Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Remaining ink in Epson 220mL carts  (Read 5364 times)
tsjanik
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 607


« on: March 08, 2008, 09:40:00 AM »
ReplyReply

I needed some archival ink to sign some prints and had the thought to open an empty Epson 220 mL photo black cartridge and use the residual ink.  Much to my surprise there was 50 mL of ink in the bag.  I know Epson was sued over the amount of ink remaining in their cartridges, but the volume remaining amazed me.
In any event, it's a good source of ink with which to sign your prints.
Logged
Ernst Dinkla
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2911


« Reply #1 on: March 08, 2008, 01:05:09 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I needed some archival ink to sign some prints and had the thought to open an empty Epson 220 mL photo black cartridge and use the residual ink.  Much to my surprise there was 50 mL of ink in the bag.  I know Epson was sued over the amount of ink remaining in their cartridges, but the volume remaining amazed me.
In any event, it's a good source of ink with which to sign your prints.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


With 80% ink on the image and 20% left in the cart you can make the signature at 25% of the image size :-)  Actually it is worse, there is also 10% gone into the waste box.

An Epson 9600 that never got the firmware upgrade to reduce the ink left in the carts ?


Ernst Dinkla

Try: [a href=\"http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/]http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/[/url]
Logged
Brian Gilkes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 431


WWW
« Reply #2 on: March 08, 2008, 04:30:51 PM »
ReplyReply

Unfortunately this thread keeps returning. I too have measured 50 ml remaining. I have noticed no change since the mentioned law suit. There can be considerably more than 50ml if you remove a cart and replace it later, say after exchanging inks.
In the past some contributers have suggested that to allow for this, perhaps Epson thoughtfully puts more than 220 ml into a cart. As far as I know no-one has cut open a new cart to find out.
I suspect a new cart contains significantly less than 270ml+. This is realism , not paranoia.
If you know your usage /sq m you can easily use a chip resetter and print on, being careful not to run out and get bubbles in the line. I have done this with no problems in an emergency- usually when Light Magenta takes an unexpected  plunge.
BTW chip resetting is an excellent approach to maintenance tanks that say they are full a long way before they really are. To foil the bean counters at Epson there are cheap pad replacements available, so with a resetter you never need buy another epson maintenance tank and wonder what happens to all that plastic..
Cheers,
Brian
www.pharoseditions.com.au
Logged
alain
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 309


« Reply #3 on: March 08, 2008, 04:37:06 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Unfortunately this thread keeps returning. I too have measured 50 ml remaining. I have noticed no change since the mentioned law suit. There can be considerably more than 50ml if you remove a cart and replace it later, say after exchanging inks.
In the past some contributers have suggested that to allow for this, perhaps Epson thoughtfully puts more than 220 ml into a cart. As far as I know no-one has cut open a new cart to find out.
I suspect a new cart contains significantly less than 270ml+. This is realism , not paranoia.

...

Hi

An easy solution is to work with the weight of the cartridges.  It's rather easy to do, just calculating the ink weight can be "messy".

Alain
Logged
ksporry
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 13


« Reply #4 on: March 09, 2008, 05:19:23 AM »
ReplyReply

This could work, but it is very crude and inaccurate, because we are dealing with a mixture of plastic and ink. You can eliminate the plastic because you measure empty and full cartridges, but you cannot eliminate the ink, because ink does not have the same density as water, meaning that whatever you measure in grams, is not the same number in ml... Yo need to know the density of ink very accurately...
Logged
Ernst Dinkla
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2911


« Reply #5 on: March 09, 2008, 06:12:41 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
This could work, but it is very crude and inaccurate, because we are dealing with a mixture of plastic and ink. You can eliminate the plastic because you measure empty and full cartridges, but you cannot eliminate the ink, because ink does not have the same density as water, meaning that whatever you measure in grams, is not the same number in ml... Yo need to know the density of ink very accurately...
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Not crude at all. Weigh the new cart you get. Weigh the cart that is declared empty.
Put an empty syringe on the scale. Take the last ink out of the cart with that syringe and see what the volume in MLs is and what weight it brings on the scale. It usually is close enough to water (glycols can be lower in weight, pigments higher) to keep the 1:1 ratio. With all the numbers available you get a pretty accurate number of what amount of ink is left in the cart declared empty. I have refilled enough 500 and 220 ML Epson carts to know what I'm talking about.

The same to some extent with waste boxes. In theory the waste ink medium in the boxes should evaporate and doesn't represent the waste ink that flowed into it. Likely that that is correct but you will still be amazed about the weight difference between a new box and one that's declared full. At least a friend who has a Canon iPF9000 and did that rough measurement and counted the carts used wasn't happy with the outcome. It isn't different with Epsons.

We are so often complaining about the ML price of ink but so little concerned about what use is made of it.


Ernst Dinkla

try: [a href=\"http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/]http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/[/url]
Logged
Ernst Dinkla
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2911


« Reply #6 on: March 10, 2008, 07:03:55 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
In the past some contributers have suggested that to allow for this, perhaps Epson thoughtfully puts more than 220 ml into a cart. As far as I know no-one has cut open a new cart to find out.
I suspect a new cart contains significantly less than 270ml+. This is realism , not paranoia.
I
Cheers,
Brian
www.pharoseditions.com.au
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

In the past I have refilled many Epson carts and was well aware of what quantity ink Epson put in their carts and what was left in them when empty. Actually the older 3000-5000-9000 carts with a mechanical system to trigger a switch indicating that the cart was empty used to be better in cart economics than the 9600 and 10000 that represented the first generation of chipped carts and counted by the droplets fired. At that time Epson didn't overfill carts to compensate for what was left in them. The old 9000 carts contained about 20 - 25 ML when empty and had 220 ML in them when new. Say 10% left.

I measured 7 empty 220 ML carts of the 9600 model (actually used on a 4000, carts used from 2005-2007) and they contained on average 35 ML leftover ink.  Pulled the ink out with a syringe in two stages. Really empty carts without any ink are 149-150 grams, I had an odd one that was 157 ML. I have no full ones here so can not measure their weight. Ink ML:GR is 1:1 like water, there could be at most a 1-2% difference on how I measured and the individual ink in carts.

Anyone who can tell me what a new 220ML 9600 !!! cart brings on the scale in grams ?  Based on what I measured and with my experience of the past I would say that Epson sets the counter on this 4000 so there's 16% ink left in the carts and doesn't compensate for it. If Epson overfills the carts to compensate then there should be a weight of approx. 405 grams, if not a weight of approx. 370 grams.

There's no way that an Epson cart filled with 220 ML ink will drain to 0 ML in the printer itself, the gravity fed 9600 probably worse than the (air) pressurised 9800 in practise but both do not have the integrated cart pump of HP (Canon has them too as far as I know). The sideway outlet on the Epson cart + the folding bag in the cart and the limited pressure in the system makes it harder to get all ink out. But 16% leftover should make them work harder to get it right or add extra ink to compensate. Preferably the first as ecological aspects count as well.

There's some mention of the 9600 firmware change on ink use on the page of Alain Briot but it doesn't give any numbers and the cart pictures are confusing, no Epson cart bag folds like a toothpaste tube. It must have been used to illustrate what is left over in ink. BTW, this article of 2003 is fun to read in its expectations of new model features.

[a href=\"http://www.outbackphoto.com/printinginsights/pi013/Epson9600_03.html]http://www.outbackphoto.com/printinginsigh...son9600_03.html[/url]

In general I think weighing full carts and "declared" empty ones and use the 1:1 ratio for grams : MLs is accurate enough to see what is used in the printer and what you paid for. On numbers like 16% a difference of 1-2% in measuring isn't significant.
All the ink that goes through the ink lines isn't used on paper either but that's another story. I suggest you weigh a new waste box and an old one, the last after the first warning to replace it or after resetting it twice = 3 loads of waste ink. If you also keep an eye on the number of carts used in that period you get a better idea where the 84% ink droplets that left the cart have gone, to the paper or to the waste box. There will be evaporation from that waste box so it will be a conservative percentage you will end with.


Ernst Dinkla

try: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/
Logged
Paul2660
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2017


WWW
« Reply #7 on: March 10, 2008, 09:38:09 AM »
ReplyReply

I found that on the 7600 I also had considerable ink left over, I never actually measured it however.  With the 9880, the carts seem to be empty.  I opened my 1st 220 photoblack and it was basically empty, just some ink around bag.  I haven't since opened one but I always shake them when I remove them and there is no movement so I have to feel that 50ml isn't left.  As that is close to 1/4 of a cart, it should make some noise when shaken.

Paul Caldwell
Logged

Paul Caldwell
Little Rock, Arkansas U.S.
Photography > http://photosofarkansas.com
Blog> http://paulcaldwellphotography.com
Brian Gilkes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 431


WWW
« Reply #8 on: March 10, 2008, 04:19:43 PM »
ReplyReply

Thanks for that Paul. If the 880 series indeed almost empties carts this would be a very good sales point for Epson though I doubt they would admit their previous practice. I would expect the 11880 features to come down the line fairly shortly, perhaps by the end of this year. There's a whiff of something else in the wind too, with the breath of August , but if correct; it is being held very tightly. In any case it has been reported the 880 inks are more concentrated , which may see less ink per area, and the clogging and subsequent wastage to the maintenance tank considerably reduced.
The ink is good, but currently much more expensive than most users realise. The pressure from HP and Canon is very welcome.
Ernst;  what are you sticking in those Epson carts?
Cheers,
Brian
Logged
Ernst Dinkla
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2911


« Reply #9 on: March 11, 2008, 03:11:03 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Ernst;  what are you sticking in those Epson carts?
Cheers,
Brian
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Looking back one gets the impression it has been any ink available. For the 3000 it has been Staedtler pigment (8-9 years ago, a month I guess, too dull). For the two 9000s, Lyson Fotonic (a year), Van Son (a month), Generations, a MIS VM Quad B&W + my own mixes of that ink. For the 10000, MIS 7600.  And of course the Epson ones at the beginning. In general the quality of third party inks did become better along this path. Do not forget that the  9000 had a dye ink that faded (and so did the Lyson and Van Son despite the manufacturer's claims) and the Epson pigment ink that followed wasn't better than the Generations pigment  we used already. The MIS 7600 was pretty equivalent to the first UC pigment generation and also better than the Epson Archival pigment in gamut and with less metamerism.

Now with a Z3100 that's more economic on ink, more reliable, good for B&W + color, gloss and matte and with the right ink specs I have lost that desire to experiment while it was a necessity in the past.


Ernst Dinkla

try: [a href=\"http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/]http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/[/url]
Logged
Paul2660
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2017


WWW
« Reply #10 on: March 11, 2008, 07:43:11 AM »
ReplyReply

I would agree Brian,  HP's Z3100 is quite a machine.  I like the ability to create it's own
profiles.  I believe it allows for both the matte and photo blacks to stay in the printer at the same time.  It has 4 blacks instead of the 3 that Epson has.  

Paul C
Logged

Paul Caldwell
Little Rock, Arkansas U.S.
Photography > http://photosofarkansas.com
Blog> http://paulcaldwellphotography.com
tsjanik
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 607


« Reply #11 on: March 11, 2008, 10:21:48 AM »
ReplyReply

Just some additional information obtained from "empty " Epson 220mL carts used on a 4800:

The density of the light black Epson ink is 1.052g/mL.  There was 45 mL of ink remaining in the cart.

I have 3 additional empty 220 mL carts, volume of remaining ink and weights of the carts are:

LC, 177.17g, 25mL measured by syringe
LLK, 186.18g 30-40mL estimate
LM, 177.10g, 20-30mL estimate

These are all carts of Japanese origin, not the newer Chinese ones

I have no full carts, so I can't estimate the weight loss.  It is clear that the amount of residual ink varies which brings up the question: how does the printer determine a cart is empty?  Does anyone know?

The next  time I have a full cart, I'll weigh it before and after use.  I have to agree with Ernst that a great percentage of the ink ends up in the trash or the maintenance tank.

Tom
Logged
Brian Gilkes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 431


WWW
« Reply #12 on: March 11, 2008, 04:19:48 PM »
ReplyReply

Inbuilt profiling would be a boon for most users that either use canned profiles that are notoriously bad, especially from labs and pro shops, or make their own, often without the skills to do so. Continual profile adjustment seems to be critical for thermal heads (HP and Canon) that wear faster than piezo (HP, Roland).The problem is the number of patches is really too low  in the standard profiling set up  and  the procedures for perceptual renderings is not, and perhaps cannot be , standardised. So on board profiling is a move forward, but is very limited for fine  work.
4 K inks may be better , but not necessarily, as they are probably different dilutions of the same ink. The dithering, size of droplets and dot placement are determinants of quality. These parameters seem to be better controlled with piezo heads. Reports so far on the latest printers suggest viewers can pick little between the results , but the Epson 11880 has an edge. I am sure this improved technology will be seen in the next generation of smaller Epson printers.
Quaility in B&W seems to be superior when mainly  K inks are used , say with Advanced  B&W or  with a RIP and  with profiles created  for optimum lumininosity (rather than chromaticity). Correct me if I am wrong, but I don't think this can be done with on board profiling.
Finally, I would be interested in reports of residual ink in the new 11880 carts.
Cheers,
Brian
www.pharoseditions.com.au
Logged
Ernst Dinkla
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2911


« Reply #13 on: March 12, 2008, 05:12:58 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Inbuilt profiling would be a boon for most users that either use canned profiles that are notoriously bad, especially from labs and pro shops, or make their own, often without the skills to do so. Continual profile adjustment seems to be critical for thermal heads (HP and Canon) that wear faster than piezo (HP, Roland).The problem is the number of patches is really too low  in the standard profiling set up  and  the procedures for perceptual renderings is not, and perhaps cannot be , standardised. So on board profiling is a move forward, but is very limited for fine  work.
4 K inks may be better , but not necessarily, as they are probably different dilutions of the same ink. The dithering, size of droplets and dot placement are determinants of quality. These parameters seem to be better controlled with piezo heads. Reports so far on the latest printers suggest viewers can pick little between the results , but the Epson 11880 has an edge. I am sure this improved technology will be seen in the next generation of smaller Epson printers.
Quaility in B&W seems to be superior when mainly  K inks are used , say with Advanced  B&W or  with a RIP and  with profiles created  for optimum lumininosity (rather than chromaticity). Correct me if I am wrong, but I don't think this can be done with on board profiling.
Finally, I would be interested in reports of residual ink in the new 11880 carts.
Cheers,
Brian

www.pharoseditions.com.au
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

For HPs and Canons repeated profiling shouldn't be necessary and is in fact not the right approach either. Given the nozzle control, cleaning process, substitution of nozzles there's no reason thermoheads are less consistent in laying down ink. This is a new generation of thermoheads. The way the cartridges are drained with an integrated pump active per cart and for the Canon a circulating ink channel up to the head there's also less chance of pigment settling anywhere in the system. That's the base the rest builds on.

Repeated profiling isn't needed at all on the Z3100 for a given paper. There's a calibration function that can be used once a month as recommended or can be used voluntarily when a new batch of paper arrives. That calibration will create an even more consistent base to use the profiles on. Profiling in itself shouldn't be used to correct a printer that's no longer delivering linear output on a specific paper etc but calibration should be used instead. RIPs have for that the linearisation function for every printer including Epsons and that done a permanent profile is created on top of it or a generic one can be used. Epson introduced the ColorBase software to give their printers a kind of calibration function about 3 years ago. Not so convenient as it is done on HP's or Canons. The integrated calibration is a step forward for all inkjet printers and the  convenient, integrated profiling makes the use of third party papers much easier.

The issue of rendering intentions, BPC, etc not being standard is a general one and not a printer, profile creator, brand, specific one. The APS extension for profiling includes a profile editor and larger targets. There's an endless debate going on what even more patches deliver.  There's no discussion that linearisation/calibration enhances color consistency in time.

The Z3100 B&W mode benefits of the integrated calibration like the color mode does.    Right out of the box. Custom B&W media  presets can also be calibrated that way for a specific paper, for both the quad or tritone ink selections. On top of that you can make QTR profiles for B&W that are used in the CM of the application you print from. The last can not be done with the integrated profiling of the Z3100 but should theoretically be possible too, the hardware isn't the limit there just some extra software is needed and an extra target. The calibration of the 4 K inks has 48 patches but that happens before the partitioning, a 51 patch profile target on the partitioned K channels should be possible. I have mentioned that 18 months ago when the Z3100 was launched at the Photokina 2006. HP has upgraded more soft and firmware since and who knows what may happen before the Photokina 2008. I have a perfect neutral, measured linear (but calibrated) B&W media preset for Photorag and the custom QTR profile for it.

There's an integrated solution. The perceptual luminosity distribution of B&W prints made with the color mode is based on the (integrated) calibration + profiling done and will not use any color ink either if the file is neutral. The long black generation from 0-100 % in the media preset takes care of that. Color ink will be added though if paper white compensation is set in profiling. As there's no control of black generation it means you have to put a microscope on the graywedge print to check whether there is color used somewhere. There isn't when it is done correctly. I see however a slight Dmax gain in using the B&W mode instead of the color mode.

Going back to ink economy, a neutral KKkk or Kkk only B&W media preset like standard with the Z3100 B&W mode doesn't use color inks for composite grays like Epsons ABW mode still does to some extent.


I think the 11880 should suck its carts better percentagewise like any big bag will drain better percentagewise if compared to smaller bags. Comparing it to the Canon iPF9000 (reported to leave very, very little in the carts, but spits about 12% in the waste box) and the Z6100 (no idea) is then the right way to do it.


Ernst Dinkla

Try: [a href=\"http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/]http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/[/url]
« Last Edit: March 12, 2008, 07:14:45 AM by Ernst Dinkla » Logged
sloow
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 78


WWW
« Reply #14 on: March 15, 2008, 05:13:43 PM »
ReplyReply

I found very little residual ink left in the z3100 cartridges, maybe 5 mls at most. It's a collapsible bag. with a nozzle attached at one end. No problems with that but I do wish one could change a cartridge on the fly.
Logged
neil snape
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1433


WWW
« Reply #15 on: March 16, 2008, 03:34:49 AM »
ReplyReply

The left over in the Z is very low indeed. You cannot in theory introduce air in the line either as there is protection against this happening in the foot of the cart.

I would have thought the constant to use in calculating the empty full cartridges would be to use specific gravity ( density compared to the pure water). IF the above density figures are the same then it's simply terminology.

Very interesting thread though.

Hope the newly announced cartridge recycling program (s) will do something about cleaning up the waste. HP announced this about 4 months ago.
Logged
tsjanik
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 607


« Reply #16 on: March 20, 2010, 12:05:56 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: tsjanik
Just some additional information obtained from "empty " Epson 220mL carts used on a 4800:

The density of the light black Epson ink is 1.052g/mL.  There was 45 mL of ink remaining in the cart.

I have 3 additional empty 220 mL carts, volume of remaining ink and weights of the carts are:

LC, 177.17g, 25mL measured by syringe
LLK, 186.18g 30-40mL estimate
LM, 177.10g, 20-30mL estimate

These are all carts of Japanese origin, not the newer Chinese ones

I have no full carts, so I can't estimate the weight loss.  It is clear that the amount of residual ink varies which brings up the question: how does the printer determine a cart is empty?  Does anyone know?

The next  time I have a full cart, I'll weigh it before and after use.  I have to agree with Ernst that a great percentage of the ink ends up in the trash or the maintenance tank.

Tom

I just realized that I never updated this post, so here's some information:
220 mL full cartridge mass - 385.1 g
empty cartridge mas         - 177.6g

So 207.5g of ink were delivered. Using a density of 1.052g/mL indicates 218.7 mL of ink; I'm not going to quibble over a shortage of 1.3 mL.

Based on the sound it makes when shaken, there is considerable ink left in the cartridge.
« Last Edit: March 20, 2010, 12:10:03 PM by tsjanik » Logged
eronald
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4262



« Reply #17 on: March 20, 2010, 12:59:49 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Brian Gilkes
Inbuilt profiling would be a boon for most users that either use canned profiles that are notoriously bad, especially from labs and pro shops, or make their own, often without the skills to do so.

I have offered to do free profiles for members of this forum, and never received a single response -

Edmund
Logged
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad