Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Printer + pirate-INK suggestion  (Read 22728 times)
goran
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 45


« on: June 28, 2008, 07:32:08 AM »
ReplyReply

I am planning to upgrade my Epson 1290 (=1280).

I am considering these printers: Epson 1400, R1900, R2400 and R2880.

1.)
I want a printer without cogging
(my 1290 clogs if not used every day and somtimes even then).  

2.)
I want to use "pirat-ink".
( I never did that with 1290)
2a.)
With as good colors as OEM
2b.)
and with a longevity comparable to OEM.

3.)
I am from Sweden so I have to order INK from the UK.


ANY suggestion:   PPRINTER + SOME GOOD PIRATE-INK.


/Goran Sweden
Logged
NikoJorj
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1063


WWW
« Reply #1 on: June 28, 2008, 02:41:55 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
ANY suggestion:   PPRINTER + SOME GOOD PIRATE-INK.
/Goran Sweden
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=204160\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
It's funny though - I'd rather think that the "pirate" noun better applies to those who sell their stuff three times higher, just because of their brand.  

Anyway, I'm glad of my InkJetFly BigFoot CIS (for a R1800). Colors are really good (you need to build custom profiles), and for longevity time will tell...
I live in France and bought it in the US without any problem (40$ shipping).

For the R1800, its only weaker point is in B&W : the lack of dedicated gray inks makes it harder to find true neutral tones, without metamerism.  
Strong point : brilliant color prints on glossy or matte media. The gloss enhancer suppresses bronzing and gloss differential.
Useful, but could be improved :  some decent panoramic potential (it lacks a built-in cutter, and as the driver has a quirk you need QImage beyond 1m20 length).
Logged

Nicolas from Grenoble
A small gallery
The View
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 999


« Reply #2 on: June 28, 2008, 08:09:41 PM »
ReplyReply

The problem with third party inks (that's how the "pirater ink men" - no tattoos involved - call themselves, that the canned ICC profiles won't work.

To get close to correct color, you need to handle known entities, like how the ink is applied by the printer, how the paper's own color affects them, etc...

If you have your own spectrometer, you can do your own profiles anyway, but if not...

And I wonder if third party inks are that good.
Logged

Deserts, Cities, Woods, Faces - View of the World.
equiason
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 10


« Reply #3 on: June 28, 2008, 10:27:20 PM »
ReplyReply

I stumbled upon this web site of an ink manufacturer from China.  They even have inks for the relatively new HP Z3100 and Z2100.  Has anyone used their ink?

http://www.ink4you.com/english/
Logged
Schewe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5469


WWW
« Reply #4 on: June 28, 2008, 11:44:37 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
ANY suggestion:   PPRINTER + SOME GOOD PIRATE-INK.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

That's an oxymoron like military intelligence...you may want to read up on 3rd party ink fading at [a href=\"http://www.wilhelm-research.com/]Wilhelm Research[/url]. Shame to buy a nice new printer then screw it up with bad inks...
Logged
abiggs
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 544



WWW
« Reply #5 on: June 29, 2008, 02:49:16 PM »
ReplyReply

what are you trying to accomplish with using third party ink? Only cost savings? If so, you should just look into buying a bigger printer with a better cost/ml cartridge. Think Epson 3800, 4880, Canon iPF5100, etc etc etc.

After all we invest in our camera gear, computer system, printer, software and time spend learning, why throw inexpensive and unreliable ink into the mix?
Logged

Andy Biggs
http://www.andybiggs.com
Africa Photo Safaris | Workshops | Fine Art Prints
Jonathan Wienke
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5759



WWW
« Reply #6 on: June 29, 2008, 06:20:26 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
IANY suggestion:   PPRINTER + SOME GOOD PIRATE-INK.

3rd-party inks are cheap, and may give good color with custom profiles, but expecting decent longevity from them is wishful thinking at best. You want to buy a Maserati and then try to run it on yak urine instead of the recommended gasoline. Stupid.
Logged

NikoJorj
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1063


WWW
« Reply #7 on: June 30, 2008, 06:56:27 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
you may want to read up on 3rd party ink fading at Wilhelm Research.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
A little side note : WIR's papers do seem to apply more on office depot-like inks, the cheapest of the cheap ones... It may well be that the ink4you link above falls into that segment, given their "scanned print" approach for demonstrating ink quality  .

If we're talking about more serious ink manufacturers (like Lyson, Cone, Image-Specialists, InkJetFly, etc... their gamut is [a href=\"http://www.ripitgolf.com/ink_comparison.htm]not that bad[/url] btw), they're not in the scope of Wilhelm's tests AFAIK.

There is at least data available at Aardenburg Imaging, concerning (among others Epson and Canon inks) MIS vs. Epson ink in a R1800 on Epson Luster and Red River UltraProGloss.  
Executive summary : the MIS inkset (I've heard it was made by Image Specialists) performs very poorly on the Epson paper, but on the 3rd party paper it ages "only" about 2-3 times faster than OEM ink (much better results than with the Epson paper, which seems to have a specific aging issue with the MIS inkset, or rather vice-versa   ).
Mileages vary wildly here, and furthermore it's up to everyone to sum up own conclusions from those raw figures.

And for the validity of feeding printers with 3rd party inks... (cling, the coin)   I'll just sum the debate saying that in the particular case of an amateur (not selling prints), a CIS (and therefore, often 3rd party ink, even if it is not compulsory) is the only way to afford a desktop printer (the ones like the OP considers, with tiny & expensive cartridges).
For someone willing to invest a bit more, I fully agree that it is much sounder to go towards a pro printer with big OEM cartridges - and actually, a 3800 is as cheap or cheaper than a 2400/2880 if you consider the ink in it!

Oh yes, and to add a bit to Jonathan Wienke's image, it may be a bit more like cachaça in the Maserati's tank, rather than yak urine, in the best cases   .
« Last Edit: June 30, 2008, 07:08:04 AM by NikoJorj » Logged

Nicolas from Grenoble
A small gallery
goran
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 45


« Reply #8 on: June 30, 2008, 09:03:36 AM »
ReplyReply

OK!  I have made my decision  
I have an Epson R2880 printer on order.  

I am planning to turn to "pirate-ink" after the included ink is gone.

Are there any CIS or refillable cartridges to the R2880. ?


/Goran Sweden
Logged
frankperry
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 9


« Reply #9 on: June 30, 2008, 10:34:01 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
OK!  I have made my decision  
I have an Epson R2880 printer on order.  

I am planning to turn to "pirate-ink" after the included ink is gone.

Are there any CIS or refillable cartridges to the R2880. ?
/Goran Sweden
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=204480\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Try InkRepublic.com, they should have R2880 CIS or refillable carts soon or alrady has it.

I am testing 3800 CIS from them now. Extremely happy with this system and inks.
The ink levels are resettable, same as the waste ink level. System came with 16oz ink for each color, and it's about 70 - 75% saving comparing to oem's. Colors are identical to oem's, I cant tell the difference. I didn't apply any profiles.
Logged
Peter McLennan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1678


« Reply #10 on: June 30, 2008, 10:49:48 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
3rd-party inks are cheap, and may give good color with custom profiles, but expecting decent longevity from them is wishful thinking at best. You want to buy a Maserati and then try to run it on yak urine instead of the recommended gasoline. Stupid.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=204390\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
And your source for such definitive information is...?


Have you ever actually tried printing with third party inks?
Have you ever actually done any tests to see what fading occurs with those inks?

If the answer to either or both of these questions is "no", I respectfully suggest that calling third-party ink users "stupid" is out of line.


I've said it before here and I'll say it again.  I have third-party ink prints hanging on my walls that show zero visible fading after nearly 10 years.

Unless I'm reading them wrong, the charts and data cited in the accelerated tests  indicate that visible fading under normal household conditions may occur in 38 to 57 years.

By then, I won't care.


btw, they state that "normal household conditions" is twice the standard museum level
Logged
Roscolo
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 621


« Reply #11 on: June 30, 2008, 11:37:57 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
.....

1.)
I want a printer without cogging
(my 1290 clogs if not used every day and somtimes even then).  


/Goran Sweden
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=204160\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Then don't get an Epson!  
« Last Edit: June 30, 2008, 11:40:14 PM by Roscolo » Logged
goran
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 45


« Reply #12 on: July 02, 2008, 03:19:44 AM »
ReplyReply

I think I will stick to OEM-ink.

MACWORLD:
( http://www.macworld.com/article/133625/200...2880.html?t=221 )

First Look: Epson Stylus Photo R2880 printer
.......
"The printhead in the R2880 is the same one found in the Stylus Pro printers, incorporating both an ink-repelling coating (also found in the R1900) designed to minimize clogged nozzles and a sensor that regularly checks the nozzles and maintains proper head alignment. According to Epson, the R2880 printhead also undergoes a precise colorimetric calibration at the factory, obviating the need for regular calibration of the printer"
.......
"we were able to print nearly twice as many photos using the same amount of ink on R2880 as we were able to do with the R2400, results that were even better than we had anticipated. While some of this can be directly related to the advanced ink-mixing technology in Radiance, I think that there’s probably more technological improvements under the hood that Epson isn’t specifically talking about"
.......

/Goran
Logged
Ernst Dinkla
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2830


« Reply #13 on: July 02, 2008, 07:33:10 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I think I will stick to OEM-ink.

.......
"we were able to print nearly twice as many photos using the same amount of ink on R2880 as we were able to do with the R2400, results that were even better than we had anticipated. While some of this can be directly related to the advanced ink-mixing technology in Radiance, I think that there’s probably more technological improvements under the hood that Epson isn’t specifically talking about"
.......

/Goran
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I think that only competition forces manufacturers to address complaints of their customers about ink waste, there's no gain for manufacturers to reduce waste. Now we only have to figure out whether the ML ink price between the 2400 and 2880 carts isn't changed as well.


Ernst Dinkla

Try: [a href=\"http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/]http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/[/url]
« Last Edit: July 02, 2008, 07:33:39 AM by Ernst Dinkla » Logged
NikoJorj
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1063


WWW
« Reply #14 on: July 02, 2008, 07:51:28 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
.......
"we were able to print nearly twice as many photos using the same amount of ink on R2880 as we were able to do with the R2400, results that were even better than we had anticipated. While some of this can be directly related to the advanced ink-mixing technology in Radiance, I think that there’s probably more technological improvements under the hood that Epson isn’t specifically talking about"
.......
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

See [a href=\"http://www.printerville.net/2008/05/26/first-look-at-epson-stylus-photo-r2880/]original review[/url], and note that there has been an erratum to this estimation (see bottom of the page) :
Quote
We found that, contrary to our initial results, the R2880 and R2400 ink yields were actually pretty similar, with a slight edge to the R2880.
Logged

Nicolas from Grenoble
A small gallery
Peter McLennan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1678


« Reply #15 on: July 02, 2008, 09:20:12 AM »
ReplyReply

I've just finished a day-long battle with my Epson 4800.  Clogging, of course.  Three "auto" runs and several other techniques finally returned all the nozzles to normal operation, but I have a waste basket full of useless printed ink patches and a "waste" tank overflowing with "waste" ink.  This is extremely annoying and extremely expensive.

A few months ago, as a test, I changed the 4800's black channel to MIS bulk ink and I've been doing some black-only printing as well as normal colour and Avanced BW printing with it since then.  During the nozzle cleaning debacle of yesterday, guess which channel showed NO clogging whatsoever, before or after?

Right.  Exactly.  The MIS bulk ink black channel.  It has shown zero clogging since it was installed.  

As soon as the next accounting cycle comes around, I'm changing the rest of the printer over to all-MIS inks.
Logged
Wally
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 64


« Reply #16 on: July 02, 2008, 11:21:40 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
As soon as the next accounting cycle comes around, I'm changing the rest of the printer over to all-MIS inks.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=205010\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

FWIW I find the MIS inks to be better than the Epson ones at a fraction of the price. The customer service at MIS is also top notch.
Logged
Wayne Fox
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2826



WWW
« Reply #17 on: July 02, 2008, 11:44:43 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Then don't get an Epson!   
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=204695\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I have 2 3800's, each about a year old.  I have had one clog, easily cleared, once.

I have never had a clog with my r800.  I had a 2400 for over 6 months and never had a clog.

My 11880 is now 9 months old, and has had 1 small clog in 1 channel that was easily cleared. (This printer sits for weeks at a time, then gets heavy use.)

A friend of mine has been running a 9880 for about 6 months now, and had one clog very early on, none since.

Clogged heads are certainly not the issue they once were.
Logged

mmurph
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 507


WWW
« Reply #18 on: July 02, 2008, 03:59:39 PM »
ReplyReply

With all due respect:

As a professional, I need concrete testing information on ink longevity and gamut before I can use it for prints that I sell. Antecdotal information is not adequate.

I do use some 3rd party inks, for proofing. But to make a blanket statement that one ink is better than another - or worse - with no data to back up it is meaningless.  

Even Jon Cone acknowledges that the Epson inks are excellent:

Epson unarguably makes terrific inks that give chemists terrible headaches when they are charged with trying to come up with an ink that is as good as! We will honestly say that our inks are not better than Epson inks. But we can also honestly say that our inks are as close as possible to Epson Ultrachrome K3 in comparison to competing brands. We did come up with a great ink.

And Cone inks are unquestionably some of the best non-OEM inks out there.

I have looked at the avalilable data on most 3rd party pigment inks on the market over the last 8+ months.   Most of them lack the type of data required to make an informed decision.  Although many imply otherwise.  
« Last Edit: July 02, 2008, 04:18:49 PM by mmurph » Logged
Jonathan Wienke
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5759



WWW
« Reply #19 on: July 04, 2008, 11:44:13 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
And your source for such definitive information is...?
Have you ever actually tried printing with third party inks?
Have you ever actually done any tests to see what fading occurs with those inks?

If the answer to either or both of these questions is "no", I respectfully suggest that calling third-party ink users "stupid" is out of line.
I've said it before here and I'll say it again.  I have third-party ink prints hanging on my walls that show zero visible fading after nearly 10 years.

Great. Do you have the same image printed with OEM ink on the same paper exhibited under the same conditions for a comparison? Have you measured the colors of said prints with a spectrophotometer to verify that they haven't faded (DeltaE shift <1-2)? Is the inkset used to make those prints still on the market?

Wilhelm Imaging's tests are fairly apples-to-apples, and correlate reasonably well with my own observations of friends trying 3rd-party inks and having printer problems, reduced color gamut, and faster fading. If you've managed to find a 3rd-party ink that is cheaper than OEM, has comparable gamut and fade resistance, and doesn't cause clogging or other print problems, great. Just understand that is very much the exception rather than the rule.
Logged

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad