Ink jet photo printers and printingProblem with your ink jet printer or are you exploring ways of making your prints ever more vibrant and pleasing. Post your ink jet printer posers here.
Im new to the forum- well any forum actually! Ive had an Epson R2400 for a bit now and the cartridge prices really do hurt. I know this has been discussed before and all seems to depend on who you talk to. So theres print quality, permanance and reliabilty etc. Ive even considered buying larger Epson cartridges and seeing if its possible to decant the ink into a CIS or refillable cartridges. Im not sure how much ink is in or because of the chip actually usable in an R2400 cartridge, however if the volume is about 12mls, the cost/ml is around 70p but drops with a 100ml cartridge to around 30p, which I believe is not vastly different to some of the 3rd party inks. So, has anyone tried this and what are your general views on continuous inking systems and the inks that go with them? Any views most welcome.
Bill
Im new to the forum- well any forum actually! Ive had an Epson R2400 for a bit now and the cartridge prices really do hurt. I know this has been discussed before and all seems to depend on who you talk to. So theres print quality, permanance and reliabilty etc. Ive even considered buying larger Epson cartridges and seeing if its possible to decant the ink into a CIS or refillable cartridges. Im not sure how much ink is in or because of the chip actually usable in an R2400 cartridge, however if the volume is about 12mls, the cost/ml is around 70p but drops with a 100ml cartridge to around 30p, which I believe is not vastly different to some of the 3rd party inks. So, has anyone tried this and what are your general views on continuous inking systems and the inks that go with them? Any views most welcome.
Bill
Permajet did produce a system of refillable cartridges but had problems. I wasn’t aware you could buy larger Epson ink cartridges or Epson ink in bulk other than third party. You would require one of those devises to re program the cartridge to show full again if you refill.
I now use the Permajet continues ink system on my Epson R2400, I had a few teething problems but it is now settled down. Purging air trapped in the system I believe may have been the trouble; even the smallest amount would appear to cause banding, once clear keep the inks toped up to avoid it reoccurring. The system has a chip on each cartridge that reprograms to full automatically as required.
I think it works out ignoring the initial cost of the system the equivalent of six or seven cartridges to the price of one Epson cartridge. Buy don’t forget the CIS cost over £300 to start you off.
For details go to this site www.permajet.com
The quality is superb, as to life of the prints, well we only have the word of the supplier be it Epson or Permajet. I won’t be around in 100 years to challenge either if the prints have faded.
Thanks Patrick! There seems to be some information out there to suggest that Lyson and other major distributors of CIS and inks to go with them have good permanence. On the other hand I did hear the story of the Epson printer that caught fire (alcohol based inks) and then theres the Tesco ink that in contrast to the genuine HP's ink-life of 73years has a life of 0.1years. What I need is a slew of reassuring replies from subscribers saying how wonderfully happy they are with their inking systems.
bill
Thanks Patrick! There seems to be some information out there to suggest that Lyson and other major distributors of CIS and inks to go with them have good permanence. On the other hand I did hear the story of the Epson printer that caught fire (alcohol based inks) and then theres the Tesco ink that in contrast to the genuine HP's ink-life of 73years has a life of 0.1years. What I need is a slew of reassuring replies from subscribers saying how wonderfully happy they are with their inking systems.
bill
You have a Epson R2400 that uses pigment inks, it is generally accepted they give greater permanence than dye inks.
The Permajet CIS uses pigment ink that are claimed to match Epson’s own.
The same claims are made I believe by both Lyson and Fotospeed in fact I heard are allegedly one in the same system, how true I don’t really know.
There are many cheap systems out there using dye ink leave well alone. Sold in the main at computer fairs.
The three third party companies I mentioned above have very good reputations in the photographic world and will not knowingly sell you a bad product. In fact their cartridges are much the same prices Epson, but with marginally more ink per cartridge.
The money saving is in the CIS because the ink is purchased in 125ml bottles.
Im new to the forum- well any forum actually! Ive had an Epson R2400 for a bit now and the cartridge prices really do hurt. I know this has been discussed before and all seems to depend on who you talk to. So theres print quality, permanance and reliabilty etc. Ive even considered buying larger Epson cartridges and seeing if its possible to decant the ink into a CIS or refillable cartridges. Im not sure how much ink is in or because of the chip actually usable in an R2400 cartridge, however if the volume is about 12mls, the cost/ml is around 70p but drops with a 100ml cartridge to around 30p, which I believe is not vastly different to some of the 3rd party inks. So, has anyone tried this and what are your general views on continuous inking systems and the inks that go with them? Any views most welcome.
Bill
Hi Bill, and a warm welcome to the DPNow forum. Have you thought about trading in for an Epson Stylus Pro 3800. I understand the large ink cartridges mean significantly improved running costs, plus there is no need to swap matt and photo blacks.
Im not sure how much ink is in or because of the chip actually usable in an R2400 cartridge, however if the volume is about 12mls, the cost/ml is around 70p but drops with a 100ml cartridge to around 30p, which I believe is not vastly different to some of the 3rd party inks.
I always find it funny that people seeking alternative inks always consider "cost of ink" and rarely ever work out the "cost per print".
With that in mind, I had to buy some flea drops from a friend's cat last week. It was £18 for six capsules of 0.5ml. That's about £6 per ml. Boy, I wish there was some third-party alternatives out there. This stuff's like gold dust, it makes Epson OEM ink prices seem like chicken feed in comparison.
Maybe Lyson or Permajet do a CIS that I could attach to the cat?
We've developed an online cost-per print caculator, I've shown it to a few people but it's not live yet, which knows the consumption rate of a given printer based on run-down testing we have carried out. You type in the cost of cartridges in your own currency, plus the cost of your paper and it will deliver a cost per print result.
We've developed an online cost-per print caculator, I've shown it to a few people but it's not live yet, which knows the consumption rate of a given printer based on run-down testing we have carried out. You type in the cost of cartridges in your own currency, plus the cost of your paper and it will deliver a cost per print result.
Watch this space
Ian
I'll look forward to it. It'll be interesting to see how it compares to the real-world figures I've got for my R1800.
I always find it funny that people seeking alternative inks always consider "cost of ink" and rarely ever work out the "cost per print".
With that in mind, I had to buy some flea drops from a friend's cat last week. It was £18 for six capsules of 0.5ml. That's about £6 per ml. Boy, I wish there was some third-party alternatives out there. This stuff's like gold dust, it makes Epson OEM ink prices seem like chicken feed in comparison.
Maybe Lyson or Permajet do a CIS that I could attach to the cat?
Well JSR not sure as that desrves a reply, except to say that consumer organisations might beg to differ and that I doubt many other forum members regard inkjet printing costs "chicken feed", particularly if youre picky about the result and print at A3 or A3+. It provides printer manufacturers with a huge chunk of their income which they jealously protect, perhaps even more income than the actual printer sales. Its a serious question and I would hope for serious answers.
Well JSR not sure as that desrves a reply, except to say that consumer organisations might beg to differ and that I doubt many other forum members regard inkjet printing costs "chicken feed", particularly if youre picky about the result and print at A3 or A3+. It provides printer manufacturers with a huge chunk of their income which they jealously protect, perhaps even more income than the actual printer sales. Its a serious question and I would hope for serious answers.
If you don't take my "chicken feed" phrase out of context, you'll understand what I'm trying to say. Cost is relative. At the end of the day, if we all used third-party inks we wouldn't have printers like the R2400 to enjoy anyway.
I would hazzard a guess that you won't get a "slew of reassuring replies" because most people who buy the R2400 do so to benefit from Epson's K3 inkset (particularly those who, as you say, are "picky about the result"). You won't find too many people to reassure you because of this - not many people buy the R2400 then use someone else's inks as it defeats the purpose of buying the printer. The actual cost-per-print for most people is acceptable for their purpose, regardless of your view of who is ripping off whom.
Only if you do a *lot* of printing would you benefit from a CIS. Even then, I would have thought that your suggestion of using the larger cartridges from the Epson 4800 would be the best option. Surely it must be fairly easy to buy an empty CIS and decant the 220ml inks from the Epson 4800 into the bottles so you'd still benefit from the K3 inkset while saving on the cost per ml (presumably you wouldn't have the hassle of requiring new profiles either). As I understand it, Epson's Ultrachrome inks are held in some kind of bladder in the ink cartridge - it's not like trying to get the ink out of a sponge like in the old days. If I was in the position of needing to use a CIS with an R2400, this is the road I'd be going down.
From what I can tell, the Lyson inks are about £30/125ml (inc. VAT); while the K3 inks for the 4800's 220ml carts is £59/220ml (that's RRP inc. VAT, actual cost may be less) - price per ml is almost identical.
(See, I can do "serious answers", too! )
JSR
PS - Incidentally, I use a CIS on an old Epson 1290S.
If you don't take my "chicken feed" phrase out of context, you'll understand what I'm trying to say. Cost is relative. At the end of the day, if we all used third-party inks we wouldn't have printers like the R2400 to enjoy anyway.
I would hazzard a guess that you won't get a "slew of reassuring replies" because most people who buy the R2400 do so to benefit from Epson's K3 inkset (particularly those who, as you say, are "picky about the result"). You won't find too many people to reassure you because of this - not many people buy the R2400 then use someone else's inks as it defeats the purpose of buying the printer. The actual cost-per-print for most people is acceptable for their purpose, regardless of your view of who is ripping off whom.
Only if you do a *lot* of printing would you benefit from a CIS. Even then, I would have thought that your suggestion of using the larger cartridges from the Epson 4800 would be the best option. Surely it must be fairly easy to buy an empty CIS and decant the 220ml inks from the Epson 4800 into the bottles so you'd still benefit from the K3 inkset while saving on the cost per ml (presumably you wouldn't have the hassle of requiring new profiles either). As I understand it, Epson's Ultrachrome inks are held in some kind of bladder in the ink cartridge - it's not like trying to get the ink out of a sponge like in the old days. If I was in the position of needing to use a CIS with an R2400, this is the road I'd be going down.
From what I can tell, the Lyson inks are about £30/125ml (inc. VAT); while the K3 inks for the 4800's 220ml carts is £59/220ml (that's RRP inc. VAT, actual cost may be less) - price per ml is almost identical.
(See, I can do "serious answers", too! )
JSR
PS - Incidentally, I use a CIS on an old Epson 1290S.
There aint anyone more picky than me, and Permajets K chrome inks @ 24.95 per 125ml bottles every bit as good as Epson. I wouldn’t have settled on them otherwise.
I currently use Permajet Fibre usually for my mono work or Fujihunt Satin for my colour, although this does give quite exceptional results with Mono as well.
Can’t say about Lyson, my experiments with their Mono inks some years ago were not very successful.
Have you ever tried putting ink into one of these cartridges? I have, never again it’s not a job to do in your best suit, I can tell you. B*** messy.
Your comment is it worth installing a CIS system is valid. Its only worth while if a lot off printing is done, or that the owner of such a setup keep it a very long time to ensure the economics.
There aint anyone more picky than me, and Permajets K chrome inks @ 24.95 per 125ml bottles every bit as good as Epson. I wouldn’t have settled on them otherwise.
Good, I'm glad you've found a system that fills your needs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrick
Have you ever tried putting ink into one of these cartridges? I have, never again it’s not a job to do in your best suit, I can tell you. B*** messy.
I didn't actually suggest refilling cartridges. I considered the idea before I got the CIS for my 1290 but went off the idea when I couldn't find anyone to recommend it (not even the guy who was selling the carts!). My thought was that taking ink out of the 4800 carts and syphoning it into the bottles of a CIS would be a way to maintain the K3 inkset while taking advantage of the cheaper ink costs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrick
Your comment is it worth installing a CIS system is valid. Its only worth while if a lot off printing is done, or that the owner of such a setup keep it a very long time to ensure the economics.
On this subject, does Permajet (or Lyson, or whoever) state that the ink should be used up within a certain period? Epson always recommend using inks within 6 months of opening, or 2 years of storage. Does the same apply to a CIS - so if you have 125ml of each colour, should you be printing sufficient to use it all within 6 months? Or is the "use within 6 months" just a misnomer put about by OEM manufacturers?
And while we're on the subject (I didn't think I'd have another question ), I've read up on Epson's smart valve ink cartridges that are designed in such a way to prevent the pigments settling in the OEM cartridges - thus avoiding nozzle clogging. Given that "smart valve" is a proprietary technology and Epson are suing the pants of anyone trying to infringe their patents, how does the Permajet CIS prevent the pigments from settling in both the bottles and the cartridges?
Ive had a hunt around and come across lots more of stuff in other forums. Apparantly Epson charge us twice as much for the same cartridges as they charge in Japan. (I see that you had comments to make on this JSR!) I know everyone else does it, but it does give some idea of the mark up. Lets hope that we get legislation here like they have in Japan that means printer running costs have to be stated. I think then there might be genuine competition, prices will drop and what is suggested below may become less appealing.
On the subject of filling 2400 carts with ink from larger 110 or 220ml carts I came across the following useful thread. This guy is obviously a boffin! It looks a bit complicated but if you want to try using the K3 inkset bought in bulk with an R2400.......
From my experience, using 3rd party inks is a false economy. We have had a
lot of people have return from CIS back to Epson inks, because we have seen
many bleeding heads (corrosion from 3rd party inks). I have read a 10 page
special report on original against 3rd party inks earlier this year, which
confirms exactly what we have suspected. I will pull out the article and
will post the key points concerning these cartridges. I think these findings
will make everyone think again about the high cost of the original inks
(watch this space).
Also another point one needs to know is that while generic profiles tend to
work well with Epson ink on 3rd party paper, it is not the same in the
reverse. This is due to the fact that there are two parts to a printer/paper
profile, the first part is ink linearization to the paper, then the actual
colour profile. With every Epson printer profile, the ink/paper
linearization is calculated with the Epson ink characteristics, meaning that
CMYK inks will have a different signature on different paper surfaces. This
is done first by laying ink onto a paper in increments of say 5-10%. At some
point laying more ink down on the paper would not change its density. This
what linearization achieves and it prevents paper from being flooded and
over-saturated with the ink. Incidentally, this also prevents ink wastage.
This is then followed by the colour chart profiling to make up the second
part of the paper/ink ICC profile. This is fine so as long as it is Epson's
own ink, but when it comes to 3rd party inks, all the characteristics will
change and this is where I have notice solarisation and banding has occurred
after profiles are made based on the Epson ink's linearization, because of
incompatibility in their native colour characteristics.
We could go on to debate this for longer, but the very fact is, third party
inks are produced independently of the print head's required specification,
and lack of full scientific understanding of the technical requirements of
these highly tuned and delicate print heads, hence quality could never match
the original manufacturers inks.
From my experience, using 3rd party inks is a false economy. We have had a
lot of people have return from CIS back to Epson inks, because we have seen
many bleeding heads (corrosion from 3rd party inks). I have read a 10 page
special report on original against 3rd party inks earlier this year, which
confirms exactly what we have suspected. I will pull out the article and
will post the key points concerning these cartridges. I think these findings
will make everyone think again about the high cost of the original inks
(watch this space).
Interesting reading Danny - I'd be very interested to see the article you mention.
What you are saying is going to be a bit controversial for some, I'd expect. How would you respond to those who have invested in a CIS system that has satisfied their needs?
Quote:
Also another point one needs to know is that while generic profiles tend to
work well with Epson ink on 3rd party paper, it is not the same in the
reverse. This is due to the fact that there are two parts to a printer/paper
profile, the first part is ink linearization to the paper, then the actual
colour profile. With every Epson printer profile, the ink/paper
linearization is calculated with the Epson ink characteristics, meaning that
CMYK inks will have a different signature on different paper surfaces. This
is done first by laying ink onto a paper in increments of say 5-10%. At some
point laying more ink down on the paper would not change its density. This
what linearization achieves and it prevents paper from being flooded and
over-saturated with the ink. Incidentally, this also prevents ink wastage.
It all seems very logical.
Quote:
This is then followed by the colour chart profiling to make up the second
part of the paper/ink ICC profile. This is fine so as long as it is Epson's
own ink, but when it comes to 3rd party inks, all the characteristics will
change and this is where I have notice solarisation and banding has occurred
after profiles are made based on the Epson ink's linearization, because of
incompatibility in their native colour characteristics.
We could go on to debate this for longer, but the very fact is, third party
inks are produced independently of the print head's required specification,
and lack of full scientific understanding of the technical requirements of
these highly tuned and delicate print heads, hence quality could never match
the original manufacturers inks.
I find it almost impossible to recommend third party inks to people who wnat to use them on consumer photo printers because the risk is just too great that they will either get bad colours, poor fade resistance or long term damage to their printer's print head, if it's not the disposable type, or a combination of these reasons.
With CIS it's rather more difficult to consider as I'm sure more effort has been put into producing better inks than in the consumer market, but from what manufacturers have told me about the sheer physics and chemistry that goes into, especially pigmented, ink design and manufacturing, I'd be very unsure about going for a third party option. On the other hand, there are plenty of reports of good results using CIS. It's a b it of a paradox really.
Continuous Inking Systems
)
Linear Mode
