just had a strange way of going about it.  Not sure I would have got the same result if I hadn't put up a fight though.

    ooOOOoo

    Latest Update

    Tuesday 6th September - At 12:52 today I was contacted by phone by Andrew Pearson, Operations manager of Jump Up Media.  He was concerned about the catalogue of problems I had had with the company and wanted to assure me they were doing all they could to improve their performance so this would never happen again.  He told me that B had been sent on a training course, another employee had been 'let go' and AW had been given a talking to.  I told him that out of all of them 'B' seemed to be the most genuine and was the only person to return any calls and appeared to do her best to try and sort things out but that she was in the difficult position of being stuck in the middle.  Andrew Pearson then asked me what measures I thought the company should take to improve the service they offer.  I mentioned a list;

    1. They should always return calls when promised.  He said this was being addressed in a training course.
    2. Customers that are cold called should not be expected to have to give out their credit card details straight away but should be given time to think about it and research their key phrases.  He said it was difficult as they needed to get things under-way quickly as only one business of any one type would be called at a time so that there would not be more than one business chasing the same top spot.  He did say that they would probably be able to allow a customer a few hours to think it over and then call them back before the end of the day.  That at least would be an improvement.
    3. All charges should be made clear before people are asked to sign up. He agreed with me on this and said that would be resolved.
    4. A contract or letter of agreement should be e-mailed to the customer including the chosen key phrases before they are asked to pay.  He said that the full terms of service were on their web site (I can't find them but then maybe I'm not looking in the right place) and they could not give the key phrases as the customer might just take them away and use them without buying their service.  I said this didn't hold water because you have already verbally agreed these key phrases on the phone so they could still do that so putting it in writing would not make any difference to that.  He then said that the other reason was because they could not guarantee the chosen key phrases would be available although 99% of the time they would be, but that if they were not they might have to substitute.  I pointed out that this would mean the customer would not know what they were paying for then, so he replied by saying they could change them if they were not happy of we could issue them a credit note.  I said in such instance you should offer them a full refund.
    5. Refunds should be put back on the credit card.  He said they didn't do that because it would often take up to 10 days for the funds to be clear that way but they were looking at offering a direct bank transfer.  I said you should let the customer decide and if they want it put back on their card you should agree to do that.
    6. The references on their web site don't currently check out.  He said the web site has been rebuilt but they are awaiting authorisation before it can go live.  Funny, I was told that 2 months ago!  Later in the conversation I said it would not take an afternoon simply to re-write the out of date testimonials on the current web site and replace them with current genuine ones.  He agreed that would be done today.  Worth checking.

    Andrew Pearson then went on to say that all these points would be raised with the intention of putting them into a re-training course and asked me if they were put in place if I would think it would improve their service. 
    I said if all those points were put into place the service would be phenomenally better.
    He then went on to say that my blog was causing them a problem and losing them custom and would I mind taking it down seeing as how he had promised to address all these issued. 
    I said that would be entirely at my discretion and I had no plans to do so.
    He went on to say that my case was a one off, that it was not simply one error but a whole catalogue of errors and as such would not happen again.  I asked him what he intended to do about all the other people that have had or are having problems with Jump Up Media and he promised that he would sort it all out if they contact him. 
    He said he thought my blog presented an unbalanced view of their service and that there was no other bad publicity or comments on the internet about Jump Up Media. He also said that people never write articles to say how good a service they get from companies.  I agreed that it generally is only when someone want to complain that they are prepared to write about it but that they themselves were not helping there as their current testimonials on the Jump Up Media web site did not check out.  This is when he agreed to have them updated by the end of the day.
    He asked me what else he could say that would convince me to remove this blog.
    I replied "Actions speak louder than words"
    He agreed.


    but said that Google had been in contact with them as they were concerned that one of their partners was being seen in this bad light and had told them they should get me to remove this blog.  He also said that "this is not a threat but it had been suggested they take legal action but I said it would be better if I just talk to you". 
    I pointed out that I had just noted the facts and there was nothing slanderous in anything I have said.  Naturally I can't vouch for the authenticity of other peoples comments. I also said that if I did not get any more people commenting on my blog to say they had either bad dealings or had felt they were being trapped by a cold caller from this company then I would assume that things had been put right after a while and remove it but that would take time.
    He spent ages trying to convince me to remove this blog giving me 7 days to do so after which they would have to look at other means.  The conversation eventually ended with no agreement by me.

    Labels: , ,

    Friday, 8 July 2011

    Pet Portrait Stories - Chapter 3

    This is Robbie, a working sheepdog. Robbie was my first paid commission back in 2005. My brief was to capture him while working a flock. I was mesmerised by he focus on the sheep. The day however was gloomy and the first set of shots didn't come out too well so I had to return and do it all over again. It was no hardship as I found it so fascinating.

    Labels:

    Monday, 13 June 2011

    Inkjet Fixative Sprays

    In my previous blog I discussed how with some photographic printers, such as Epson Photo Stylus printers for example, you have two types of black ink; one for matt papers (MK) and one for glossy (PK).  I also discussed what happens when you print on glossy paper using matt black ink and suggested this could be fixed using a fixative spray.  In this blog I will discuss the merits of the most easily available of these sprays.

    So to recap, the problem with using matt ink on glossy paper is that is does not penetrate the surface of the paper and will rub off.  It also produces a matt finish in areas of the image where mainly black ink is used.  Using a fixative spray 'fixes' the ink so it will no longer rub off and can help cover up the unevenness of the glossy surface by applying a sheen to the matt areas.

    The most readily available brand of fixative spray on the internet is a brand called Giant.  They produce three types, Matt, Satin and Gloss.  Each 300ml can retails at between £6 and £12 depending on where you shop.  There are other brands on the market but they need hunting out.  Another common alternative is cheap hair spray which you can get the same quantity for less than £2.

    I tested the gloss and satin versions of the Giant fixative and compared them with a supermarket own brand hairspray.  I printed a couple of images on glossy photo paper and allowed them time to dry.  One using my Epson R3000 printer with pigment inks and one on a standard Hewlett Packard photo printer using standard dye based inks.

    I sprayed a section of each with the Giant gloss fixative following the manufacturers instructions taking care to mask the areas I did not want sprayed so I had a clear line between the coated area and the uncoated.  You must use this stuff outside as the fumes are very pungent. After leaving for 10 minutes to dry I looked at the results.  The finish was duller than the original gloss of the printed photo except over the matt black areas.  The overall finish was smooth and even but not really a high gloss finish I was expecting, however, the black ink was certainly well fixed and would not rub off.  The instructions on the can did say a second coat could be applied so I gave it another light spray.  This time the finish was less glossy once again but still very even.  I would say the overall finish was most satin than gloss.  One the image printed using the HP printed with dye based inks there was a noticeable colour change although that lightened as it dried but didn't go completely.

    I then performed the same test with the Giant Satin fixative.  The results were amazingly similar and if anything I would say the finish with the Satin spray appeared actually slightly glossier but that could be my imagination as I was expecting it to be the reverse.

    There is a YouTube video advertising this stuff and there the guy using the spray seems to saturate the images with the spray when he applies it so I thought I would give that a go as well.  Initially it appears to give a good gloss coating that way but once it dries the finish is rough and uneven, so stick to the manufacturers instructions.

    Last I tested the hairspray.  This dies a lot faster and is not so pungent in use as it is designed to be used indoors.  Once dry the results were evenly glossy and it even improved the shine on the matt black areas.  The black ink was fixed and would not rub or wash off.  A second coat could be applied within minutes if required.  On the HP prints though, there was a marked change in colour far worse than using the Giant fixative.  This did not reduce at all upon drying.

    I also tried the Giant sprays on photographic matt papers to see if you could turn a matt print into a glossy or satin one.  The answer is 'No'.  Perhaps if you were to use up a whole can of the stuff with repeated spraying it might work but clearly it is not intended for this and the result is not very pleasing at all.  Hairspray will fix a matt print but there are also matt fixative sprays available should you need them.

    Conclusion
    On the face of it it would appear that hairspray is the outright winner here.  It is cheap and in the short term seems to give the best results on pigment prints if you want a gloss finish.  If you are happy with a satin finish then either the Gloss or Satin spray will do.  I say 'in the short term hairspray is the winner' because the fixative sprays claim they incorporate colour fixing properties preventing your colours from fading over time and also have an anti-yellowing formula.  The same cannot be said about hairspray and it is quite possible that it will yellow with time.  As for the colour fastness, well, pigment inks are not supposed to fade anyway.

    ooOOOoo

    Well it's been five weeks since I wrote this and since then I have had my test images stuck up in my south west facing study window to see if they yellow.  It may be too early to say but so far neither the fixative spray or the hairspray has shown any signs of yellowing.  All the images have curled up though and when I tried to flatten them out by bending them the other way, those images that were given a second coat of either the fixative or hairspray, cracked across their surface. 

    Labels: ,

    Wednesday, 8 June 2011

    Matt Black v Photo Black Ink

    Most of my colour printing is done on photo matt papers but I do occasionally use glossy papers too.  My Epson printer utilises two full black inks.  One for matt papers called Matt Black (MK) and one for glossy papers called Photo Black (PK).  On my previous Epson printer (R2400) if I wanted to switch my media from matt to glossy paper I had to unplug the matt black ink and plug in the photo black.  the printer would then perform a head clean to remove any residual ink before printing.  My new Epson R3000 both blacks are installed but switching between them involves the printer flushing out the old ink from the tubes so there is no cross contamination.  Either way, it wastes ink so you don't want to be doing it too often or just for the sake of a one off print.

    So what happens if you don't switch?
    Well if you are using Epson ink with Epson paper then you probably haven't gone to the trouble to get any custom profiles created.  In which case you are stuck with switching inks as you cannot select any of the glossy paper profiles if you have matt black ink installed and vice a versa.
    If you are using quality third party paper the manufacturers will supply generic profiles for that paper for your printer.  They will be on the paper manufacturers web site somewhere usually called ICC profiles.  You will need to select the paper & your model of printer and probably either MK or PK ink.  The profile will then be made available for you to download and install.  This is not a custom profile but normally these will be close enough.  For custom profiles you normally have to print of a set of colour patches which you send away to be read by a spectrometer and the resulting profile will be e-mailed back to you.  Once you have your profiles you can select them no matter which type of black ink you have installed allowing you to print on either matt or glossy papers with either matt black or photo black ink.

    Matt Paper with Photo Black Ink
    If you print on mat papers with photo black ink the results can look a bit flat.  The high absorbency of the paper means the black ink soaks in more and looks less black, more very dark grey.  As a result there can appear to be a lack of contrast in your images. If you are going to regularly use PK ink on matt paper I would recommend getting some custom profiles made up for each matt paper using PK ink and if you make sure you use them each time it will largely compensate for this problem.

    Glossy Paper with Matt Black Ink
    Printing on glossy paper with matt black ink is not generally recommended by ink manufacturers.  The ink looks dull (matt) on the surface while all the coloured inks will retain their gloss.  You will notice this when you tilt the image to reflect the light.  The ink will also not penetrate the paper so the black areas can be rubbed off.  Having said that, if you look at the image flat on you will not see any difference in colour or contrast from a glossy print printed with photo black ink and you can solve the rubbing off problem by spraying the image with fixative spray.  You can even get fixatives with a glossy finish so eliminating the matt texture of the black areas.

    Verdict.
    Swap the ink over if:
    • you are going to be printing an image for sale or exhibition
    • you are going to be printing a large volume so making it worth changing.
    Leave the ink as it is if:
    • you are just printing the off image for yourself 
    • the images are not of high importance.
    Ideally, you need to use the right ink for the right media if you want the absolute best results but we don't always need that level of perfection, do we?

    Labels: , ,

    Friday, 27 May 2011

    Epson Stylus Photo R3000 printer



    My printer died, long live the printer!  Up until recently I had been using an Epson Stylus Photo R2400 A3 printer for all my printing needs.  It was brilliant.  Unfortunately, printers, like all things on Earth, are not immortal and the inevitable happened.  It gave me an error message to say that 'components in your printer have reached the end of their service life'.  Yes there are fixes for this but all are temporary unless you are willing to fork out £200 to have it serviced by Epson.  I decided I wasn't so bought a replacement; the R3000.  

    The blurb was impressive.  Droplet size nearly half the size on the R2400 means finer gradients and less gain when it's not wanted.  New Vibrant magenta inks providing better colour and having both the black inks (matt black and photo black) installed all the time meant no messy change overs.  In practice a lot of this appears to be mostly spin.

    Good Points
    • First I have to say that having both inks installed is a good idea and means I am more likely to print on glossy papers occasionally where as I am mainly a matt paper person.  It has it's drawbacks however which I will list below.
    • The LCD display on the printer provides very helpful information with pictorial step by step instructions when needed.
    • It's quiet, very quiet compared to the R2400 probably because the ink compartment does not move with the printer head while printing.
    • It is easier to load think papers in this machine than it was in my R2400.  No more mis-feeds and if it does it tells you exactly why and how to sort it.
    • The ink cartridges are just over twice the size of the R2400's ink cartridges which means less time spent replacing ink cartridges and hopefully less ink wasted in spent cartridges, but they are twice the price. 
    • A real bonus - you can keep printing right up to the point the the ink cartridges run out without fear of ruining a print because the printer will just pause the printing while you change the cartridge and then continue where it left off.  You won't be able to tell where it paused.  This saves a lot of wasted ink and or paper.
    Bad Points
    • Switching between the black inks uses up a lot of ink by default.  The printer flushes the tubes that run from the cartridges to the printer head of any remaining ink and these tubes are quite long because the cartridges do not travel with the printer head as they used to in previous models.  You use 1ml of ink switching between Photo Black and Matt Black but 3mls switching back the other way!  That's a lot of ink from a 24ml cartridge and a lot of money wasted.  
    •  The printer does not retain the settings you last used after it has been switched off but reverts to it's defaults once switched back on.  This could be a problem if you wanted your printer to keep to the Matt Black ink as the default is Photo Black.  So once you turn it on it flushes out 1ml of Matt Black ink and there is nothing you can do about it but think about all the money you are wasting and knowing you will have to waste a further 3mls switching back again.
    • You can't leave the printer on for more than 8 hours without touching it as it will power off.  It is a good thing to have a auto power off option on a timer but to not allow you to leave it on permanently if wished is annoying especially as it doesn't retain it's last used settings once powered off.  
    • It's bigger than my old R2400 which for me is a bit of a problem as it had to fit in an alcove and now it's a bit tight, but at least I don't have to feed paper in from behind.
    Fixes

    There is a fix for both these issues however but they're not exactly well publicised particularly the ink issue.  If you bring up the printer menu on the printer's LCD panel you can scroll to 'Setup' then select 'Printer Setup' and then 'Black Ink Change Settings'.  Here you can select 'Economy' instead of 'Standard' which is the default.  You will get a warning about possibly losing image quality but believe me, you won't notice it and it will save a lot of ink.  It still performs a short head clean but it's much quicker than it is on 'Standard'.


    As for the default settings you can get the printer to stick to Matt Black but you can't save it as a default as such.  To do this in Windows you need to go to your 'Start Menu' and 'Control Panel'.  Select 'Printers'.  find the Epson R3000 and highlight it. Right click on this printer and select 'Printing Preferences'.  You will see the same dialogue box you get when you send something to it for printing but the difference is that here it will remember the settings even after the printer has been switched off.  In fact, the printer doesn't even need to be on to do this.  Set it to Matt Black or what ever default settings you want.  You can even set the paper type you most use but that is not so crucial.   Now when ever you turn the printer on it will remember these settings.  Just remember though, if you change the ink during printing from whatever you have set as the default and turn the printer off when it comes back on it will change back to the default you have set so if, for argument sake, you, like me, have set your default to Matt Black, but you have a stake of glossy prints to print and so you switch it over to Photo Black, should you not finish printing the images but decide to come back to it later, if your printer is switched off in between you will need to go back into your printer preferences dialogue box BEFORE you switch your printer back on to prevent it returning to Matt Black ink.  Why, oh why, could it not simply retain the setting it had when it was last used????

    Over-all Impressions

    I have to say I was expecting something amazing from this printer on reading the blurb and reviews.  Certainly a big step up in terms of quality from my R2400 so I was a little disappointed when I saw the results.  I printed an image that was identical to the last image I printed on my R2400 using the same paper.  I could see no discernible difference between the two.  OK, maybe if I had taken a strong magnifying glass to it I might have been able to see that the R3000's print was smoother but who looks at photo's that close.  Both images showed excellent detail and colour in my opinion.  The R2400 is no longer in production as it was superseded by the R2880 which is still being sold in tandem with the R3000 but cheaper.  The only real practical differences between the two is that the R3000 carries both black inks where as with the R2880 you have to manually unplug one and plug in the other and the larger ink cartridges in the R3000 but it not certain this will save any money.  So, what it comes down to is how much are you prepared to pay out for these two features?




    Labels: , ,

    Wednesday, 23 June 2010

    Sanderson Regular circa 1904

    Now this camera was a real treat to discover.  I remember my dad using this one a lot.  Mum had placed it in the care of my sister for safe keeping many years ago when she went off on an extended holiday and never remembered to ask for it back.  I had always assumed, like the other camera, that this had been sold after my father's death with his business.  So when my sister came with an old leather box a couple of days ago I was so pleased to discover what was inside.

    The camera is a Sanderson Regular Hand & Filed camera built around 1904 so it would have been old when my dad had it.  It took either glass plate film or hand cut film measuring 5 x 4 inches.  Sadly I only have one of the negatives that was taken on this camera although my mother believes she had some of the glass plates stored away somewhere.  With such large negatives the camera was capable of recording vast amounts of detail which is why my father used to use it despite it's age.

    One Interesting feature it has is it's ability to tilt shift the lens.  Although my knowledge of this kind of camera is very sketchy I believe this would have been used when taking wide angle shot to counteract the distortion.  For instance, when taking wide angle shots of buildings the walls tend to lean out or lean in depending on what angle you hold the camera at.  Tilting the lens helps to correct for that. Today, a tilt/shift lens will set you back hundreds of pounds for a SLR camera but here it was incorporated into the design.

    This particular camera has had a few modification made to it.  I'm not sure the lens is original as they were often swapped and normally they had a brass view finder mounted on the base board but on this camera that has been removed and a glass view finder has been placed on the outside of the case as seen in the top image.


    Still, the camera appears in remarkable good condition and, if I could get film for it, I'm sure it would still take brilliant images.

    I'm glad to have had the opportunity to photograph it.  It will now be returned to my mother's care or, placed on loan to a museum.

    Labels: , ,