upcoming 1 picoliter Canon printers ?

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

I read a press release describing some new Canon printers
with ability to print with 1 picoliter droplets to be
marketed in October.

One was described as able to use fewer colored inks because
of the improved resolution of the droplet.

I'd be interested in hearing opinions on how this technology
upgrade may benefit ... with the understanding, of course,
that until you test it in the specific printer released by
the manufacturer in a rigrous way, it's just idle
speculation.

J. Cod
16 answers Last reply
More about upcoming picoliter canon printers
  1. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    J. Cod wrote:

    > I read a press release describing some new Canon printers
    > with ability to print with 1 picoliter droplets to be
    > marketed in October.
    >
    > One was described as able to use fewer colored inks because
    > of the improved resolution of the droplet.
    >
    > I'd be interested in hearing opinions on how this technology
    > upgrade may benefit ... with the understanding, of course,
    > that until you test it in the specific printer released by
    > the manufacturer in a rigrous way, it's just idle
    > speculation.
    >
    > J. Cod
    >
    >
    >

    Seriously?

    I suspect they want to drop the extra inks to save on manufacturing costs, and
    it would seem red and green are hardly used for printing - perhaps for cleaning
    only - compared to the other inks.

    Is it possible that the red and green aren't used at all for printing and
    someone has proved this and now Canon have to come up with a reason for removing
    those inks from future printers or not adding them to future printers that
    currently only have 6 colours?

    --
    Ben Thomas
    Opinions, conclusions, and other information in this message that do not
    relate to the official business of my firm shall be understood as neither
    given nor endorsed by it.
  2. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    BenOne© wrote:

    >Seriously?

    Yes, but not the way you think...

    >I suspect they want to drop the extra inks to save on manufacturing costs, and
    >it would seem red and green are hardly used for printing - perhaps for cleaning
    >only - compared to the other inks.

    No. In order to get any or all of the various colours, we need AT LEAST
    three basic colours on white paper - cyan, magenta, and yellow.

    >Is it possible that the red and green aren't used at all for printing and
    >someone has proved this and now Canon have to come up with a reason for removing
    >those inks from future printers or not adding them to future printers that
    >currently only have 6 colours?

    There is no red or green ink. Magenta and yellow are mixed to get red,
    while green is made from cyan and yellow, and magenta if it's a dark
    green, etc.

    The reduced colours refers to using only three instead of five or six or
    seven, etc. However, this is not really new...Canon already did this
    with their printers that use only three colours, plus black. The Canon
    i-560, 850, Pixma 3000 and other models use just three colours, and a
    black ink for text. By reducing the droplet size to 2 picoliters for the
    cyan and magenta, photos are much smoother and finer detailed, with
    better tonal range, without the need for the photo cyan and photo
    magenta colours. Granted, they don't work as well as the 5+ colour
    models, but they get darn close for just three colours.
  3. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    "J. Cod" <jcod@cod.org> wrote in message
    news:aOl1d.717946$ic1.74722@news.easynews.com...
    >I read a press release describing some new Canon printers
    > with ability to print with 1 picoliter droplets to be
    > marketed in October.
    >
    > One was described as able to use fewer colored inks because
    > of the improved resolution of the droplet.
    >
    > I'd be interested in hearing opinions on how this technology
    > upgrade may benefit ... with the understanding, of course,
    > that until you test it in the specific printer released by
    > the manufacturer in a rigrous way, it's just idle
    > speculation.
    >

    Having seen the output from the iP4000 and iP5000 I can say they are quite
    remarkable IMO.
    You can achieve a high quality image with fewer inks and a smaller drop size
    due to how the eye perceives the image.
    One benefit is lower cost printing due to the reduced ink usage (though Red
    and Green are rarely used any way in the models that use it).
  4. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    "BenOne©" <nosp@m.thanks.mate> wrote in message
    news:hg55ic.rmc.ln@192.168.11.2...
    > J. Cod wrote:
    >
    >> I read a press release describing some new Canon printers
    >> with ability to print with 1 picoliter droplets to be
    >> marketed in October.
    >>
    >> One was described as able to use fewer colored inks because
    >> of the improved resolution of the droplet.
    >>
    >> I'd be interested in hearing opinions on how this technology
    >> upgrade may benefit ... with the understanding, of course,
    >> that until you test it in the specific printer released by
    >> the manufacturer in a rigrous way, it's just idle
    >> speculation.
    >>
    >> J. Cod
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >
    > Seriously?
    >
    > I suspect they want to drop the extra inks to save on manufacturing costs,
    > and it would seem red and green are hardly used for printing - perhaps for
    > cleaning only - compared to the other inks.
    >
    > Is it possible that the red and green aren't used at all for printing and
    > someone has proved this and now Canon have to come up with a reason for
    > removing those inks from future printers or not adding them to future
    > printers that currently only have 6 colours?
    >
    > --

    How can you ask 'seriously?' and then state the red and green are probably
    only used for cleaning! That is ridiculous!
    While you are correct in that they are used very little (compared to other
    colors) they are used during jobs where a particular shade is present. They
    also certainly would not want to (and haven't) dropped R and G to save on
    manufacturing costs. In fact new models are being released using them.
  5. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    I have been advocating this approach to inkjet printing for many years now.

    Simply put, the whole reason why inkjet manufacturers have had to
    introduce light dye load ink into the mix is due to the size of the ink
    droplet.

    Although it improved color fidelity somewhat, it was mainly a way to
    sell you more water at horribly inflated prices.

    The human eye, at anything approaching normal viewing distance cannot
    tell the difference between a bunch of very small spaced darker ink dots
    or many more larger lighter ink dots.

    In early inject printers which used 12-20 picolitre dots, attempts to
    produce lighter colors ended up looking like 4 o'clock shadow. Very
    granular large dots with lots of white space around them. It was
    obvious even at viewing distance that the gradient was not smooth.

    As the ink dot size lessened and speed of placing the dots increased,
    it became easier for the printers to produce something approaching a
    smooth even color that imitated a lighter color. If each time the dot
    sized were halved, twice as many dots could be put down in the same
    area, the color appeared to become more and more smooth.

    With the advent of 1 picolitre dot volumes, the dot literally becomes
    invisible to the naked eye even on close inspection. If these dots are
    laid down with full dye load inks it becomes their spacing that gives
    the illusion of lighter colored inks.

    How does this benefit the end user... greatly!

    Full dye load inks are much less fugitive than lighter diluted inks.
    The reason is because the way fading occurs is that the dye molecules
    get activated by things like UV light, and they literally fly off the
    paper surface. Light dye load inks have many less molecules per surface
    area, and they are poorly protected by other dye molecules, since they
    don't bunch up in layers very much. However, a small dot of high dye
    load inks, has the dye molecules stacked on top of each other. That
    way, the top layer of molecules might be activated by the UV light, and
    fly off, but deeper layers remain protected from the UV, being filtered
    by upper layers. This helps to maintain the ink staying within the paper.

    Secondly, you use a LOT less ink. As has been been discussed
    previously, printer drivers are designed to wash the paper with the low
    dye load inks in printers that use them. These inks usually get used up
    twice as quickly as the high dye load inks are. That is why you will
    find yourself replacing the light cyan and magenta ink cartridges twice
    as often as the others. The printer companies which rely upon ink sales
    to make their profits, love these inks, because not only do they cost
    much less to produce, since the pigment or dye components are the most
    costly part, but you are continually having to replace them. Further, on
    most inkjet printers, every time you replace a cartridge, the printer
    purges all the other ink heads as well, wasting ink in every cartridge.

    With the use of very small dots of high dye load inks to make even the
    lighter colors, those areas will use almost no ink at all, so your ink
    cartridges will last much longer if you tend to print with a lot of
    middle range densities.

    Depending upon the technology used, this process could even speed up the
    printing process.

    If implemented well, this is the type of breakthrough that could lead to
    many advantages for the end user, for a change, while not degrading
    image quality. We shall see. I give Canon kudos for this.

    The one question is if they can do this with pigmented inks, or if they
    have successfully improve the dye inks enough to make them more
    permanent. I am looking forward to this. Having only owned 4 color
    printers, it would be a great continuation of tradition to be able to
    finally use a 4 color printer that rivaled anything the low dye load
    printer inks could accomplish.

    Art


    J. Cod wrote:

    > I read a press release describing some new Canon printers
    > with ability to print with 1 picoliter droplets to be
    > marketed in October.
    >
    > One was described as able to use fewer colored inks because
    > of the improved resolution of the droplet.
    >
    > I'd be interested in hearing opinions on how this technology
    > upgrade may benefit ... with the understanding, of course,
    > that until you test it in the specific printer released by
    > the manufacturer in a rigrous way, it's just idle
    > speculation.
    >
    > J. Cod
    >
    >
    >
  6. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    Actually, there is a reason for those orange, red, green or blue inks
    that several manufacturers have added. For people with really good
    color vision, and demanding color accuracy, the CMY process is not
    perfect. Subtractive color, as used in inkjet printers is very tricky
    to control. The inks in theory need to be perfectly transparent, have
    equal density and be exactly colored for process printing. They rarely
    are. Also, the drivers have to be exactly designed for color management.

    Adding these subtractive secondary ink colors can provide more accurate
    color rendition. They aren't needed at lot in your average image, but
    they can make a difference.

    The place where inks can be removed is the lighter dye load inks (the
    light cyan and magenta) if a small enough dot can be produced.

    Art

    BenOne© wrote:

    > J. Cod wrote:
    >
    >> I read a press release describing some new Canon printers
    >> with ability to print with 1 picoliter droplets to be
    >> marketed in October.
    >>
    >> One was described as able to use fewer colored inks because
    >> of the improved resolution of the droplet.
    >>
    >> I'd be interested in hearing opinions on how this technology
    >> upgrade may benefit ... with the understanding, of course,
    >> that until you test it in the specific printer released by
    >> the manufacturer in a rigrous way, it's just idle
    >> speculation.
    >>
    >> J. Cod
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >
    > Seriously?
    >
    > I suspect they want to drop the extra inks to save on manufacturing
    > costs, and it would seem red and green are hardly used for printing -
    > perhaps for cleaning only - compared to the other inks.
    >
    > Is it possible that the red and green aren't used at all for printing
    > and someone has proved this and now Canon have to come up with a reason
    > for removing those inks from future printers or not adding them to
    > future printers that currently only have 6 colours?
    >
  7. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    Many thanks for these interesting responses, especially
    Arthur Entlich's technically satisfying explanations.

    regards, J. Cod
  8. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    J. Cod wrote:

    > Many thanks for these interesting responses, especially
    > Arthur Entlich's technically satisfying explanations.

    It was definitely the most useful reply. :)


    --
    Ben Thomas
    Opinions, conclusions, and other information in this message that do not
    relate to the official business of my firm shall be understood as neither
    given nor endorsed by it.
  9. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    PC Medic wrote:


    > How can you ask 'seriously?' and then state the red and green are probably
    > only used for cleaning! That is ridiculous!

    I'm trying to point out that they seem to be contradicting themselves at the
    expense of the consumer. First they tell us it's better to have more inks, so it
    costs us more to buy the printer, then they tell us they can do things
    differently and use less colours. It would seem that the red and green get most
    use during cleaning cycles.

    Does anyone seriously believe they release these technologies as soon as they
    are invented?


    > While you are correct in that they are used very little (compared to other
    > colors) they are used during jobs where a particular shade is present. They
    > also certainly would not want to (and haven't) dropped R and G to save on
    > manufacturing costs. In fact new models are being released using them.

    I have one such model.

    --
    Ben Thomas
    Opinions, conclusions, and other information in this message that do not
    relate to the official business of my firm shall be understood as neither
    given nor endorsed by it.
  10. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    "BenOne©" <nosp@m.thanks.mate> wrote in message
    news:dajaic.nvh.ln@192.168.11.2...
    > PC Medic wrote:
    >
    >
    >> How can you ask 'seriously?' and then state the red and green are
    >> probably only used for cleaning! That is ridiculous!
    >
    > I'm trying to point out that they seem to be contradicting themselves at
    > the expense of the consumer. First they tell us it's better to have more
    > inks, so it costs us more to buy the printer, then they tell us they can
    > do things differently and use less colours. It would seem that the red and
    > green get most use during cleaning cycles.
    >

    They are not saying you will get *best* results with fewer inks, only that
    it is possible to get excellent results with the smaller drop size using
    less ink. Considering it would save the customer money it would hardly be at
    their expense.

    > Does anyone seriously believe they release these technologies as soon as
    > they are invented?
    >

    As soon as they are tested and ready for primetime, yes they do.
  11. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    PC Medic wrote:

    > "BenOne©" <nosp@m.thanks.mate> wrote in message
    > news:dajaic.nvh.ln@192.168.11.2...
    >
    >>PC Medic wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>>How can you ask 'seriously?' and then state the red and green are
    >>>probably only used for cleaning! That is ridiculous!
    >>
    >>I'm trying to point out that they seem to be contradicting themselves at
    >>the expense of the consumer. First they tell us it's better to have more
    >>inks, so it costs us more to buy the printer, then they tell us they can
    >>do things differently and use less colours. It would seem that the red and
    >>green get most use during cleaning cycles.
    >>
    >
    >
    > They are not saying you will get *best* results with fewer inks, only that
    > it is possible to get excellent results with the smaller drop size using
    > less ink. Considering it would save the customer money it would hardly be at
    > their expense.

    Convincing us to buy 8 colour printers when they had upcoming 6 colour smaller
    drop technology around the corner is at the expense of the consumer.
    >
    >
    >>Does anyone seriously believe they release these technologies as soon as
    >>they are invented?
    >>
    >
    >
    > As soon as they are tested and ready for primetime, yes they do.

    I firmly believe that they release the new techonologies slowly so they can make
    a design last longer. Call it a conspiracy theory if you like.

    --
    Ben Thomas
    Opinions, conclusions, and other information in this message that do not
    relate to the official business of my firm shall be understood as neither
    given nor endorsed by it.
  12. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    "BenOne©" <nosp@m.thanks.mate> wrote in message
    news:2i6bic.llo.ln@192.168.11.2...
    > PC Medic wrote:
    >
    >> "BenOne©" <nosp@m.thanks.mate> wrote in message
    >> news:dajaic.nvh.ln@192.168.11.2...
    >>
    >>>PC Medic wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>How can you ask 'seriously?' and then state the red and green are
    >>>>probably only used for cleaning! That is ridiculous!
    >>>
    >>>I'm trying to point out that they seem to be contradicting themselves at
    >>>the expense of the consumer. First they tell us it's better to have more
    >>>inks, so it costs us more to buy the printer, then they tell us they can
    >>>do things differently and use less colours. It would seem that the red
    >>>and green get most use during cleaning cycles.
    >>>
    >>
    >>
    >> They are not saying you will get *best* results with fewer inks, only
    >> that it is possible to get excellent results with the smaller drop size
    >> using less ink. Considering it would save the customer money it would
    >> hardly be at their expense.
    >
    > Convincing us to buy 8 colour printers when they had upcoming 6 colour
    > smaller drop technology around the corner is at the expense of the
    > consumer.

    More realisticly, it is meeting the demands of two different consumer
    markets.
    Not everyone needs the quality of the 8 ink system and 1 picoliter allows a
    close proximation
    for that group.
  13. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    Arthur Entlich <artistic@telus.net> wrote in message news:<gNS1d.24777$KU5.13198@edtnps89>...
    > I have been advocating this approach to inkjet printing for many years now.

    Thanks for explaining the reason small droplets reduces or eliminates the
    need for the photo-cyan and photo-magenta inks, you did a lot more complete
    job than I was planning while reading the posts "ahead" of yours. Excellent!

    The newest Epson printer using pigments has a 1.5 or 2 pl rating on its drops
    and that is supposed to be about like 1-pl for dye inks (dye inks spread more
    on the paper than the pigments (that tend to sit on top of the paper)). Epson
    dropped their photo-cyan and photo-magenta on that one while adding a
    second black (for glossy vs matte) and an overcoat (to fix the glossy).

    The others, like the Green and "Red" inks aren't affected although they
    could be in a later generation of dithering software. Current Canon
    printers do, and should, use their other inks instead of Green and "Red"
    inks unless the color being printed /needs/ that ink to display the color.
    Reason being same as for the light color inks. Whether the light color
    inks are required or not, they still provide a more technically accurate
    rendition when used. If the lighter inks are gone, then that reason to
    favor dithered greens goes away and more favors using the green (or red)
    inks. Except.. that the dithering algorithms are probably near gold-status
    and there's probably a great resistance to change it w/o being REALLY
    REALLY sure the new version is better under ALL conditions, and so that
    may take a while before being released to production drivers. Any mistake
    would have serious impact on sales. So more modest changes in algorithms
    are likely for any given release. Just my WAG.

    Mike

    P.S. - "Red" ink is a bit on the orange side.
  14. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    "BenOne©" <nosp@m.thanks.mate> wrote in message
    news:2i6bic.llo.ln@192.168.11.2...

    > I firmly believe that they release the new techonologies slowly so they can
    > make a design last longer. Call it a conspiracy theory if you like.

    This would work if there was no competition. In the real world manufacturers
    bring new technologies out as soon as they can because if they do not their
    competitors will.

    - Bob Headrick, not speaking for my employer HP
  15. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    PC Medic wrote:


    > More realisticly, it is meeting the demands of two different consumer
    > markets.
    > Not everyone needs the quality of the 8 ink system and 1 picoliter allows a
    > close proximation
    > for that group.

    Now I get it. Thanks PC M.

    --
    Ben Thomas
    Opinions, conclusions, and other information in this message that do not
    relate to the official business of my firm shall be understood as neither
    given nor endorsed by it.
  16. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    Canon on their product list is cycling through FASTER on pro/advanced SLR
    Digital faster then any other producer. i.e. look how long their digs are
    in production compared to Nikon

    As I see it, the CANON Company has a strategy to introduce and MARKET new
    products on a fast track and yet ( IMHO) keep on raising the bar in
    features and quality. If you go to a sporting or news event, it appears
    that most of the lens are the Canon white ones and since the bodies are at
    least close to or matches Nikon, the photographers have switched to Canon
    for their IMAGE Stabilizer lens and Canon lens are considered as good or
    close to as good Nikon ( I do not want to argue the relative merits of Canon
    vs. Nikon) Both of these PRODUCT lines are great.

    This strategy and tactic seems to be being used for hi quality home printers
    for photo quality where EPSON has been the leader for years. Canon is
    making excellent printers for the ADVANCED amateur like me but have not
    mastered the longevity nor range in paper options yet. These are my
    observations. My only caveat is that there is a tendency to get caught up in
    the "latest and greatest" syndrome and I at least ( I suspect most others)
    are not able to pay for new equipment ever few years.

    So if Canon pushes the quality envelop that is overall good. THINK back 5
    years ago and see how far the equipment has advanced and IMHO has been great
    for the advance amateur like me and for other.


    "BenOne©" <nosp@m.thanks.mate> wrote in message
    news:2i6bic.llo.ln@192.168.11.2...
    : PC Medic wrote:
    :
    : > "BenOne©" <nosp@m.thanks.mate> wrote in message
    : > news:dajaic.nvh.ln@192.168.11.2...
    : >
    : >>PC Medic wrote:
    : >>
    : >>
    : >>
    : >>>How can you ask 'seriously?' and then state the red and green are
    : >>>probably only used for cleaning! That is ridiculous!
    : >>
    : >>I'm trying to point out that they seem to be contradicting themselves at
    : >>the expense of the consumer. First they tell us it's better to have more
    : >>inks, so it costs us more to buy the printer, then they tell us they can
    : >>do things differently and use less colours. It would seem that the red
    and
    : >>green get most use during cleaning cycles.
    : >>
    : >
    : >
    : > They are not saying you will get *best* results with fewer inks, only
    that
    : > it is possible to get excellent results with the smaller drop size using
    : > less ink. Considering it would save the customer money it would hardly
    be at
    : > their expense.
    :
    : Convincing us to buy 8 colour printers when they had upcoming 6 colour
    smaller
    : drop technology around the corner is at the expense of the consumer.
    : >
    : >
    : >>Does anyone seriously believe they release these technologies as soon as
    : >>they are invented?
    : >>
    : >
    : >
    : > As soon as they are tested and ready for primetime, yes they do.
    :
    : I firmly believe that they release the new techonologies slowly so they
    can make
    : a design last longer. Call it a conspiracy theory if you like.
    :
    : --
    : Ben Thomas
    : Opinions, conclusions, and other information in this message that do not
    : relate to the official business of my firm shall be understood as neither
    : given nor endorsed by it.
    :
Ask a new question

Read More

Printers Canon Peripherals Product