non-clogging inkjet printer

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

I am currently living in the northern US and spending about 4 months
in Florida. I want to get an inkjet printer that will do an adequate
job on photos and also handle general printing tasks. I do not want to
carry the printer back and forth to Florida. I therefore need to find
a printer that can sit idle for 6 to 8 months and not be clogged when
I return to use it. Does anyone have any suggestions?

BobS
22 answers Last reply
More about clogging inkjet printer
  1. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    All inkjet printers can clog. However, in your case the answer is to
    buy two of the same model printer which uses the integrated head and ink
    cartridges.

    I would suggest getting two HP printers of the same type, or that at
    least use the same ink cartridge type. SInce the cartridge/head units
    come out of the printer, but will probably not do well sitting for
    months without use, and they are costly, I suggest removing them and
    taking them with you when you travel to your other residence, and then
    pop them into your other printer when you arrive, and continue to use them.

    HP used to have a little case you could buy for transporting the head
    and cartridge units, and maybe they still do.

    Once the head/cartridge units (usually one for color and one for black
    ink, or one color and one photo which includes black plus two other
    colors) is removed form the printer, there is nothing left to clog. You
    can just unplug the printer until you return.

    Lexmark uses a similar design, however, although they may be cheaper to
    buy, the cost of running them is higher, their drivers are a real pain,
    they are not typically as well built, are not as reliable and will not
    give you the same quality printing as HP.

    Both Epson and Canon use heads that are separate from the ink cartridge.
    In the case of Epson they are permanently installed in the printer.
    In Canon they are removable, but they will clog up if left to dry out.

    I think your case is a perfect one for a couple of identical HP printers.

    Art

    BobS wrote:

    > I am currently living in the northern US and spending about 4 months
    > in Florida. I want to get an inkjet printer that will do an adequate
    > job on photos and also handle general printing tasks. I do not want to
    > carry the printer back and forth to Florida. I therefore need to find
    > a printer that can sit idle for 6 to 8 months and not be clogged when
    > I return to use it. Does anyone have any suggestions?
    >
    > BobS
  2. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    Why not simply buy two Canon's.
    First, using quality ink the heads should not clog to begin with. Second,
    the Canon printheads are covered under the warranty so even if they were to
    clog, they would be replaced free of charge. You also get the convenience of
    individual ink tanks that also reduce printing cost through reduced ink
    waste.


    "Arthur Entlich" <artistic@telus.net> wrote in message
    news:8eLfd.17157$9b.1898@edtnps84...
    > All inkjet printers can clog. However, in your case the answer is to buy
    > two of the same model printer which uses the integrated head and ink
    > cartridges.
    >
    > I would suggest getting two HP printers of the same type, or that at least
    > use the same ink cartridge type. SInce the cartridge/head units come out
    > of the printer, but will probably not do well sitting for months without
    > use, and they are costly, I suggest removing them and taking them with you
    > when you travel to your other residence, and then pop them into your other
    > printer when you arrive, and continue to use them.
    >
    > HP used to have a little case you could buy for transporting the head and
    > cartridge units, and maybe they still do.
    >
    > Once the head/cartridge units (usually one for color and one for black
    > ink, or one color and one photo which includes black plus two other
    > colors) is removed form the printer, there is nothing left to clog. You
    > can just unplug the printer until you return.
    >
    > Lexmark uses a similar design, however, although they may be cheaper to
    > buy, the cost of running them is higher, their drivers are a real pain,
    > they are not typically as well built, are not as reliable and will not
    > give you the same quality printing as HP.
    >
    > Both Epson and Canon use heads that are separate from the ink cartridge.
    > In the case of Epson they are permanently installed in the printer. In
    > Canon they are removable, but they will clog up if left to dry out.
    >
    > I think your case is a perfect one for a couple of identical HP printers.
    >
    > Art
    >
    > BobS wrote:
    >
    >> I am currently living in the northern US and spending about 4 months
    >> in Florida. I want to get an inkjet printer that will do an adequate
    >> job on photos and also handle general printing tasks. I do not want to
    >> carry the printer back and forth to Florida. I therefore need to find
    >> a printer that can sit idle for 6 to 8 months and not be clogged when
    >> I return to use it. Does anyone have any suggestions?
    >>
    >> BobS
    >
  3. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    Because of several reasons.

    Some people like to keep their printers more than one year (warranty
    period), and secondly, the ink savings on individual ink cartridges is,
    as has been discussed in the group numerous times, is nil to nothing in
    most cases.

    I won't go into the test results several of us have experienced, but the
    ink savings due to individual ink cartridges is one of the most
    overrated "savings" there is. In actual fact, it usually saves nothing,
    and may cost more, depending on how much the individual ink cartridges
    cost relative to the amount of ink and the cost of tri-color ink cartridges.

    Do Canon printers go through a purging cycle when you replace one
    cartridge, and if so, is each color head purged individually or as a group?

    Art

    PC Medic wrote:

    > Why not simply buy two Canon's.
    > First, using quality ink the heads should not clog to begin with. Second,
    > the Canon printheads are covered under the warranty so even if they were to
    > clog, they would be replaced free of charge. You also get the convenience of
    > individual ink tanks that also reduce printing cost through reduced ink
    > waste.
    >
    >
    > "Arthur Entlich" <artistic@telus.net> wrote in message
    > news:8eLfd.17157$9b.1898@edtnps84...
    >
    >>All inkjet printers can clog. However, in your case the answer is to buy
    >>two of the same model printer which uses the integrated head and ink
    >>cartridges.
    >>
    >>I would suggest getting two HP printers of the same type, or that at least
    >>use the same ink cartridge type. SInce the cartridge/head units come out
    >>of the printer, but will probably not do well sitting for months without
    >>use, and they are costly, I suggest removing them and taking them with you
    >>when you travel to your other residence, and then pop them into your other
    >>printer when you arrive, and continue to use them.
    >>
    >>HP used to have a little case you could buy for transporting the head and
    >>cartridge units, and maybe they still do.
    >>
    >>Once the head/cartridge units (usually one for color and one for black
    >>ink, or one color and one photo which includes black plus two other
    >>colors) is removed form the printer, there is nothing left to clog. You
    >>can just unplug the printer until you return.
    >>
    >>Lexmark uses a similar design, however, although they may be cheaper to
    >>buy, the cost of running them is higher, their drivers are a real pain,
    >>they are not typically as well built, are not as reliable and will not
    >>give you the same quality printing as HP.
    >>
    >>Both Epson and Canon use heads that are separate from the ink cartridge.
    >>In the case of Epson they are permanently installed in the printer. In
    >>Canon they are removable, but they will clog up if left to dry out.
    >>
    >>I think your case is a perfect one for a couple of identical HP printers.
    >>
    >>Art
    >>
    >>BobS wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>I am currently living in the northern US and spending about 4 months
    >>>in Florida. I want to get an inkjet printer that will do an adequate
    >>>job on photos and also handle general printing tasks. I do not want to
    >>>carry the printer back and forth to Florida. I therefore need to find
    >>>a printer that can sit idle for 6 to 8 months and not be clogged when
    >>>I return to use it. Does anyone have any suggestions?
    >>>
    >>>BobS
    >>
    >
    >
  4. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    Arthur Entlich wrote:

    >Do Canon printers go through a purging cycle when you replace one
    >cartridge, and if so, is each color head purged individually or as a group?

    I'm not positive, but I believe my Canon printer does a quick cleaning
    cycle almost every time it's turned on. And if you print a lot of photos
    in a row, it pauses printing to do a quick cleaning cycle, and then
    continue.

    I'm guessing it does this cleaning with all of the colours.
  5. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    If you like printing underwater pictures you will use up blue quite quickly.
    Most people report the "photo colours" are used up more quickly than the
    other 3 colours in canon printers. so a five colour cartridge would have a
    lot of wastage. None of my cartridges have run out all at once either.


    "Arthur Entlich" <artistic@telus.net> wrote in message
    news:ss5gd.34232$9b.430@edtnps84...
    > Because of several reasons.
    >
    > Some people like to keep their printers more than one year (warranty
    > period), and secondly, the ink savings on individual ink cartridges is, as
    > has been discussed in the group numerous times, is nil to nothing in most
    > cases.
    >
    > I won't go into the test results several of us have experienced, but the
    > ink savings due to individual ink cartridges is one of the most overrated
    > "savings" there is. In actual fact, it usually saves nothing, and may
    > cost more, depending on how much the individual ink cartridges cost
    > relative to the amount of ink and the cost of tri-color ink cartridges.
    >
    > Do Canon printers go through a purging cycle when you replace one
    > cartridge, and if so, is each color head purged individually or as a
    > group?
    >
    > Art
    >
    > PC Medic wrote:
    >
    >> Why not simply buy two Canon's.
    >> First, using quality ink the heads should not clog to begin with. Second,
    >> the Canon printheads are covered under the warranty so even if they were
    >> to clog, they would be replaced free of charge. You also get the
    >> convenience of individual ink tanks that also reduce printing cost
    >> through reduced ink waste.
    >>
    >>
    >> "Arthur Entlich" <artistic@telus.net> wrote in message
    >> news:8eLfd.17157$9b.1898@edtnps84...
    >>
    >>>All inkjet printers can clog. However, in your case the answer is to buy
    >>>two of the same model printer which uses the integrated head and ink
    >>>cartridges.
    >>>
    >>>I would suggest getting two HP printers of the same type, or that at
    >>>least use the same ink cartridge type. SInce the cartridge/head units
    >>>come out of the printer, but will probably not do well sitting for months
    >>>without use, and they are costly, I suggest removing them and taking them
    >>>with you when you travel to your other residence, and then pop them into
    >>>your other printer when you arrive, and continue to use them.
    >>>
    >>>HP used to have a little case you could buy for transporting the head and
    >>>cartridge units, and maybe they still do.
    >>>
    >>>Once the head/cartridge units (usually one for color and one for black
    >>>ink, or one color and one photo which includes black plus two other
    >>>colors) is removed form the printer, there is nothing left to clog. You
    >>>can just unplug the printer until you return.
    >>>
    >>>Lexmark uses a similar design, however, although they may be cheaper to
    >>>buy, the cost of running them is higher, their drivers are a real pain,
    >>>they are not typically as well built, are not as reliable and will not
    >>>give you the same quality printing as HP.
    >>>
    >>>Both Epson and Canon use heads that are separate from the ink cartridge.
    >>>In the case of Epson they are permanently installed in the printer. In
    >>>Canon they are removable, but they will clog up if left to dry out.
    >>>
    >>>I think your case is a perfect one for a couple of identical HP printers.
    >>>
    >>>Art
    >>>
    >>>BobS wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>I am currently living in the northern US and spending about 4 months
    >>>>in Florida. I want to get an inkjet printer that will do an adequate
    >>>>job on photos and also handle general printing tasks. I do not want to
    >>>>carry the printer back and forth to Florida. I therefore need to find
    >>>>a printer that can sit idle for 6 to 8 months and not be clogged when
    >>>>I return to use it. Does anyone have any suggestions?
    >>>>
    >>>>BobS
    >>>
    >>
    >>
    >
  6. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    Mr Jessop wrote:

    >If you like printing underwater pictures you will use up blue quite quickly.

    In odd circumstances like that, yes a tri-colour is not the way to go
    and individual cartridges are great.

    >Most people report the "photo colours" are used up more quickly than the
    >other 3 colours in canon printers.

    The photo colours in other printers are always housed in a separate
    tri-colour cartridge. You don't have to worry about running out of photo
    magenta, and then having to replace everything.

    > so a five colour cartridge would have a lot of wastage.

    I don't believe a five colour cartridge exists. Three colours is the
    most I've seen in a single unit.

    > None of my cartridges have run out all at once either.

    While that has never happened to me either, most of the time they run
    low all within the same day when I'm printing photos.
  7. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    "Arthur Entlich" <artistic@telus.net> wrote in message
    news:ss5gd.34232$9b.430@edtnps84...
    > Because of several reasons.
    >
    > Some people like to keep their printers more than one year (warranty
    > period),

    Yes, my last retired Canon (still working at the time by the way) was 3
    years and probably about 15,000 pages old.
    An iP4000 can be had for about $189 (including the Canon 2 year Extended
    Service Plan) so for 3 years you have no worry about replacing the printhead
    should it dry out and clog (which it probably will not).

    >and secondly, the ink savings on individual ink cartridges is, as has been
    >discussed in the group numerous times, is nil to nothing in most cases.
    >

    Evidentally not discussed by anyone that understands costs and usage then.
    If you have a tri-color tank for for say an HP and it still has plenty of
    yellow and some cyan left, but have to toss it because you are out of
    magenta only (the most common color used) to spend another $30+ for a
    cartridge vs. being able to replace the single color tank on a Canon costing
    only about $10 (an yields more pages per tank) then it is cheaper. Even Al
    Gores fuzzy math can't change that.

    > I won't go into the test results several of us have experienced, but the
    > ink savings due to individual ink cartridges is one of the most overrated
    > "savings" there is. In actual fact, it usually saves nothing, and may
    > cost more, depending on how much the individual ink cartridges cost
    > relative to the amount of ink and the cost of tri-color ink cartridges.
    >

    See above, your testing was flawed. I use my two Canon's here at home twice
    as much as my brother uses his HP and he spends probably 3X more on ink than
    I do.

    > Do Canon printers go through a purging cycle when you replace one
    > cartridge, and if so, is each color head purged individually or as a
    > group?
    >

    Every printer does and as to whether all nozzles are purged depends on the
    model. This is a pitiful example in that the amount during a purge is
    minimal and you do not change your tanks every day. Now if you want to sit
    and do 20 or so manual Head Refreshes you can certainly use up a tank of
    ink, but then why would you do that

    > Art
    >
    > PC Medic wrote:
    >
    >> Why not simply buy two Canon's.
    >> First, using quality ink the heads should not clog to begin with. Second,
    >> the Canon printheads are covered under the warranty so even if they were
    >> to clog, they would be replaced free of charge. You also get the
    >> convenience of individual ink tanks that also reduce printing cost
    >> through reduced ink waste.
    >>
    >>
    >> "Arthur Entlich" <artistic@telus.net> wrote in message
    >> news:8eLfd.17157$9b.1898@edtnps84...
    >>
    >>>All inkjet printers can clog. However, in your case the answer is to buy
    >>>two of the same model printer which uses the integrated head and ink
    >>>cartridges.
    >>>
    >>>I would suggest getting two HP printers of the same type, or that at
    >>>least use the same ink cartridge type. SInce the cartridge/head units
    >>>come out of the printer, but will probably not do well sitting for months
    >>>without use, and they are costly, I suggest removing them and taking them
    >>>with you when you travel to your other residence, and then pop them into
    >>>your other printer when you arrive, and continue to use them.
    >>>
    >>>HP used to have a little case you could buy for transporting the head and
    >>>cartridge units, and maybe they still do.
    >>>
    >>>Once the head/cartridge units (usually one for color and one for black
    >>>ink, or one color and one photo which includes black plus two other
    >>>colors) is removed form the printer, there is nothing left to clog. You
    >>>can just unplug the printer until you return.
    >>>
    >>>Lexmark uses a similar design, however, although they may be cheaper to
    >>>buy, the cost of running them is higher, their drivers are a real pain,
    >>>they are not typically as well built, are not as reliable and will not
    >>>give you the same quality printing as HP.
    >>>
    >>>Both Epson and Canon use heads that are separate from the ink cartridge.
    >>>In the case of Epson they are permanently installed in the printer. In
    >>>Canon they are removable, but they will clog up if left to dry out.
    >>>
    >>>I think your case is a perfect one for a couple of identical HP printers.
    >>>
    >>>Art
    >>>
    >>>BobS wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>I am currently living in the northern US and spending about 4 months
    >>>>in Florida. I want to get an inkjet printer that will do an adequate
    >>>>job on photos and also handle general printing tasks. I do not want to
    >>>>carry the printer back and forth to Florida. I therefore need to find
    >>>>a printer that can sit idle for 6 to 8 months and not be clogged when
    >>>>I return to use it. Does anyone have any suggestions?
    >>>>
    >>>>BobS
    >>>
    >>
    >>
    >
  8. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    My point exactly!
    I tend to (as most will) go through Black and Magenta the most and in fact
    probably change the magenta 3 to 1 over the yellow and 2 to 1 over the cyan.
    Never convince me that a multi-color tank is not a waste of money.


    "Mr Jessop" <anonymouse@isp.com> wrote in message
    news:_mbgd.1440$up1.1330@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
    > If you like printing underwater pictures you will use up blue quite
    > quickly. Most people report the "photo colours" are used up more quickly
    > than the other 3 colours in canon printers. so a five colour cartridge
    > would have a lot of wastage. None of my cartridges have run out all at
    > once either.
    >
    >
    > "Arthur Entlich" <artistic@telus.net> wrote in message
    > news:ss5gd.34232$9b.430@edtnps84...
    >> Because of several reasons.
    >>
    >> Some people like to keep their printers more than one year (warranty
    >> period), and secondly, the ink savings on individual ink cartridges is,
    >> as has been discussed in the group numerous times, is nil to nothing in
    >> most cases.
    >>
    >> I won't go into the test results several of us have experienced, but the
    >> ink savings due to individual ink cartridges is one of the most overrated
    >> "savings" there is. In actual fact, it usually saves nothing, and may
    >> cost more, depending on how much the individual ink cartridges cost
    >> relative to the amount of ink and the cost of tri-color ink cartridges.
    >>
    >> Do Canon printers go through a purging cycle when you replace one
    >> cartridge, and if so, is each color head purged individually or as a
    >> group?
    >>
    >> Art
    >>
    >> PC Medic wrote:
    >>
    >>> Why not simply buy two Canon's.
    >>> First, using quality ink the heads should not clog to begin with.
    >>> Second, the Canon printheads are covered under the warranty so even if
    >>> they were to clog, they would be replaced free of charge. You also get
    >>> the convenience of individual ink tanks that also reduce printing cost
    >>> through reduced ink waste.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> "Arthur Entlich" <artistic@telus.net> wrote in message
    >>> news:8eLfd.17157$9b.1898@edtnps84...
    >>>
    >>>>All inkjet printers can clog. However, in your case the answer is to
    >>>>buy two of the same model printer which uses the integrated head and ink
    >>>>cartridges.
    >>>>
    >>>>I would suggest getting two HP printers of the same type, or that at
    >>>>least use the same ink cartridge type. SInce the cartridge/head units
    >>>>come out of the printer, but will probably not do well sitting for
    >>>>months without use, and they are costly, I suggest removing them and
    >>>>taking them with you when you travel to your other residence, and then
    >>>>pop them into your other printer when you arrive, and continue to use
    >>>>them.
    >>>>
    >>>>HP used to have a little case you could buy for transporting the head
    >>>>and cartridge units, and maybe they still do.
    >>>>
    >>>>Once the head/cartridge units (usually one for color and one for black
    >>>>ink, or one color and one photo which includes black plus two other
    >>>>colors) is removed form the printer, there is nothing left to clog. You
    >>>>can just unplug the printer until you return.
    >>>>
    >>>>Lexmark uses a similar design, however, although they may be cheaper to
    >>>>buy, the cost of running them is higher, their drivers are a real pain,
    >>>>they are not typically as well built, are not as reliable and will not
    >>>>give you the same quality printing as HP.
    >>>>
    >>>>Both Epson and Canon use heads that are separate from the ink cartridge.
    >>>>In the case of Epson they are permanently installed in the printer. In
    >>>>Canon they are removable, but they will clog up if left to dry out.
    >>>>
    >>>>I think your case is a perfect one for a couple of identical HP
    >>>>printers.
    >>>>
    >>>>Art
    >>>>
    >>>>BobS wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>I am currently living in the northern US and spending about 4 months
    >>>>>in Florida. I want to get an inkjet printer that will do an adequate
    >>>>>job on photos and also handle general printing tasks. I do not want to
    >>>>>carry the printer back and forth to Florida. I therefore need to find
    >>>>>a printer that can sit idle for 6 to 8 months and not be clogged when
    >>>>>I return to use it. Does anyone have any suggestions?
    >>>>>
    >>>>>BobS
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>
    >
    >
  9. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    "Bill" <bill@c.a> wrote in message news:S8mdnZ6DeL1FxRzcRVn-3Q@golden.net...
    > Arthur Entlich wrote:
    >
    >>Do Canon printers go through a purging cycle when you replace one
    >>cartridge, and if so, is each color head purged individually or as a
    >>group?
    >
    > I'm not positive, but I believe my Canon printer does a quick cleaning
    > cycle almost every time it's turned on. And if you print a lot of photos
    > in a row, it pauses printing to do a quick cleaning cycle, and then
    > continue.
    >
    > I'm guessing it does this cleaning with all of the colours.

    There are several different cleaning cycles in printers and all will cycle
    at power on. If the printer has been off for a short time (a few hours) it
    will perform a quick clean of the base of the printhead with a little wiper
    mechanism in the purge area. If the printer has been off for an extended
    period (many hours) it will do this and also fire a very minute amount of
    ink to clear the nozzles.
    The process during extensive print jobs that you mention is also the wiping
    process.
  10. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    Sir,

    You are correct that the photo colors in a five color cartridge run out
    about twice as fast as the high dye load colors do. I should have been
    more clear, that I was speaking about 4 color machines (CMYK) in terms
    of the Epsons. I believe HP doesn't supply their cartridges in that
    fashion. I believe they have one CMY cartridge and one K cartridge,
    which can be replaced with a photo cartridge which contains cmK (Photo
    cyan and magenta and Black). In such a system, the CMY usually run out
    about the same time, and the c and m do as well.

    Since you were comparing my HP suggestion to your Canon suggestion, I
    still believe the savings would be minimal if any, and the problem of
    the head still continues to exist. The savings of separate cartridges in
    that case, as in the CMY and K case is minimal.

    I would agree that the photo inks run out at about twice the speed as
    the others, which is actually why they are included... its a real money
    maker.

    I still stand behind my original suggestion to the person who wished to
    have two printers in two locations which he would be using at each
    location for half a year. The HP system seems best for his needs.

    Art


    Mr Jessop wrote:

    > If you like printing underwater pictures you will use up blue quite quickly.
    > Most people report the "photo colours" are used up more quickly than the
    > other 3 colours in canon printers. so a five colour cartridge would have a
    > lot of wastage. None of my cartridges have run out all at once either.
    >
    >
    > "Arthur Entlich" <artistic@telus.net> wrote in message
    > news:ss5gd.34232$9b.430@edtnps84...
    >
    >>Because of several reasons.
    >>
    >>Some people like to keep their printers more than one year (warranty
    >>period), and secondly, the ink savings on individual ink cartridges is, as
    >>has been discussed in the group numerous times, is nil to nothing in most
    >>cases.
    >>
    >>I won't go into the test results several of us have experienced, but the
    >>ink savings due to individual ink cartridges is one of the most overrated
    >>"savings" there is. In actual fact, it usually saves nothing, and may
    >>cost more, depending on how much the individual ink cartridges cost
    >>relative to the amount of ink and the cost of tri-color ink cartridges.
    >>
    >>Do Canon printers go through a purging cycle when you replace one
    >>cartridge, and if so, is each color head purged individually or as a
    >>group?
    >>
    >>Art
    >>
    >>PC Medic wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>Why not simply buy two Canon's.
    >>>First, using quality ink the heads should not clog to begin with. Second,
    >>>the Canon printheads are covered under the warranty so even if they were
    >>>to clog, they would be replaced free of charge. You also get the
    >>>convenience of individual ink tanks that also reduce printing cost
    >>>through reduced ink waste.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>"Arthur Entlich" <artistic@telus.net> wrote in message
    >>>news:8eLfd.17157$9b.1898@edtnps84...
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>All inkjet printers can clog. However, in your case the answer is to buy
    >>>>two of the same model printer which uses the integrated head and ink
    >>>>cartridges.
    >>>>
    >>>>I would suggest getting two HP printers of the same type, or that at
    >>>>least use the same ink cartridge type. SInce the cartridge/head units
    >>>>come out of the printer, but will probably not do well sitting for months
    >>>>without use, and they are costly, I suggest removing them and taking them
    >>>>with you when you travel to your other residence, and then pop them into
    >>>>your other printer when you arrive, and continue to use them.
    >>>>
    >>>>HP used to have a little case you could buy for transporting the head and
    >>>>cartridge units, and maybe they still do.
    >>>>
    >>>>Once the head/cartridge units (usually one for color and one for black
    >>>>ink, or one color and one photo which includes black plus two other
    >>>>colors) is removed form the printer, there is nothing left to clog. You
    >>>>can just unplug the printer until you return.
    >>>>
    >>>>Lexmark uses a similar design, however, although they may be cheaper to
    >>>>buy, the cost of running them is higher, their drivers are a real pain,
    >>>>they are not typically as well built, are not as reliable and will not
    >>>>give you the same quality printing as HP.
    >>>>
    >>>>Both Epson and Canon use heads that are separate from the ink cartridge.
    >>>>In the case of Epson they are permanently installed in the printer. In
    >>>>Canon they are removable, but they will clog up if left to dry out.
    >>>>
    >>>>I think your case is a perfect one for a couple of identical HP printers.
    >>>>
    >>>>Art
    >>>>
    >>>>BobS wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>I am currently living in the northern US and spending about 4 months
    >>>>>in Florida. I want to get an inkjet printer that will do an adequate
    >>>>>job on photos and also handle general printing tasks. I do not want to
    >>>>>carry the printer back and forth to Florida. I therefore need to find
    >>>>>a printer that can sit idle for 6 to 8 months and not be clogged when
    >>>>>I return to use it. Does anyone have any suggestions?
    >>>>>
    >>>>>BobS
    >>>>
    >>>
    >
    >
  11. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    Bill wrote:

    > Mr Jessop wrote:
    >
    >
    >> so a five colour cartridge would have a lot of wastage.
    >
    >
    > I don't believe a five colour cartridge exists. Three colours is the
    > most I've seen in a single unit.
    >

    Epson did make some printers with a five color cartridge (CcMmYK) and
    this is what led to the need for individual cartridges for their printers.

    I agree with most everything else you have said.

    Art
    >


    >> None of my cartridges have run out all at once either.
    >
    >
    > While that has never happened to me either, most of the time they run
    > low all within the same day when I'm printing photos.
  12. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    Dear Mr. "Medic",

    My testing is not flawed, in fact, it has been confirmed by numerous
    people and some who work in the cartridge manufacturing field.

    In the vast majority of cases, the amount of ink residing in a tricolor
    cartridge after one color runs out, is less than 10% of the other colors
    (again, I am not speaking of photo colors and high dye load in the same
    breath). Actually, the first color to run out is relatively
    subjective, depending upon the mix of images done, but yellow is more
    likely than cyan or magenta, because it is required for reds, greens,
    yellows, browns, and all flesh tones, regardless of race.

    Most printers go through a rather large purge cycle on any cartridge
    replacement to expel any air in the head/ ink feed tubes or cartridge
    outlet. This first purge can use up to 15% of the ink in the cartridge
    depending upon the model. Most printer use a purging system that uses a
    vacuum pump to dislodge air, and even on printers using individual
    colored ink cartridges, this pump removes ink not only from the new
    cartridge that is installed, but from ALL the ink cartridges. If each
    time one cartridge is replaced, all the other cartridges are also
    purged, very quickly a heck of a lot of ink goes down the drain.

    With a tri-color cartridge, only one purging cycle of that type occurs,
    when the cartridge is first installed for all three colors.

    The cost of cartridges may differ considerably between brands. I know
    that Canon has kept the cost of their cartridges lower than most, but I
    very much doubt that your perceived savings versus that of your brother
    is due to the tricolor versus individual tanks, which was my major point.

    Also, you speak about proper testing. Do you both print the same prints
    with the same content and the same number? How can you determine his
    printer costs so much more to operate? (It may, but I'm just wondering
    how you know that unless you also keep track of the type of printing
    done the quantity, etc.).

    Art

    PC Medic wrote:

    > "Arthur Entlich" <artistic@telus.net> wrote in message
    > news:ss5gd.34232$9b.430@edtnps84...
    >
    >>Because of several reasons.
    >>
    >>Some people like to keep their printers more than one year (warranty
    >>period),
    >
    >
    > Yes, my last retired Canon (still working at the time by the way) was 3
    > years and probably about 15,000 pages old.
    > An iP4000 can be had for about $189 (including the Canon 2 year Extended
    > Service Plan) so for 3 years you have no worry about replacing the printhead
    > should it dry out and clog (which it probably will not).
    >
    >
    >>and secondly, the ink savings on individual ink cartridges is, as has been
    >>discussed in the group numerous times, is nil to nothing in most cases.
    >>
    >
    >
    > Evidentally not discussed by anyone that understands costs and usage then.
    > If you have a tri-color tank for for say an HP and it still has plenty of
    > yellow and some cyan left, but have to toss it because you are out of
    > magenta only (the most common color used) to spend another $30+ for a
    > cartridge vs. being able to replace the single color tank on a Canon costing
    > only about $10 (an yields more pages per tank) then it is cheaper. Even Al
    > Gores fuzzy math can't change that.
    >
    >
    >>I won't go into the test results several of us have experienced, but the
    >>ink savings due to individual ink cartridges is one of the most overrated
    >>"savings" there is. In actual fact, it usually saves nothing, and may
    >>cost more, depending on how much the individual ink cartridges cost
    >>relative to the amount of ink and the cost of tri-color ink cartridges.
    >>
    >
    >
    > See above, your testing was flawed. I use my two Canon's here at home twice
    > as much as my brother uses his HP and he spends probably 3X more on ink than
    > I do.
    >
    >
    >>Do Canon printers go through a purging cycle when you replace one
    >>cartridge, and if so, is each color head purged individually or as a
    >>group?
    >>
    >
    >
    > Every printer does and as to whether all nozzles are purged depends on the
    > model. This is a pitiful example in that the amount during a purge is
    > minimal and you do not change your tanks every day. Now if you want to sit
    > and do 20 or so manual Head Refreshes you can certainly use up a tank of
    > ink, but then why would you do that
    >
    >
    >>Art
    >>
    >>PC Medic wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>Why not simply buy two Canon's.
    >>>First, using quality ink the heads should not clog to begin with. Second,
    >>>the Canon printheads are covered under the warranty so even if they were
    >>>to clog, they would be replaced free of charge. You also get the
    >>>convenience of individual ink tanks that also reduce printing cost
    >>>through reduced ink waste.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>"Arthur Entlich" <artistic@telus.net> wrote in message
    >>>news:8eLfd.17157$9b.1898@edtnps84...
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>All inkjet printers can clog. However, in your case the answer is to buy
    >>>>two of the same model printer which uses the integrated head and ink
    >>>>cartridges.
    >>>>
    >>>>I would suggest getting two HP printers of the same type, or that at
    >>>>least use the same ink cartridge type. SInce the cartridge/head units
    >>>>come out of the printer, but will probably not do well sitting for months
    >>>>without use, and they are costly, I suggest removing them and taking them
    >>>>with you when you travel to your other residence, and then pop them into
    >>>>your other printer when you arrive, and continue to use them.
    >>>>
    >>>>HP used to have a little case you could buy for transporting the head and
    >>>>cartridge units, and maybe they still do.
    >>>>
    >>>>Once the head/cartridge units (usually one for color and one for black
    >>>>ink, or one color and one photo which includes black plus two other
    >>>>colors) is removed form the printer, there is nothing left to clog. You
    >>>>can just unplug the printer until you return.
    >>>>
    >>>>Lexmark uses a similar design, however, although they may be cheaper to
    >>>>buy, the cost of running them is higher, their drivers are a real pain,
    >>>>they are not typically as well built, are not as reliable and will not
    >>>>give you the same quality printing as HP.
    >>>>
    >>>>Both Epson and Canon use heads that are separate from the ink cartridge.
    >>>>In the case of Epson they are permanently installed in the printer. In
    >>>>Canon they are removable, but they will clog up if left to dry out.
    >>>>
    >>>>I think your case is a perfect one for a couple of identical HP printers.
    >>>>
    >>>>Art
    >>>>
    >>>>BobS wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>I am currently living in the northern US and spending about 4 months
    >>>>>in Florida. I want to get an inkjet printer that will do an adequate
    >>>>>job on photos and also handle general printing tasks. I do not want to
    >>>>>carry the printer back and forth to Florida. I therefore need to find
    >>>>>a printer that can sit idle for 6 to 8 months and not be clogged when
    >>>>>I return to use it. Does anyone have any suggestions?
    >>>>>
    >>>>>BobS
    >>>>
    >>>
    >
    >
  13. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    Basing your results on your own personal habits only is about as flawed
    a test as you can have.

    Your results, and those of Mr. Jessops are not typical. If you were to
    read the original threads about this (only a week or two ago) you would
    see I mention these anomaly situations which also include people who
    print special logos, certain type of images (for instance with a lot of
    skies), etc. I am speaking about most people with average photo content.

    People who say things like " Never convince me that..." are often
    blinkered even when the truth is staring at them, so all I can say is,
    believe what you will, for the average person, your results do not coincide.

    Art


    PC Medic wrote:

    > My point exactly!
    > I tend to (as most will) go through Black and Magenta the most and in fact
    > probably change the magenta 3 to 1 over the yellow and 2 to 1 over the cyan.
    > Never convince me that a multi-color tank is not a waste of money.
    >
    >
    > "Mr Jessop" <anonymouse@isp.com> wrote in message
    > news:_mbgd.1440$up1.1330@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
    >
    >>If you like printing underwater pictures you will use up blue quite
    >>quickly. Most people report the "photo colours" are used up more quickly
    >>than the other 3 colours in canon printers. so a five colour cartridge
    >>would have a lot of wastage. None of my cartridges have run out all at
    >>once either.
    >>
    >>
    >>"Arthur Entlich" <artistic@telus.net> wrote in message
    >>news:ss5gd.34232$9b.430@edtnps84...
    >>
    >>>Because of several reasons.
    >>>
    >>>Some people like to keep their printers more than one year (warranty
    >>>period), and secondly, the ink savings on individual ink cartridges is,
    >>>as has been discussed in the group numerous times, is nil to nothing in
    >>>most cases.
    >>>
    >>>I won't go into the test results several of us have experienced, but the
    >>>ink savings due to individual ink cartridges is one of the most overrated
    >>>"savings" there is. In actual fact, it usually saves nothing, and may
    >>>cost more, depending on how much the individual ink cartridges cost
    >>>relative to the amount of ink and the cost of tri-color ink cartridges.
    >>>
    >>>Do Canon printers go through a purging cycle when you replace one
    >>>cartridge, and if so, is each color head purged individually or as a
    >>>group?
    >>>
    >>>Art
    >>>
    >>>PC Medic wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>Why not simply buy two Canon's.
    >>>>First, using quality ink the heads should not clog to begin with.
    >>>>Second, the Canon printheads are covered under the warranty so even if
    >>>>they were to clog, they would be replaced free of charge. You also get
    >>>>the convenience of individual ink tanks that also reduce printing cost
    >>>>through reduced ink waste.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>"Arthur Entlich" <artistic@telus.net> wrote in message
    >>>>news:8eLfd.17157$9b.1898@edtnps84...
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>All inkjet printers can clog. However, in your case the answer is to
    >>>>>buy two of the same model printer which uses the integrated head and ink
    >>>>>cartridges.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>I would suggest getting two HP printers of the same type, or that at
    >>>>>least use the same ink cartridge type. SInce the cartridge/head units
    >>>>>come out of the printer, but will probably not do well sitting for
    >>>>>months without use, and they are costly, I suggest removing them and
    >>>>>taking them with you when you travel to your other residence, and then
    >>>>>pop them into your other printer when you arrive, and continue to use
    >>>>>them.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>HP used to have a little case you could buy for transporting the head
    >>>>>and cartridge units, and maybe they still do.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>Once the head/cartridge units (usually one for color and one for black
    >>>>>ink, or one color and one photo which includes black plus two other
    >>>>>colors) is removed form the printer, there is nothing left to clog. You
    >>>>>can just unplug the printer until you return.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>Lexmark uses a similar design, however, although they may be cheaper to
    >>>>>buy, the cost of running them is higher, their drivers are a real pain,
    >>>>>they are not typically as well built, are not as reliable and will not
    >>>>>give you the same quality printing as HP.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>Both Epson and Canon use heads that are separate from the ink cartridge.
    >>>>>In the case of Epson they are permanently installed in the printer. In
    >>>>>Canon they are removable, but they will clog up if left to dry out.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>I think your case is a perfect one for a couple of identical HP
    >>>>>printers.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>Art
    >>>>>
    >>>>>BobS wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>I am currently living in the northern US and spending about 4 months
    >>>>>>in Florida. I want to get an inkjet printer that will do an adequate
    >>>>>>job on photos and also handle general printing tasks. I do not want to
    >>>>>>carry the printer back and forth to Florida. I therefore need to find
    >>>>>>a printer that can sit idle for 6 to 8 months and not be clogged when
    >>>>>>I return to use it. Does anyone have any suggestions?
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>BobS
    >>>>>
    >>>>
    >>
    >
    >
  14. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    "Arthur Entlich" <artistic@telus.net> wrote in message
    news:GQogd.18370$VA5.11118@clgrps13...
    > Basing your results on your own personal habits only is about as flawed a
    > test as you can have.

    not for your own use it isn't. As someone who sells cartridges everyday the
    hp owners are the most upset at the prices. As for refillers who
    successfully refill on a regular basis you are the minority i'm afraid. My
    i highlight successfully again ;)

    As for HP and lexmark they are doing everything they can to stop people
    refilling. They are even resorting to the courts. Whilst in europe they
    won't succeed because ink prices are being investigated as it is. Yes i
    have refilled many hp and lexmarks. It is messy inefficient, and quality of
    results vary wildly. I can buy canon genuine stuff for less than the
    factory refilled ones. I have seen those fail too.

    If i decided that reliability no matter what the price was the way to go i
    would take my stuff for a lab to do. They do a better job and cheaper too.
  15. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    Dear arthur please drop the argument. one of the problems i had when
    refilling was not realising that the level needed to refill was not equal
    for each colour. Unfortunately scientific testing of individual things like
    ink purging and making each set of pictures are the same is flawed. Only
    real world use works. Many epson customers do indeed complain that after a
    head block and several cleaning cycles later their carts are empty and heads
    are still blocked. I will never buy another epson.

    HP and lexmark have a great idea of new head with every cartridge. That
    swayed me for a while but the expense was tremendous and the rough results
    of refilling myself led me to try canon.

    Now i have had trouble and complained here about the cheap printers of canon
    and clogs. However they didn't clog when i owned them but when a freind
    took it over and ran them even when ink was dry. I also tried professional
    refilling and inkcartridgeworld and baulked at the lack of quality. The
    price wasn't great either. However, my expensive canon printer with
    seperate tanks and the visibly checkable and deadly accurate level indicator
    rules supreme. The running costs even with genuine stuff is modest too.

    I therefore wish to summarise.

    1. if it wasn't for hps greed they would have the best system.
    2. individual tanks rule!
    3. the website saying that sub £100 printers are a false economy are quite
    correct.
    4.canon consumables are the most reasonably priced
    5. anyone vouching for a system that requires a screwdriver, dirty hands and
    third party products are missing the point when weighing these things up.
    5b. throwing scorn on people for not coping with above as well as you do
    won't help your position
    6. on the whole arthur entlich gives very useful advice.

    and my own futher point. If you want 6x4 or 5x7 inch prints good and cheap
    then go to a lab and hand over your chip.
    If you want large prints, quick and complete control over colour etc buy a
    quality home printer.
    If it really matters and you really are that good then 5 or more inks will
    make a difference but only to you and people in the professional industry
    and the odd photography judge.
  16. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    "Mr Jessop" <anonymouse@isp.com> wrote in message
    news:40wgd.2097$up1.1670@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
    [snip]

    > and my own futher point. If you want 6x4 or 5x7 inch prints good and cheap
    > then go to a lab and hand over your chip.

    At 4x6 prints it is now getting close; both HP and Epson have ink
    cartridge/paper bundles that provide 4x6 prints for about $0.30, competitive
    with most of the lab prints. At 5x7 the picture changes; printing your own is
    generally more economical than having the retailer print them for you.

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

    "Bob Headrick" <bobh@proaxis.com> wrote in message
    news:10o618j28ms9d6c@corp.supernews.com...
    >
    > "Mr Jessop" <anonymouse@isp.com> wrote in message
    > news:40wgd.2097$up1.1670@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
    > [snip]
    >
    >> and my own futher point. If you want 6x4 or 5x7 inch prints good and
    >> cheap then go to a lab and hand over your chip.
    >
    > At 4x6 prints it is now getting close; both HP and Epson have ink
    > cartridge/paper bundles that provide 4x6 prints for about $0.30,
    > competitive with most of the lab prints. At 5x7 the picture changes;
    > printing your own is generally more economical than having the retailer
    > print them for you.
    >
    > Regards,
    > Bob Headrick, not speaking for my employer HP

    azda boots and jessops all do 50x 60x4 prints for £5. jessops do 50x 6x4
    for 6.99. Even at staff price for paper and third party inks i can't beat
    that.
  18. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    Let's get back to original issue. Someone asked advice on which printer
    would be least likely to cause him a problem is he had one in one
    location and one in another and he traveled between the two with large
    gaps of time between, possibly as long as 6 months or more.

    I suggested, and I still stick to my suggestion of a HP printer, because
    they have an incorporated ink and head cartridge which could be removed
    leaving the printer safe for reinstallation on return, and that the
    cartridge could travel with him to the other location.

    In terms of keeping the printers safe and usable without clogging, in
    terms of using up the cartridges without likely having them dry up or
    fail, the HP approach is best for this person.

    In terms of ink usage, being "stuck" with one or even two tricolor
    cartridges as opposed to individual cartridges, or the cost differential
    of the HP cartridges versus Canon or Epson cartridges or worrying about
    the amount of ink lost due to one ink running out early is minutia
    relative to the potential head and clogging issue FOR THE SPECIFIC
    CIRCUMSTANCES this specific request was dealing with.

    Having said that, even for people who are not in this specific need, the
    differences in ink USAGE for individual versus tri-color cartridges,
    leave little difference in terms of ink loss.

    I am not discussing cost per ml of ink, because this varies widely
    depending on cartridge, printer type, brand, ink type and several other
    variables, however, all of them do have to be factored is cost of ink is
    the number one issue.

    Art


    Mr Jessop wrote:

    > "Arthur Entlich" <artistic@telus.net> wrote in message
    > news:GQogd.18370$VA5.11118@clgrps13...
    >
    >>Basing your results on your own personal habits only is about as flawed a
    >>test as you can have.
    >
    >
    > not for your own use it isn't. As someone who sells cartridges everyday the
    > hp owners are the most upset at the prices. As for refillers who
    > successfully refill on a regular basis you are the minority i'm afraid. My
    > i highlight successfully again ;)
    >
    > As for HP and lexmark they are doing everything they can to stop people
    > refilling. They are even resorting to the courts. Whilst in europe they
    > won't succeed because ink prices are being investigated as it is. Yes i
    > have refilled many hp and lexmarks. It is messy inefficient, and quality of
    > results vary wildly. I can buy canon genuine stuff for less than the
    > factory refilled ones. I have seen those fail too.
    >
    > If i decided that reliability no matter what the price was the way to go i
    > would take my stuff for a lab to do. They do a better job and cheaper too.
    >
    >
  19. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    NO, I will not allow you to have the "last word" when you leave a
    misrepresentation of what I have stated.

    I have seen numerous tests done on ink usage. Believe me, all the
    inkjet printer companies need to know about this, and there have been
    many test does of this nature. On average, in 4 color printers (CMY-K)
    there is little ink left over once one of the three (CMY) color runs
    out unless unusual production is involved.

    This has nothing to do with refilling, or third party products, neither
    of which I have mentioned in this thread.

    TO reiterate once more, this thread was initiated by someone asking
    about the best system to avoid head clogging when a printer was going to
    be left unattended for up to half a year because this person had two
    residences and did not want to move the printer.

    The only two modern inkjet systems using the removable ink/head combo
    are Lexmark and HP. I cannot recommend Lexmark in good conscience,
    mainly because the drivers are problematic, and for some models print
    quality and reliability are not as good. That leaves HP, which provide
    a good quality image, and have a reasonable acquisition cost. I have
    not priced the cartridges, but obviously with millions of them being
    sold, and with HP the number one sold inkjet printer, they can't be
    horribly more costly than other brands.

    In the case at hand, they strike me as the best alternative.

    Now, as to the Canon issue... Just this weekend, I was looking over the
    newest Canon Printers which are just arriving in Canada now. The 500,
    3000, 4000, 5000, 6000, etc. The print results on their super glossy
    paper is tremendous, especially the 3000 and above. The 6000 is
    fantastic. I'm speaking print quality... not speed, not reliability,
    not clogging, not cost of ink, not print driver quality, or color
    accuracy, not refillability and certainly not permanence. Most of these
    things I cannot determine from looking at test prints which were
    produced by Canon.

    However, I can say one thing about permanence of earlier models. At
    same said dealer they had several prints from the previous i series
    printers on display. These were exposed to medium high level
    fluorescent light, unprotected by anything (no glass or plastic). These
    prints were probably between 6 and 8 months old and were also printed by
    Canon (or for them). They all showed unbalanced fading which manifested
    in loss of the light cyan and black density, making them look like very
    old color C2 prints.

    I like a lot of things Canon is doing. I like the fact they are moving
    back to four color with new smaller droplets. I like it that they are
    somewhat more reasonable with their inks and that the inks cartridges
    are easy to refill, should people so desire. I like that they aren't
    spending a fortune on trying to thwart companies from making 3rd party
    product.

    I only wish they produced printers which worked with more stable inks,
    and I hope they do so soon.

    Epson produces consumer inks and papers that can hold the image together
    for up to 200 years, and HP has some that are good for half a decade or
    more. Many 3rd party inks are available for Epson printers, even those
    sold for dye inks, which will allow for much better permanence. I
    haven't followed the Canon market, are their pigmented inks that work
    well with them now?

    I totally agree that Epson printers should be more user friendly in
    keeping them clog free. Epson has made some improvements, especially
    with their dye based inks, but now they need to work out those details
    with the pigmented inks. Canon has some issues also, such as head life,
    and if they can resolve ink permanence.

    I have often stated in the last year or so, that print quality is very
    similar between the three major brands of inkjet printers, and so except
    in quite critical situations, that is no longer the major consideration.

    So, in the end, which printer one gets depends upon what features one
    find most critical. I can only advise people based upon what they
    indicate is important to them, and that is why I responded to this
    thread that HP was the best answer for that poster.

    Art


    Mr Jessop wrote:

    > Dear arthur please drop the argument. one of the problems i had when
    > refilling was not realising that the level needed to refill was not equal
    > for each colour. Unfortunately scientific testing of individual things like
    > ink purging and making each set of pictures are the same is flawed. Only
    > real world use works. Many epson customers do indeed complain that after a
    > head block and several cleaning cycles later their carts are empty and heads
    > are still blocked. I will never buy another epson.
    >
    > HP and lexmark have a great idea of new head with every cartridge. That
    > swayed me for a while but the expense was tremendous and the rough results
    > of refilling myself led me to try canon.
    >
    > Now i have had trouble and complained here about the cheap printers of canon
    > and clogs. However they didn't clog when i owned them but when a freind
    > took it over and ran them even when ink was dry. I also tried professional
    > refilling and inkcartridgeworld and baulked at the lack of quality. The
    > price wasn't great either. However, my expensive canon printer with
    > seperate tanks and the visibly checkable and deadly accurate level indicator
    > rules supreme. The running costs even with genuine stuff is modest too.
    >
    > I therefore wish to summarise.
    >
    > 1. if it wasn't for hps greed they would have the best system.
    > 2. individual tanks rule!
    > 3. the website saying that sub £100 printers are a false economy are quite
    > correct.
    > 4.canon consumables are the most reasonably priced
    > 5. anyone vouching for a system that requires a screwdriver, dirty hands and
    > third party products are missing the point when weighing these things up.
    > 5b. throwing scorn on people for not coping with above as well as you do
    > won't help your position
    > 6. on the whole arthur entlich gives very useful advice.
    >
    > and my own futher point. If you want 6x4 or 5x7 inch prints good and cheap
    > then go to a lab and hand over your chip.
    > If you want large prints, quick and complete control over colour etc buy a
    > quality home printer.
    > If it really matters and you really are that good then 5 or more inks will
    > make a difference but only to you and people in the professional industry
    > and the odd photography judge.
    >
    >
  20. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    "Arthur Entlich" <artistic@telus.net> wrote in message
    news:65%gd.35242$VA5.17735@clgrps13...
    > NO, I will not allow you to have the "last word" when you leave a
    > misrepresentation of what I have stated.
    >
    > I have seen numerous tests done on ink usage. Believe me, all the inkjet
    > printer companies need to know about this, and there have been many test
    > does of this nature. On average, in 4 color printers (CMY-K) there is
    > little ink left over once one of the three (CMY) color runs out unless
    > unusual production is involved.
    >

    Bull Ka-Ka

    > This has nothing to do with refilling, or third party products, neither of
    > which I have mentioned in this thread.
    >
    > TO reiterate once more, this thread was initiated by someone asking about
    > the best system to avoid head clogging when a printer was going to be left
    > unattended for up to half a year because this person had two residences
    > and did not want to move the printer.
    >
    > The only two modern inkjet systems using the removable ink/head combo are
    > Lexmark and HP.

    Wrong again! They may be the only two charging you from day one to replace
    the removeable printhead, but that's about it.

    I cannot recommend Lexmark in good conscience,
    > mainly because the drivers are problematic, and for some models print
    > quality and reliability are not as good. That leaves HP, which provide a
    > good quality image, and have a reasonable acquisition cost. I have not
    > priced the cartridges, but obviously with millions of them being sold, and
    > with HP the number one sold inkjet printer, they can't be horribly more
    > costly than other brands.
    >

    Bad analogy, Sony is the number one (and one of the most costly) consumer
    electronics providers.


    > In the case at hand, they strike me as the best alternative.
    >
    > Now, as to the Canon issue... Just this weekend, I was looking over the
    > newest Canon Printers which are just arriving in Canada now. The 500,
    > 3000, 4000, 5000, 6000, etc. The print results on their super glossy
    > paper is tremendous, especially the 3000 and above. The 6000 is
    > fantastic. I'm speaking print quality... not speed, not reliability, not
    > clogging, not cost of ink, not print driver quality, or color accuracy,
    > not refillability and certainly not permanence. Most of these things I
    > cannot determine from looking at test prints which were produced by Canon.
    >

    Just got my iP4000 and hope it lasts as well as my other Canons

    > However, I can say one thing about permanence of earlier models. At same
    > said dealer they had several prints from the previous i series printers on
    > display. These were exposed to medium high level fluorescent light,
    > unprotected by anything (no glass or plastic). These prints were probably
    > between 6 and 8 months old and were also printed by Canon (or for them).
    > They all showed unbalanced fading which manifested in loss of the light
    > cyan and black density, making them look like very old color C2 prints.
    >

    Never had this problem, but have heard of others (from various manufactures)
    that did, but air quality is more harmful than just lighting. Kill a print
    by stickig to the frodge (can you say ozone emitter)

    > I like a lot of things Canon is doing. I like the fact they are moving
    > back to four color with new smaller droplets. I like it that they are
    > somewhat more reasonable with their inks and that the inks cartridges are
    > easy to refill, should people so desire. I like that they aren't spending
    > a fortune on trying to thwart companies from making 3rd party product.
    >
    > I only wish they produced printers which worked with more stable inks, and
    > I hope they do so soon.
    >
    > Epson produces consumer inks and papers that can hold the image together
    > for up to 200 years, and HP has some that are good for half a decade or
    > more. Many 3rd party inks are available for Epson printers, even those
    > sold for dye inks, which will allow for much better permanence. I haven't
    > followed the Canon market, are their pigmented inks that work well with
    > them now?
    >

    But just as many complaints about Epson and HP fading can be found. To many
    variables here for me to judge the product on it.


    > So, in the end, which printer one gets depends upon what features one find
    > most critical. I can only advise people based upon what they indicate is
    > important to them, and that is why I responded to this thread that HP was
    > the best answer for that poster.
    >

    Agree to disagree here, we can all offer OUR opinions and it should be
    remembered that your mileage may vary
  21. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    "Arthur Entlich" <artistic@telus.net> wrote in message
    news:65%gd.35242$VA5.17735@clgrps13...
    > NO, I will not allow you to have the "last word" when you leave a
    > misrepresentation of what I have stated.

    I am guilty of no such thing.

    > I have seen numerous tests done on ink usage. Believe me, all the inkjet
    > printer companies need to know about this,

    slightly arrogant statement there.


    and there have been
    > many test does of this nature. On average, in 4 color printers (CMY-K)

    Two things there. 1. on average. 2. 4 colour printers.


    > there is little ink left over once one of the three (CMY) color runs

    Considering there is little ink to start with......

    > out unless unusual production is involved.

    So nothng unsusual about holiday beach shots -lots of blue water then more
    blue sky. landscapes lots of blue.

    > This has nothing to do with refilling, or third party products, neither of
    > which I have mentioned in this thread.

    never said you had.
    >
    > TO reiterate once more, this thread was initiated

    okay but threads change over their length. my comments were justified.
    Besides things like cost of use ease of refilling etc are something to
    consider.

    by someone asking
    > about the best system to avoid head clogging when a printer was going to
    > be left unattended for up to half a year because this person had two
    > residences and did not want to move the printer.

    Considering the cost of hp printers and genuine refills he may as well buy a
    cheap one and chuck it once it clogs. The carts are that expensive.

    "1. if it wasn't for hps greed they would have the best system."


    if he wishes to do quality prints that infrequently i would suggest the
    local lab far more cost effective. As for doing text a mono laser would be
    infinitely cheaper yes even an hp one. Hp lasers seem to go on nearly
    forever.


    >
    > The only two modern inkjet systems using the removable ink/head combo are
    > Lexmark and HP. I cannot recommend Lexmark in good conscience,

    me neither


    .. That leaves HP, which provide
    > a good quality image, and have a reasonable acquisition cost.

    They all do. Total cost of ownership is another matter.

    I have not priced the cartridges, but obviously with millions of them
    being > sold, and with HP the number one sold inkjet printer, they can't be
    > horribly more costly than other brands.

    For someone who puts store so much by independent scientific testing that
    well.....

    Not until the poor souls come to buy a new cartridge but there are still
    plenty of first time buyers getting stung. I should know i sell them the
    cartridges then watch their faces when the work it out. Can count on their
    next purchase not being an HP>
    >
    > In the case at hand, they strike me as the best alternative.

    Mono laser and local lab.

    > Now, as to the Canon issue... Just this weekend, I was looking over the
    > newest Canon Printers which are just arriving in Canada now. The 500,
    > 3000, 4000, 5000, 6000, etc. The print results on their super glossy
    > paper is tremendous, especially the 3000 and above. The 6000 is
    > fantastic. I'm speaking print quality... not speed, not reliability, not
    > clogging, not cost of ink, not print driver quality, or color accuracy,
    > not refillability and certainly not permanence. Most of these things I
    > cannot determine from looking at test prints which were produced by Canon.

    Canon are renouned for their speed. Most manufacturers are catching up.
    Now the difference is 1 or two minutes not 10 or 20. so fair enough there my
    lad. At least until you get to A3 models.

    > However, I can say one thing about permanence of earlier models. At same
    > said dealer they had several prints from the previous i series printers on
    > display. These were exposed to medium high level fluorescent light,
    > unprotected by anything (no glass or plastic). These prints were probably
    > between 6 and 8 months old and were also printed by Canon (or for them).
    > They all showed unbalanced fading which manifested in loss of the light
    > cyan and black density, making them look like very old color C2 prints.

    Yup. they have quite a problem there. I have dealt with that by using non
    canon paper and careful storage but yes it is an issue.

    >
    > I like a lot of things Canon is doing. I like the fact they are moving
    > back to four color with new smaller droplets. I like it that they are
    > somewhat more reasonable with their inks and that the inks cartridges are
    > easy to refill, should people so desire. I like that they aren't spending
    > a fortune on trying to thwart companies from making 3rd party product.
    >
    > I only wish they produced printers which worked with more stable inks, and
    > I hope they do so soon.

    Then Hp will no longer justify stupidly high costs for their carts.


    >
    > Epson produces consumer inks and papers that can hold the image together
    > for up to 200 years, and HP has some that are good for half a decade or
    > more. Many 3rd party inks are available for Epson printers, even those
    > sold for dye inks, which will allow for much better permanence. I haven't
    > followed the Canon market, are their pigmented inks that work well with
    > them now?

    nah! But its a start.

    >
    > I totally agree that Epson printers should be more user friendly in
    > keeping them clog free. Epson has made some improvements, especially with
    > their dye based inks, but now they need to work out those details with the
    > pigmented inks. Canon has some issues also, such as head life,

    Yes very much so. Probably why they made it so easy to remove.

    > and if they can resolve ink permanence.

    yeah that would be great.

    >
    > I have often stated in the last year or so, that print quality is very
    > similar between the three major brands of inkjet printers, and so except
    > in quite critical situations, that is no longer the major consideration.

    I hope so. Friend just bought a very expensive scanner, fax, copier,
    printer. will let you know.


    >
    > So, in the end, which printer one gets depends upon what features one find
    > most critical. I can only advise people based upon what they indicate is
    > important to them, and that is why I responded to this thread that HP was
    > the best answer for that poster.
    >
    > Art

    I will be generous and say out of the inkjets its probably correct. But
    local labs and lasers were overlooked. Considering the costs of hp inkjets
    their laser jet range shouldn't be overlooked. Nor should the local labs.

    In fact in most circumstances even in my own shop when someone asks "whats
    the best printer you would recommend" I point to the kiosk.

    Inkjets are cheap n cheerful and multipurpose all rounders. If you
    desperately want the best and typcially only want small prints then get a
    dye sub. Print at home for 30pence per print and get the long life.

    If you want big prints. lab or inkjet. Dye sub still too new to be cost
    effective even at a4 let alone a3.

    So to summarise yet again
    1.Single inktank systems still rule
    2. hp would be great except for their excessive cartridge pricing
    don't overlook dye subs or mini labs. or the humble mono laser for text.
  22. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    I wanted to correct an error I made in this posting this left an
    incorrect impression.

    In the paragraph below, it should have read:

    Epson produces consumer inks and papers that can hold the image together
    for up to 200 years, and HP has some that are good for half a century or
    more.

    Art

    Arthur Entlich wrote:


    > Epson produces consumer inks and papers that can hold the image together
    > for up to 200 years, and HP has some that are good for half a decade or
    > more. Many 3rd party inks are available for Epson printers, even those
    > sold for dye inks, which will allow for much better permanence. I
    > haven't followed the Canon market, are their pigmented inks that work
    > well with them now?
    >
    read that HP was the best answer for that poster.
    >
    > Art
Ask a new question

Read More

Printers Inkjet Peripherals