Anyone using Canon Pixma with non-canon cartridges?

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

Hello

I need to do short and long runs of flyers for mailing (mostly black text, some photos)

I will never need to print photos on photo quality paper.

I can get replacement cartridges very, very cheap which makes it less expensive in the long run than getting a colour laser printer.

I would like to know your personal experience using the ip4000 or ip5000 with replacement cartridges continously........ has anyone used them non-stop since they bought their printer? How many have you used so far? Please mention if you refill yourself or buy no-name cartridges ready to go. How is your print quality now compared to the original cartridge the printer came with?

The main problem with using these dodgy cartridges appears to be clogging of the print head. I would be interested in anyone's thoughts on which printer would be best with non-original cartridges. Would the ip4000 with the 2 picoliter droplets be better than the ip5000 with the 1 picolitre droplets, as it is wider and therefore less chance of clogging?
19 answers Last reply
More about anyone canon pixma canon cartridges
  1. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    "Mapanari" <whosthat@anonmail.com> wrote in message
    news:Xns962AB5F2C2A0Amapi@216.168.3.64...
    > The research I've done, and as a former purchasing manger/buyer, leads me
    > to believe that almost all OEM ink comes from only a few places, and they
    > sell the same bulk ink to online resellers; with the caveat that they can't
    > say "Same as HP ink!" because that would screw their sales of bulk ink to
    > HP and Canon et al.
    >
    > The formula and the ink is pretty basic.

    Your research is faulty. Making an ink formulation that gives optimum
    lightfastness, black to color bleed, print quality, image quality, optical
    density, color balance and other parameters while still maintaining nozzle
    health is not something printer manufacturers just pick off the shelf. Printer
    companies invest heavily in ink chemistry and they typically own the
    intellectual property of given formulations. HP, Epson and Cannon have hundred
    of ink related patents.

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

    I agree with Bob, that a great deal of investment is made in designing
    the OEM inks. However, many of these designs (which they patent) are
    not so much improvements as they are designed to make it difficult to
    replicate without patent violation. Now this is not the case in every
    patent they make regarding inks, but I've seen some of the Canon, HP,
    and Epson patents and it looks like every thing they do they get a
    patent for it, whether it has some benefit or not. Given the prices HP
    and other companies charge for the cartridges they well afford to
    obtain and enforce such patents.

    Don't get me wrong, I love HP laser printers (I can live without their
    inkjets). But I've used both OEM and 3rd party party products in all
    the printers I have available to me and I know that there are 3rd party
    solutions that work just as well as the OEM, without killing the
    machines.

    However, I believe that 3rd party solutions are best used by those who
    have the time and abilty to work with their equipment or who can find a
    3rd party source thay can trust (referrals from a trusted friend who
    can demonstrate their use is always good). I've made 3rd party
    solutions into a business and know first hand that their are both well
    made and p*** poor sources of 3rd party products out there.

    That said, it does not mean that alternate sources can't be just as
    good. A great deal of money is invested by 3rd party ink manufacturers
    (some of whom act as the OEM co-manufacturer for companies such as HP,
    Canon , Epson , Lexmark) in designing inks and toners which replicate
    the characteristics of the formulations with patented characteristics
    without violating patents. Keep in mind that a good 3rd party solution
    may not be just the ink or toner alone, but usually include alternate
    media, cartridges and/or processes which permit the 3rd party product
    to work like the OEM. The level of involvement you wish to make in your
    3rd party solution quite often determines how well it works for your
    specific needs. OEM solutions presented by the printer maker are fast
    and easy, but you pay the price, since these companies do invest a
    great deal of money to make it fast and easy. So the price you pay is
    for the technology which makes the printers as easy to use and maintain
    as possible with the minimal amount of involvement on your end other
    than to click and print.
  3. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    "Bob Headrick" <bobh@proaxis.com>
    wrotenews:114pef3n8psai84@corp.supernews.com:

    >
    > "Mapanari" <whosthat@anonmail.com> wrote in message
    > news:Xns962AB5F2C2A0Amapi@216.168.3.64...
    >> The research I've done, and as a former purchasing manger/buyer, leads
    >> me to believe that almost all OEM ink comes from only a few places, and
    >> they sell the same bulk ink to online resellers; with the caveat that
    >> they can't say "Same as HP ink!" because that would screw their sales
    >> of bulk ink to HP and Canon et al.
    >>
    >> The formula and the ink is pretty basic.
    >
    > Your research is faulty. Making an ink formulation that gives optimum
    > lightfastness, black to color bleed, print quality, image quality,
    > optical density, color balance and other parameters while still
    > maintaining nozzle health is not something printer manufacturers just
    > pick off the shelf. Printer companies invest heavily in ink chemistry
    > and they typically own the intellectual property of given formulations.
    > HP, Epson and Cannon have hundred of ink related patents.
    >
    > - Bob Headrick, not speaking for my employer HP
    >
    >
    >

    Right...and Exxon gas will put a tiger in your tank and BP gas will help
    clean your valves and Texaco gas will give you better milage....and
    yet....all the tanker trucks stop off at the same HESS Refinary depot every
    morning from every station and refill their tanker trucks with the same
    gas.

    And yet, millions of mooing morons will swear they get better gas milage by
    using Exxon instead of that "no name gas on the corner, which has water in
    it it and is cheap bad gas!", and pay an extra 30c a gallon too!

    Son, you really are a child of the 80's advertising mass media consumption
    market.

    Granted, there is a slight diference in some inks, but 90% of the diference
    is in advertising, not physical properties.


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

    Mapanari wrote:

    >"Bob Headrick" <bobh@proaxis.com>
    >wrotenews:114pef3n8psai84@corp.supernews.com:
    >
    >
    >
    >>"Mapanari" <whosthat@anonmail.com> wrote in message
    >>news:Xns962AB5F2C2A0Amapi@216.168.3.64...
    >>
    >>
    >>>The research I've done, and as a former purchasing manger/buyer, leads
    >>>me to believe that almost all OEM ink comes from only a few places, and
    >>>they sell the same bulk ink to online resellers; with the caveat that
    >>>they can't say "Same as HP ink!" because that would screw their sales
    >>>of bulk ink to HP and Canon et al.
    >>>
    >>>The formula and the ink is pretty basic.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>Your research is faulty. Making an ink formulation that gives optimum
    >>lightfastness, black to color bleed, print quality, image quality,
    >>optical density, color balance and other parameters while still
    >>maintaining nozzle health is not something printer manufacturers just
    >>pick off the shelf. Printer companies invest heavily in ink chemistry
    >>and they typically own the intellectual property of given formulations.
    >>HP, Epson and Cannon have hundred of ink related patents.
    >>
    >>- Bob Headrick, not speaking for my employer HP
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >
    >Right...and Exxon gas will put a tiger in your tank and BP gas will help
    >clean your valves and Texaco gas will give you better milage....and
    >yet....all the tanker trucks stop off at the same HESS Refinary depot every
    >morning from every station and refill their tanker trucks with the same
    >gas.
    >
    >And yet, millions of mooing morons will swear they get better gas milage by
    >using Exxon instead of that "no name gas on the corner, which has water in
    >it it and is cheap bad gas!", and pay an extra 30c a gallon too!
    >
    >Son, you really are a child of the 80's advertising mass media consumption
    >market.
    >
    >Granted, there is a slight diference in some inks, but 90% of the diference
    >is in advertising, not physical properties.
    >
    >

    And that is why you hear of printhead clogs all over this NG. And the
    majority of the users reporting these problems are not using OEM BRANDED
    inks.

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

    "Son" you really don't know what you are speaking of, about gasoline or
    about inks. In my neck of the woods, people like you are referred to
    (in polite circles) as "Sophomores" it's greek and it means "wise
    foolish" because you think you know a great deal more than you do.

    You are correct that gas is often refined at a centralized locale and
    that the companies use each others refineries and trucking, because it
    makes no sense at all to ship the gasoline hundreds of miles when their
    is a much closer refinery or distribution point. However, what makes
    gasoline unique and cost different amounts, other than some distilling
    properties, is additives. And additives are just that, they are added
    to the gasoline either in the tanker itself, at the refinery just as it
    is pumped, or sometimes even at the gas station.

    And it is these additives that often do make a difference in
    performance. There are studies done by independent research facilities
    that prove all gasoline is not the same. Some additives improve
    combustion, or change flash point temperature, or reduce carbon build up.

    Yes, cars will run on pretty much any gasoline that comes close to the
    required octane rating for the compression ration of the cylinders, but
    that does not mean it will run efficiently and with the least wear.
    Just because you may be too oblivious to recognize when an engine runs
    well and when it doesn't, or if it gets superior gas mileage doesn't
    mean it doesn't do so.

    And, to a certain extent, the same holds for inks. If you, as I, had
    taken the time to read the patents surrounding inkjet ink formulations,
    and if you had any understanding of the complexities of the technologies
    involved, instead of b*tching about the $29 printer you got a year's use
    out of, you'd be absolutely fascinated by the marvel of a printer
    capable of such precision costing so little.

    I use 3rd party inks, and I voted against everything I could involving
    things Carly F. did at HP, but you are way off here.

    Art


    Mapanari wrote:

    > "Bob Headrick" <bobh@proaxis.com>
    > wrotenews:114pef3n8psai84@corp.supernews.com:
    >
    >
    >>"Mapanari" <whosthat@anonmail.com> wrote in message
    >>news:Xns962AB5F2C2A0Amapi@216.168.3.64...
    >>
    >>>The research I've done, and as a former purchasing manger/buyer, leads
    >>>me to believe that almost all OEM ink comes from only a few places, and
    >>>they sell the same bulk ink to online resellers; with the caveat that
    >>>they can't say "Same as HP ink!" because that would screw their sales
    >>>of bulk ink to HP and Canon et al.
    >>>
    >>>The formula and the ink is pretty basic.
    >>
    >>Your research is faulty. Making an ink formulation that gives optimum
    >>lightfastness, black to color bleed, print quality, image quality,
    >>optical density, color balance and other parameters while still
    >>maintaining nozzle health is not something printer manufacturers just
    >>pick off the shelf. Printer companies invest heavily in ink chemistry
    >>and they typically own the intellectual property of given formulations.
    >>HP, Epson and Cannon have hundred of ink related patents.
    >>
    >>- Bob Headrick, not speaking for my employer HP
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >
    >
    > Right...and Exxon gas will put a tiger in your tank and BP gas will help
    > clean your valves and Texaco gas will give you better milage....and
    > yet....all the tanker trucks stop off at the same HESS Refinary depot every
    > morning from every station and refill their tanker trucks with the same
    > gas.
    >
    > And yet, millions of mooing morons will swear they get better gas milage by
    > using Exxon instead of that "no name gas on the corner, which has water in
    > it it and is cheap bad gas!", and pay an extra 30c a gallon too!
    >
    > Son, you really are a child of the 80's advertising mass media consumption
    > market.
    >
    > Granted, there is a slight diference in some inks, but 90% of the diference
    > is in advertising, not physical properties.
    >
    >
  6. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    In article <tm94e.150918$gJ3.139225@clgrps13>, artistic@telus.net says...
    > Yes, cars will run on pretty much any gasoline that comes close to the
    > required octane rating for the compression ration of the cylinders, but
    > that does not mean it will run efficiently and with the least wear.
    > Just because you may be too oblivious to recognize when an engine runs
    > well and when it doesn't, or if it gets superior gas mileage doesn't
    > mean it doesn't do so.
    >
    > And, to a certain extent, the same holds for inks. If you, as I, had
    > taken the time to read the patents surrounding inkjet ink formulations,
    > and if you had any understanding of the complexities of the technologies
    > involved, instead of b*tching about the $29 printer you got a year's use
    > out of, you'd be absolutely fascinated by the marvel of a printer
    > capable of such precision costing so little.
    >
    > I use 3rd party inks, and I voted against everything I could involving
    > things Carly F. did at HP, but you are way off here.
    >
    > Art
    >
    >

    I have used third party inks for years with Canon printers (going all the way
    back to the BJC-600) and I have found that if you buy high quality ink, you
    wonr have a problem.

    As a matter of fact, the only Canon print head Ive had fail on me (so far)
    never had anything other than OEM ink in it.

    It was in one of my i950 printers. After about six months of daily use, it
    simply wouldnt print Magenta any more.

    I called Canon Tech. support and they put me through a few simple test (which
    I had already done, and then some), and at the end of maybe 20 minutes, the
    tech decided the head needed replacement.

    All he required of me was a name, address, and serial number of the printer.

    New head arrived within 3 days.

    I dont shop for price when I buy ink, rather I stick with what I found early
    on, and so far, it has worked well for me.

    For my Canon printers (right now 2 I960, 1 ip4000, 1I950) I use ink from MIS,
    and/or Formulabs. I do not buy generic carts prefilled, I buy OEM carts and
    refill them and I buy empty carts from MIS.


    I do NOT mix inkbrands. If a printer has MIS ink in it I simply put a piece
    of masking tape on it (uaually under the lid) with a big letter M on it, and
    a big letter F goes on the printer with Formulabs.

    I do, from time to time change the ink from one brand to another in a given
    printer, but ONLY after a good "flushing" with distilled water mixed with
    about 10% household Ammonia.

    Since January 1 2005 I have printed over 300 8x10" photos, and about 150
    5x7" photos (going by the difference in paper invetory between then and now)
    and other than a cleaning cycle right after changing carts, no other
    maintenance has been required on the two printers used. (ip400, and my oldest
    I960).

    I do recommend however, if you are refilling Canon Cartridges, dont wait
    'till the cartridge is EMPTY.. replace the cart when the indicator says LOW.
    That way you never have a situation where the sponge dries out, and you dont
    have to "prime" the sponge.

    I keep about ten sets of carts, filled and ready, and when there are more
    than three or four carts waiting to be filled, I do them all at once, giving
    them about ten minutes to "equalize .(10 minutes is enough time for the
    sponge to fill up if it was low). After the 10 minute wait, I top off any
    carts that have dropped in level when the sponge filled up, then tape over
    ALL openings on the carts, including the vents. Then I store them 'till I
    need them.

    REMEMBER THIS IF YOU REFILL:

    Any place that sells bulk ink that says "this ink works in all unkjet
    printers" is lying.

    There is NO one ink that will work in more than one type of printer reliably.

    Strange as it is, those inks seem to be formulated to work in Lexmark
    printers. My friend buys generic refill ink at Sears (at least he did 'till
    they stopped selling it) and it worked in his Lexmark 3 in one. But then we
    are talking Lexmark, not a real printer.

    --
    Larry Lynch
    Mystic, Ct.
  7. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    Arthur Entlich wrote:

    > "Son" you really don't know what you are speaking of, about gasoline
    > or about inks. In my neck of the woods, people like you are referred
    > to (in polite circles) as "Sophomores" it's greek and it means "wise
    > foolish" because you think you know a great deal more than you do.
    >
    > You are correct that gas is often refined at a centralized locale and
    > that the companies use each others refineries and trucking, because it
    > makes no sense at all to ship the gasoline hundreds of miles when
    > their is a much closer refinery or distribution point. However, what
    > makes gasoline unique and cost different amounts, other than some
    > distilling properties, is additives. And additives are just that,
    > they are added to the gasoline either in the tanker itself, at the
    > refinery just as it is pumped, or sometimes even at the gas station.


    Hooray! Perfectly said. >:o

    >
    > And it is these additives that often do make a difference in
    > performance. There are studies done by independent research
    > facilities that prove all gasoline is not the same. Some additives
    > improve combustion, or change flash point temperature, or reduce
    > carbon build up.
    >
    > Yes, cars will run on pretty much any gasoline that comes close to the
    > required octane rating for the compression ration of the cylinders,
    > but that does not mean it will run efficiently and with the least
    > wear. Just because you may be too oblivious to recognize when an
    > engine runs well and when it doesn't, or if it gets superior gas
    > mileage doesn't mean it doesn't do so.
    >
    > And, to a certain extent, the same holds for inks. If you, as I, had
    > taken the time to read the patents surrounding inkjet ink
    > formulations, and if you had any understanding of the complexities of
    > the technologies involved, instead of b*tching about the $29 printer
    > you got a year's use out of, you'd be absolutely fascinated by the
    > marvel of a printer capable of such precision costing so little.
    >
    > I use 3rd party inks, and I voted against everything I could involving
    > things Carly F. did at HP, but you are way off here.


    But I would like to give her a :-* .

    >
    > Art
    >
    >
    > Mapanari wrote:
    >
    >> "Bob Headrick" <bobh@proaxis.com>
    >> wrotenews:114pef3n8psai84@corp.supernews.com:
    >>
    >>> "Mapanari" <whosthat@anonmail.com> wrote in message
    >>> news:Xns962AB5F2C2A0Amapi@216.168.3.64...
    >>>
    >>>> The research I've done, and as a former purchasing manger/buyer, leads
    >>>> me to believe that almost all OEM ink comes from only a few places,
    >>>> and
    >>>> they sell the same bulk ink to online resellers; with the caveat that
    >>>> they can't say "Same as HP ink!" because that would screw their sales
    >>>> of bulk ink to HP and Canon et al.
    >>>>
    >>>> The formula and the ink is pretty basic.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Your research is faulty. Making an ink formulation that gives
    >>> optimum lightfastness, black to color bleed, print quality, image
    >>> quality,
    >>> optical density, color balance and other parameters while still
    >>> maintaining nozzle health is not something printer manufacturers just
    >>> pick off the shelf. Printer companies invest heavily in ink chemistry
    >>> and they typically own the intellectual property of given
    >>> formulations. HP, Epson and Cannon have hundred of ink related patents.
    >>>
    >>> - Bob Headrick, not speaking for my employer HP
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>
    >>
    >> Right...and Exxon gas will put a tiger in your tank and BP gas will
    >> help clean your valves and Texaco gas will give you better
    >> milage....and yet....all the tanker trucks stop off at the same HESS
    >> Refinary depot every morning from every station and refill their
    >> tanker trucks with the same gas.
    >>
    >> And yet, millions of mooing morons will swear they get better gas
    >> milage by using Exxon instead of that "no name gas on the corner,
    >> which has water in it it and is cheap bad gas!", and pay an extra 30c
    >> a gallon too!
    >>
    >> Son, you really are a child of the 80's advertising mass media
    >> consumption market.
    >>
    >> Granted, there is a slight diference in some inks, but 90% of the
    >> diference is in advertising, not physical properties.
    >>
    >>
  8. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    Larry wrote:

    >In article <tm94e.150918$gJ3.139225@clgrps13>, artistic@telus.net says...
    >
    >
    >>Yes, cars will run on pretty much any gasoline that comes close to the
    >>required octane rating for the compression ration of the cylinders, but
    >> that does not mean it will run efficiently and with the least wear.
    >>Just because you may be too oblivious to recognize when an engine runs
    >>well and when it doesn't, or if it gets superior gas mileage doesn't
    >>mean it doesn't do so.
    >>
    >>And, to a certain extent, the same holds for inks. If you, as I, had
    >>taken the time to read the patents surrounding inkjet ink formulations,
    >>and if you had any understanding of the complexities of the technologies
    >>involved, instead of b*tching about the $29 printer you got a year's use
    >>out of, you'd be absolutely fascinated by the marvel of a printer
    >>capable of such precision costing so little.
    >>
    >>I use 3rd party inks, and I voted against everything I could involving
    >>things Carly F. did at HP, but you are way off here.
    >>
    >>Art
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >
    >I have used third party inks for years with Canon printers (going all the way
    >back to the BJC-600) and I have found that if you buy high quality ink, you
    >wonr have a problem.
    >
    >
    Without real BRANDING by a real manufacturer/formulator; how do you tell
    real quality?

    >As a matter of fact, the only Canon print head Ive had fail on me (so far)
    >never had anything other than OEM ink in it.
    >
    >It was in one of my i950 printers. After about six months of daily use, it
    >simply wouldnt print Magenta any more.
    >
    >I called Canon Tech. support and they put me through a few simple test (which
    >I had already done, and then some), and at the end of maybe 20 minutes, the
    >tech decided the head needed replacement.
    >
    >All he required of me was a name, address, and serial number of the printer.
    >
    >New head arrived within 3 days.
    >
    >I dont shop for price when I buy ink, rather I stick with what I found early
    >on, and so far, it has worked well for me.
    >
    >For my Canon printers (right now 2 I960, 1 ip4000, 1I950) I use ink from MIS,
    >and/or Formulabs. I do not buy generic carts prefilled, I buy OEM carts and
    >refill them and I buy empty carts from MIS.
    >
    >
    >I do NOT mix inkbrands. If a printer has MIS ink in it I simply put a piece
    >of masking tape on it (uaually under the lid) with a big letter M on it, and
    >a big letter F goes on the printer with Formulabs.
    >
    >I do, from time to time change the ink from one brand to another in a given
    >printer, but ONLY after a good "flushing" with distilled water mixed with
    >about 10% household Ammonia.
    >
    >Since January 1 2005 I have printed over 300 8x10" photos, and about 150
    >5x7" photos (going by the difference in paper invetory between then and now)
    >and other than a cleaning cycle right after changing carts, no other
    >maintenance has been required on the two printers used. (ip400, and my oldest
    >I960).
    >
    >I do recommend however, if you are refilling Canon Cartridges, dont wait
    >'till the cartridge is EMPTY.. replace the cart when the indicator says LOW.
    >That way you never have a situation where the sponge dries out, and you dont
    >have to "prime" the sponge.
    >
    >I keep about ten sets of carts, filled and ready, and when there are more
    >than three or four carts waiting to be filled, I do them all at once, giving
    >them about ten minutes to "equalize .(10 minutes is enough time for the
    >sponge to fill up if it was low). After the 10 minute wait, I top off any
    >carts that have dropped in level when the sponge filled up, then tape over
    >ALL openings on the carts, including the vents. Then I store them 'till I
    >need them.
    >
    >REMEMBER THIS IF YOU REFILL:
    >
    >Any place that sells bulk ink that says "this ink works in all unkjet
    >printers" is lying.
    >
    >There is NO one ink that will work in more than one type of printer reliably.
    >
    >Strange as it is, those inks seem to be formulated to work in Lexmark
    >printers. My friend buys generic refill ink at Sears (at least he did 'till
    >they stopped selling it) and it worked in his Lexmark 3 in one. But then we
    >are talking Lexmark, not a real printer.
    >
    >
    >
  9. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    In article <blg4e.7934$FN4.6023@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com>,
    measekite@yahoo.com says...
    > Without real BRANDING by a real manufacturer/formulator; how do you tell
    > real quality?
    >

    Didn't you read the whole post???

    I only use Three inks:

    OEM
    MIS
    Formulabs

    Thats it, thats all, out of the few dozen brands I've used over the years.

    Those are the ones I rely on.

    Im unclear as to whether MIS makes its own ink or not, but they do sell a
    quality product.

    They DO NOT SELL CHEAP "COMPATABLE" cartridges with MIS ink in them.

    There is (or used to be) a warning onthe page where you order the cartridges
    telling you that they are NOT filled with MIS ink.

    AFAIK there are several places where you can purchase Formulabs ink, but to
    get MIS ink you must deal with MIS.

    They have other sites (or did have) but all of them are MIS Associates.
    www.inksupply.com is the one I use for MIS inks..


    --
    Larry Lynch
    Mystic, Ct.
  10. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    I agree with most everything you say here. If a person is going to use
    a 3rd party ink, try to buy for a reputable company with a good history,
    go for the ink set that provides the features you need, don't buy
    totally generic inks, they do need to be formulated for the printer
    brand and sometimes model, don't mix and match in the same printer, etc.
    Don't be surprised if you have to alter your profiles with some inks.

    However, recognize than OEM inks often do have some special
    characteristics, and one may be longevity of the print. Pigment inks,
    and HPs PhotoSmart dye inks have good fade resistant characteristics.
    And remember that paper is also important when it comes to image quality
    and permanence.

    Art

    Larry wrote:

    > In article <tm94e.150918$gJ3.139225@clgrps13>, artistic@telus.net says...
    >
    >>Yes, cars will run on pretty much any gasoline that comes close to the
    >>required octane rating for the compression ration of the cylinders, but
    >> that does not mean it will run efficiently and with the least wear.
    >>Just because you may be too oblivious to recognize when an engine runs
    >>well and when it doesn't, or if it gets superior gas mileage doesn't
    >>mean it doesn't do so.
    >>
    >>And, to a certain extent, the same holds for inks. If you, as I, had
    >>taken the time to read the patents surrounding inkjet ink formulations,
    >>and if you had any understanding of the complexities of the technologies
    >>involved, instead of b*tching about the $29 printer you got a year's use
    >>out of, you'd be absolutely fascinated by the marvel of a printer
    >>capable of such precision costing so little.
    >>
    >>I use 3rd party inks, and I voted against everything I could involving
    >>things Carly F. did at HP, but you are way off here.
    >>
    >>Art
    >>
    >>
    >
    >
    > I have used third party inks for years with Canon printers (going all the way
    > back to the BJC-600) and I have found that if you buy high quality ink, you
    > wonr have a problem.
    >
    > As a matter of fact, the only Canon print head Ive had fail on me (so far)
    > never had anything other than OEM ink in it.
    >
    > It was in one of my i950 printers. After about six months of daily use, it
    > simply wouldnt print Magenta any more.
    >
    > I called Canon Tech. support and they put me through a few simple test (which
    > I had already done, and then some), and at the end of maybe 20 minutes, the
    > tech decided the head needed replacement.
    >
    > All he required of me was a name, address, and serial number of the printer.
    >
    > New head arrived within 3 days.
    >
    > I dont shop for price when I buy ink, rather I stick with what I found early
    > on, and so far, it has worked well for me.
    >
    > For my Canon printers (right now 2 I960, 1 ip4000, 1I950) I use ink from MIS,
    > and/or Formulabs. I do not buy generic carts prefilled, I buy OEM carts and
    > refill them and I buy empty carts from MIS.
    >
    >
    > I do NOT mix inkbrands. If a printer has MIS ink in it I simply put a piece
    > of masking tape on it (uaually under the lid) with a big letter M on it, and
    > a big letter F goes on the printer with Formulabs.
    >
    > I do, from time to time change the ink from one brand to another in a given
    > printer, but ONLY after a good "flushing" with distilled water mixed with
    > about 10% household Ammonia.
    >
    > Since January 1 2005 I have printed over 300 8x10" photos, and about 150
    > 5x7" photos (going by the difference in paper invetory between then and now)
    > and other than a cleaning cycle right after changing carts, no other
    > maintenance has been required on the two printers used. (ip400, and my oldest
    > I960).
    >
    > I do recommend however, if you are refilling Canon Cartridges, dont wait
    > 'till the cartridge is EMPTY.. replace the cart when the indicator says LOW.
    > That way you never have a situation where the sponge dries out, and you dont
    > have to "prime" the sponge.
    >
    > I keep about ten sets of carts, filled and ready, and when there are more
    > than three or four carts waiting to be filled, I do them all at once, giving
    > them about ten minutes to "equalize .(10 minutes is enough time for the
    > sponge to fill up if it was low). After the 10 minute wait, I top off any
    > carts that have dropped in level when the sponge filled up, then tape over
    > ALL openings on the carts, including the vents. Then I store them 'till I
    > need them.
    >
    > REMEMBER THIS IF YOU REFILL:
    >
    > Any place that sells bulk ink that says "this ink works in all unkjet
    > printers" is lying.
    >
    > There is NO one ink that will work in more than one type of printer reliably.
    >
    > Strange as it is, those inks seem to be formulated to work in Lexmark
    > printers. My friend buys generic refill ink at Sears (at least he did 'till
    > they stopped selling it) and it worked in his Lexmark 3 in one. But then we
    > are talking Lexmark, not a real printer.
    >
  11. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    A few weeks back, I spent several hours reading up on ink bronzing.
    This is when typically dye inks on glossy papers reflect what is often a
    dichroic color off the surface of the ink after it dries. It can occur
    with any color ink, but is often most noticeable on black ink, which
    often is made up of several color dyes mixed together. It is more
    noticeable on darker colors due to the contract between the dark
    background and the brighter reflective color.

    Anyway, HP has several research papers and patents on methods of
    reducing or removing this problem. The science is somewhat complex, and
    understanding the causes, measuring the phenomenon and developing
    methods for developing ink and paper surface formulations to control for
    it weren't simple.

    This says to me that indeed "all inks" aren't the same at all, and the
    processes involved are both time consuming and costly to develop.

    Sure, pretty much any company that makes colorants can make something
    approaching inkjet ink, but there are complexities to making good ink
    that works well in a specific printer, a specific climate, has good fade
    resistance to light, ozone, and other environmental factors, is accurate
    and repeatable in color, doesn't fall to a great deal of metamerism,
    bronzing, and so on.

    Art


    measekite wrote:

    >
    >
    > Arthur Entlich wrote:
    >
    >> "Son" you really don't know what you are speaking of, about gasoline
    >> or about inks. In my neck of the woods, people like you are referred
    >> to (in polite circles) as "Sophomores" it's greek and it means "wise
    >> foolish" because you think you know a great deal more than you do.
    >>
    >> You are correct that gas is often refined at a centralized locale and
    >> that the companies use each others refineries and trucking, because it
    >> makes no sense at all to ship the gasoline hundreds of miles when
    >> their is a much closer refinery or distribution point. However, what
    >> makes gasoline unique and cost different amounts, other than some
    >> distilling properties, is additives. And additives are just that,
    >> they are added to the gasoline either in the tanker itself, at the
    >> refinery just as it is pumped, or sometimes even at the gas station.
    >
    >
    >
    > Hooray! Perfectly said. >:o
    >
    >>
    >> And it is these additives that often do make a difference in
    >> performance. There are studies done by independent research
    >> facilities that prove all gasoline is not the same. Some additives
    >> improve combustion, or change flash point temperature, or reduce
    >> carbon build up.
    >>
    >> Yes, cars will run on pretty much any gasoline that comes close to the
    >> required octane rating for the compression ration of the cylinders,
    >> but that does not mean it will run efficiently and with the least
    >> wear. Just because you may be too oblivious to recognize when an
    >> engine runs well and when it doesn't, or if it gets superior gas
    >> mileage doesn't mean it doesn't do so.
    >>
    >> And, to a certain extent, the same holds for inks. If you, as I, had
    >> taken the time to read the patents surrounding inkjet ink
    >> formulations, and if you had any understanding of the complexities of
    >> the technologies involved, instead of b*tching about the $29 printer
    >> you got a year's use out of, you'd be absolutely fascinated by the
    >> marvel of a printer capable of such precision costing so little.
    >>
    >> I use 3rd party inks, and I voted against everything I could involving
    >> things Carly F. did at HP, but you are way off here.
    >
    >
    >
    > But I would like to give her a :-* .
    >
    >>
    >> Art
    >>
    >>
    >> Mapanari wrote:
    >>
    >>> "Bob Headrick" <bobh@proaxis.com>
    >>> wrotenews:114pef3n8psai84@corp.supernews.com:
    >>>
    >>>> "Mapanari" <whosthat@anonmail.com> wrote in message
    >>>> news:Xns962AB5F2C2A0Amapi@216.168.3.64...
    >>>>
    >>>>> The research I've done, and as a former purchasing manger/buyer, leads
    >>>>> me to believe that almost all OEM ink comes from only a few places,
    >>>>> and
    >>>>> they sell the same bulk ink to online resellers; with the caveat that
    >>>>> they can't say "Same as HP ink!" because that would screw their sales
    >>>>> of bulk ink to HP and Canon et al.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> The formula and the ink is pretty basic.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> Your research is faulty. Making an ink formulation that gives
    >>>> optimum lightfastness, black to color bleed, print quality, image
    >>>> quality,
    >>>> optical density, color balance and other parameters while still
    >>>> maintaining nozzle health is not something printer manufacturers just
    >>>> pick off the shelf. Printer companies invest heavily in ink chemistry
    >>>> and they typically own the intellectual property of given
    >>>> formulations. HP, Epson and Cannon have hundred of ink related patents.
    >>>>
    >>>> - Bob Headrick, not speaking for my employer HP
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Right...and Exxon gas will put a tiger in your tank and BP gas will
    >>> help clean your valves and Texaco gas will give you better
    >>> milage....and yet....all the tanker trucks stop off at the same HESS
    >>> Refinary depot every morning from every station and refill their
    >>> tanker trucks with the same gas.
    >>>
    >>> And yet, millions of mooing morons will swear they get better gas
    >>> milage by using Exxon instead of that "no name gas on the corner,
    >>> which has water in it it and is cheap bad gas!", and pay an extra 30c
    >>> a gallon too!
    >>>
    >>> Son, you really are a child of the 80's advertising mass media
    >>> consumption market.
    >>>
    >>> Granted, there is a slight diference in some inks, but 90% of the
    >>> diference is in advertising, not physical properties.
    >>>
    >>>
  12. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    "Arthur Entlich" <artistic@telus.net> wrote in message
    news:UYt4e.526$VF5.505@edtnps89...
    >A few weeks back, I spent several hours reading up on ink bronzing. This is
    >when typically dye inks on glossy papers reflect what is often a dichroic
    >color off the surface of the ink after it dries. It can occur with any
    >color ink, but is often most noticeable on black ink, which often is made
    >up of several color dyes mixed together. It is more noticeable on darker
    >colors due to the contract between the dark background and the brighter
    >reflective color.
    >
    > Anyway, HP has several research papers and patents on methods of reducing
    > or removing this problem. The science is somewhat complex, and
    > understanding the causes, measuring the phenomenon and developing methods
    > for developing ink and paper surface formulations to control for it
    > weren't simple.
    >
    > This says to me that indeed "all inks" aren't the same at all, and the
    > processes involved are both time consuming and costly to develop.
    >
    > Sure, pretty much any company that makes colorants can make something
    > approaching inkjet ink, but there are complexities to making good ink that
    > works well in a specific printer, a specific climate, has good fade
    > resistance to light, ozone, and other environmental factors, is accurate
    > and repeatable in color, doesn't fall to a great deal of metamerism,
    > bronzing, and so on.
    >
    > Art
    >
    >
    > measekite wrote:
    >
    >>
    >>
    >> Arthur Entlich wrote:
    >>
    >>> "Son" you really don't know what you are speaking of, about gasoline or
    >>> about inks. In my neck of the woods, people like you are referred to
    >>> (in polite circles) as "Sophomores" it's greek and it means "wise
    >>> foolish" because you think you know a great deal more than you do.
    >>>
    >>> You are correct that gas is often refined at a centralized locale and
    >>> that the companies use each others refineries and trucking, because it
    >>> makes no sense at all to ship the gasoline hundreds of miles when their
    >>> is a much closer refinery or distribution point. However, what makes
    >>> gasoline unique and cost different amounts, other than some distilling
    >>> properties, is additives. And additives are just that, they are added
    >>> to the gasoline either in the tanker itself, at the refinery just as it
    >>> is pumped, or sometimes even at the gas station.
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> Hooray! Perfectly said. >:o
    >>
    >>>
    >>> And it is these additives that often do make a difference in
    >>> performance. There are studies done by independent research facilities
    >>> that prove all gasoline is not the same. Some additives improve
    >>> combustion, or change flash point temperature, or reduce carbon build
    >>> up.
    >>>
    >>> Yes, cars will run on pretty much any gasoline that comes close to the
    >>> required octane rating for the compression ration of the cylinders, but
    >>> that does not mean it will run efficiently and with the least wear. Just
    >>> because you may be too oblivious to recognize when an engine runs well
    >>> and when it doesn't, or if it gets superior gas mileage doesn't mean it
    >>> doesn't do so.
    >>>
    >>> And, to a certain extent, the same holds for inks. If you, as I, had
    >>> taken the time to read the patents surrounding inkjet ink formulations,
    >>> and if you had any understanding of the complexities of the technologies
    >>> involved, instead of b*tching about the $29 printer you got a year's use
    >>> out of, you'd be absolutely fascinated by the marvel of a printer
    >>> capable of such precision costing so little.
    >>>
    >>> I use 3rd party inks, and I voted against everything I could involving
    >>> things Carly F. did at HP, but you are way off here.
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> But I would like to give her a :-* .
    >>
    >>>
    >>> Art
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Mapanari wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> "Bob Headrick" <bobh@proaxis.com>
    >>>> wrotenews:114pef3n8psai84@corp.supernews.com:
    >>>>
    >>>>> "Mapanari" <whosthat@anonmail.com> wrote in message
    >>>>> news:Xns962AB5F2C2A0Amapi@216.168.3.64...
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> The research I've done, and as a former purchasing manger/buyer,
    >>>>>> leads
    >>>>>> me to believe that almost all OEM ink comes from only a few places,
    >>>>>> and
    >>>>>> they sell the same bulk ink to online resellers; with the caveat that
    >>>>>> they can't say "Same as HP ink!" because that would screw their sales
    >>>>>> of bulk ink to HP and Canon et al.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> The formula and the ink is pretty basic.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Your research is faulty. Making an ink formulation that gives optimum
    >>>>> lightfastness, black to color bleed, print quality, image quality,
    >>>>> optical density, color balance and other parameters while still
    >>>>> maintaining nozzle health is not something printer manufacturers just
    >>>>> pick off the shelf. Printer companies invest heavily in ink chemistry
    >>>>> and they typically own the intellectual property of given
    >>>>> formulations. HP, Epson and Cannon have hundred of ink related
    >>>>> patents.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> - Bob Headrick, not speaking for my employer HP
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> Right...and Exxon gas will put a tiger in your tank and BP gas will
    >>>> help clean your valves and Texaco gas will give you better
    >>>> milage....and yet....all the tanker trucks stop off at the same HESS
    >>>> Refinary depot every morning from every station and refill their tanker
    >>>> trucks with the same gas.
    >>>>
    >>>> And yet, millions of mooing morons will swear they get better gas
    >>>> milage by using Exxon instead of that "no name gas on the corner, which
    >>>> has water in it it and is cheap bad gas!", and pay an extra 30c a
    >>>> gallon too!
    >>>>
    >>>> Son, you really are a child of the 80's advertising mass media
    >>>> consumption market.
    >>>>
    >>>> Granted, there is a slight diference in some inks, but 90% of the
    >>>> diference is in advertising, not physical properties.
    >>>>
    >>>>

    As the Manager of Cartridge World (Oxford) UK. I can agree and accept what
    is being said here. Cartridge World as a whole use one of the top research
    and ink producers in the industry (OCP, Europe).
    Like the oem producers, large amounts of money are spent in formulating the
    ink we use for refilling and our own brand cartridges, to be as identical as
    the oem product as possible. It is fair to say that due to trading standards
    we are not allowed to say that our ink is the same as the original, however,
    we can say that the technical make-up is no different to the original.
    At the same time we can also say and guarantee (unconditionally), that the
    end user will find no difference between them. We also guarantee the end
    users printer against any problems caused by using our inks, How many other
    suppliers are that confident!
    Having used our ink both in refilling and prefills I have had no problems
    with the various Canon printers I have owned. I can accept that some end
    users have had problems that were caused by the ink they used, Generic ink
    being the worse and certainly a no no!. It is also fair to say that problems
    can be from other causes and should not be discounted.
    At the end of the day end users will purchase what they feel comfortable
    with, both in effect and cost.

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

    Stick Stickus wrote:

    >"Arthur Entlich" <artistic@telus.net> wrote in message
    >news:UYt4e.526$VF5.505@edtnps89...
    >
    >
    >>A few weeks back, I spent several hours reading up on ink bronzing. This is
    >>when typically dye inks on glossy papers reflect what is often a dichroic
    >>color off the surface of the ink after it dries. It can occur with any
    >>color ink, but is often most noticeable on black ink, which often is made
    >>up of several color dyes mixed together. It is more noticeable on darker
    >>colors due to the contract between the dark background and the brighter
    >>reflective color.
    >>
    >>Anyway, HP has several research papers and patents on methods of reducing
    >>or removing this problem. The science is somewhat complex, and
    >>understanding the causes, measuring the phenomenon and developing methods
    >>for developing ink and paper surface formulations to control for it
    >>weren't simple.
    >>
    >>This says to me that indeed "all inks" aren't the same at all, and the
    >>processes involved are both time consuming and costly to develop.
    >>
    >>Sure, pretty much any company that makes colorants can make something
    >>approaching inkjet ink, but there are complexities to making good ink that
    >>works well in a specific printer, a specific climate, has good fade
    >>resistance to light, ozone, and other environmental factors, is accurate
    >>and repeatable in color, doesn't fall to a great deal of metamerism,
    >>bronzing, and so on.
    >>
    >>Art
    >>
    >>
    >>measekite wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>>Arthur Entlich wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>"Son" you really don't know what you are speaking of, about gasoline or
    >>>>about inks. In my neck of the woods, people like you are referred to
    >>>>(in polite circles) as "Sophomores" it's greek and it means "wise
    >>>>foolish" because you think you know a great deal more than you do.
    >>>>
    >>>>You are correct that gas is often refined at a centralized locale and
    >>>>that the companies use each others refineries and trucking, because it
    >>>>makes no sense at all to ship the gasoline hundreds of miles when their
    >>>>is a much closer refinery or distribution point. However, what makes
    >>>>gasoline unique and cost different amounts, other than some distilling
    >>>>properties, is additives. And additives are just that, they are added
    >>>>to the gasoline either in the tanker itself, at the refinery just as it
    >>>>is pumped, or sometimes even at the gas station.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>>Hooray! Perfectly said. >:o
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>And it is these additives that often do make a difference in
    >>>>performance. There are studies done by independent research facilities
    >>>>that prove all gasoline is not the same. Some additives improve
    >>>>combustion, or change flash point temperature, or reduce carbon build
    >>>>up.
    >>>>
    >>>>Yes, cars will run on pretty much any gasoline that comes close to the
    >>>>required octane rating for the compression ration of the cylinders, but
    >>>>that does not mean it will run efficiently and with the least wear. Just
    >>>>because you may be too oblivious to recognize when an engine runs well
    >>>>and when it doesn't, or if it gets superior gas mileage doesn't mean it
    >>>>doesn't do so.
    >>>>
    >>>>And, to a certain extent, the same holds for inks. If you, as I, had
    >>>>taken the time to read the patents surrounding inkjet ink formulations,
    >>>>and if you had any understanding of the complexities of the technologies
    >>>>involved, instead of b*tching about the $29 printer you got a year's use
    >>>>out of, you'd be absolutely fascinated by the marvel of a printer
    >>>>capable of such precision costing so little.
    >>>>
    >>>>I use 3rd party inks, and I voted against everything I could involving
    >>>>things Carly F. did at HP, but you are way off here.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>>But I would like to give her a :-* .
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>Art
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>Mapanari wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>"Bob Headrick" <bobh@proaxis.com>
    >>>>>wrotenews:114pef3n8psai84@corp.supernews.com:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>"Mapanari" <whosthat@anonmail.com> wrote in message
    >>>>>>news:Xns962AB5F2C2A0Amapi@216.168.3.64...
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>>The research I've done, and as a former purchasing manger/buyer,
    >>>>>>>leads
    >>>>>>>me to believe that almost all OEM ink comes from only a few places,
    >>>>>>>and
    >>>>>>>they sell the same bulk ink to online resellers; with the caveat that
    >>>>>>>they can't say "Same as HP ink!" because that would screw their sales
    >>>>>>>of bulk ink to HP and Canon et al.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>The formula and the ink is pretty basic.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>Your research is faulty. Making an ink formulation that gives optimum
    >>>>>>lightfastness, black to color bleed, print quality, image quality,
    >>>>>>optical density, color balance and other parameters while still
    >>>>>>maintaining nozzle health is not something printer manufacturers just
    >>>>>>pick off the shelf. Printer companies invest heavily in ink chemistry
    >>>>>>and they typically own the intellectual property of given
    >>>>>>formulations. HP, Epson and Cannon have hundred of ink related
    >>>>>>patents.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>- Bob Headrick, not speaking for my employer HP
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>Right...and Exxon gas will put a tiger in your tank and BP gas will
    >>>>>help clean your valves and Texaco gas will give you better
    >>>>>milage....and yet....all the tanker trucks stop off at the same HESS
    >>>>>Refinary depot every morning from every station and refill their tanker
    >>>>>trucks with the same gas.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>And yet, millions of mooing morons will swear they get better gas
    >>>>>milage by using Exxon instead of that "no name gas on the corner, which
    >>>>>has water in it it and is cheap bad gas!", and pay an extra 30c a
    >>>>>gallon too!
    >>>>>
    >>>>>Son, you really are a child of the 80's advertising mass media
    >>>>>consumption market.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>Granted, there is a slight diference in some inks, but 90% of the
    >>>>>diference is in advertising, not physical properties.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >
    >As the Manager of Cartridge World (Oxford) UK. I can agree and accept what
    >is being said here. Cartridge World as a whole use one of the top research
    >and ink producers in the industry (OCP, Europe).
    >Like the oem producers, large amounts of money are spent in formulating the
    >ink we use for refilling and our own brand cartridges, to be as identical as
    >the oem product as possible. It is fair to say that due to trading standards
    >we are not allowed to say that our ink is the same as the original, however,
    >we can say that the technical make-up is no different to the original.
    >At the same time we can also say and guarantee (unconditionally), that the
    >end user will find no difference between them. We also guarantee the end
    >users printer against any problems caused by using our inks, How many other
    >suppliers are that confident!
    >
    >

    So if we get a clogged printhead you will just send us a brand new printer?

    Also, once is OK but if you repeatedly hawk your company on this NG that
    it is considered spamming.

    >Having used our ink both in refilling and prefills I have had no problems
    >with the various Canon printers I have owned. I can accept that some end
    >users have had problems that were caused by the ink they used, Generic ink
    >being the worse and certainly a no no!. It is also fair to say that problems
    >can be from other causes and should not be discounted.
    >At the end of the day end users will purchase what they feel comfortable
    >with, both in effect and cost.
    >
    >regards
    >Dave
    >
    >
    >
    >
  14. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    "measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    news:P7L4e.2488$qD2.2305@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com...
    >
    >
    > Stick Stickus wrote:
    >
    >>"Arthur Entlich" <artistic@telus.net> wrote in message
    >>news:UYt4e.526$VF5.505@edtnps89...
    >>
    >>>A few weeks back, I spent several hours reading up on ink bronzing. This
    >>>is when typically dye inks on glossy papers reflect what is often a
    >>>dichroic color off the surface of the ink after it dries. It can occur
    >>>with any color ink, but is often most noticeable on black ink, which
    >>>often is made up of several color dyes mixed together. It is more
    >>>noticeable on darker colors due to the contract between the dark
    >>>background and the brighter reflective color.
    >>>
    >>>Anyway, HP has several research papers and patents on methods of reducing
    >>>or removing this problem. The science is somewhat complex, and
    >>>understanding the causes, measuring the phenomenon and developing methods
    >>>for developing ink and paper surface formulations to control for it
    >>>weren't simple.
    >>>
    >>>This says to me that indeed "all inks" aren't the same at all, and the
    >>>processes involved are both time consuming and costly to develop.
    >>>
    >>>Sure, pretty much any company that makes colorants can make something
    >>>approaching inkjet ink, but there are complexities to making good ink
    >>>that works well in a specific printer, a specific climate, has good fade
    >>>resistance to light, ozone, and other environmental factors, is accurate
    >>>and repeatable in color, doesn't fall to a great deal of metamerism,
    >>>bronzing, and so on.
    >>>
    >>>Art
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>measekite wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>Arthur Entlich wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>"Son" you really don't know what you are speaking of, about gasoline or
    >>>>>about inks. In my neck of the woods, people like you are referred to
    >>>>>(in polite circles) as "Sophomores" it's greek and it means "wise
    >>>>>foolish" because you think you know a great deal more than you do.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>You are correct that gas is often refined at a centralized locale and
    >>>>>that the companies use each others refineries and trucking, because it
    >>>>>makes no sense at all to ship the gasoline hundreds of miles when their
    >>>>>is a much closer refinery or distribution point. However, what makes
    >>>>>gasoline unique and cost different amounts, other than some distilling
    >>>>>properties, is additives. And additives are just that, they are added
    >>>>>to the gasoline either in the tanker itself, at the refinery just as it
    >>>>>is pumped, or sometimes even at the gas station.
    >>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>Hooray! Perfectly said. >:o
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>And it is these additives that often do make a difference in
    >>>>>performance. There are studies done by independent research facilities
    >>>>>that prove all gasoline is not the same. Some additives improve
    >>>>>combustion, or change flash point temperature, or reduce carbon build
    >>>>>up.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>Yes, cars will run on pretty much any gasoline that comes close to the
    >>>>>required octane rating for the compression ration of the cylinders, but
    >>>>>that does not mean it will run efficiently and with the least wear.
    >>>>>Just because you may be too oblivious to recognize when an engine runs
    >>>>>well and when it doesn't, or if it gets superior gas mileage doesn't
    >>>>>mean it doesn't do so.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>And, to a certain extent, the same holds for inks. If you, as I, had
    >>>>>taken the time to read the patents surrounding inkjet ink formulations,
    >>>>>and if you had any understanding of the complexities of the
    >>>>>technologies involved, instead of b*tching about the $29 printer you
    >>>>>got a year's use out of, you'd be absolutely fascinated by the marvel
    >>>>>of a printer capable of such precision costing so little.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>I use 3rd party inks, and I voted against everything I could involving
    >>>>>things Carly F. did at HP, but you are way off here.
    >>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>But I would like to give her a :-* .
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>Art
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>Mapanari wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>"Bob Headrick" <bobh@proaxis.com>
    >>>>>>wrotenews:114pef3n8psai84@corp.supernews.com:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>>"Mapanari" <whosthat@anonmail.com> wrote in message
    >>>>>>>news:Xns962AB5F2C2A0Amapi@216.168.3.64...
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>The research I've done, and as a former purchasing manger/buyer,
    >>>>>>>>leads
    >>>>>>>>me to believe that almost all OEM ink comes from only a few places,
    >>>>>>>>and
    >>>>>>>>they sell the same bulk ink to online resellers; with the caveat
    >>>>>>>>that
    >>>>>>>>they can't say "Same as HP ink!" because that would screw their
    >>>>>>>>sales
    >>>>>>>>of bulk ink to HP and Canon et al.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>The formula and the ink is pretty basic.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>Your research is faulty. Making an ink formulation that gives
    >>>>>>>optimum lightfastness, black to color bleed, print quality, image
    >>>>>>>quality,
    >>>>>>>optical density, color balance and other parameters while still
    >>>>>>>maintaining nozzle health is not something printer manufacturers just
    >>>>>>>pick off the shelf. Printer companies invest heavily in ink
    >>>>>>>chemistry
    >>>>>>>and they typically own the intellectual property of given
    >>>>>>>formulations. HP, Epson and Cannon have hundred of ink related
    >>>>>>>patents.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>- Bob Headrick, not speaking for my employer HP
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>Right...and Exxon gas will put a tiger in your tank and BP gas will
    >>>>>>help clean your valves and Texaco gas will give you better
    >>>>>>milage....and yet....all the tanker trucks stop off at the same HESS
    >>>>>>Refinary depot every morning from every station and refill their
    >>>>>>tanker trucks with the same gas.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>And yet, millions of mooing morons will swear they get better gas
    >>>>>>milage by using Exxon instead of that "no name gas on the corner,
    >>>>>>which has water in it it and is cheap bad gas!", and pay an extra 30c
    >>>>>>a gallon too!
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>Son, you really are a child of the 80's advertising mass media
    >>>>>>consumption market.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>Granted, there is a slight diference in some inks, but 90% of the
    >>>>>>diference is in advertising, not physical properties.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>
    >>As the Manager of Cartridge World (Oxford) UK. I can agree and accept what
    >>is being said here. Cartridge World as a whole use one of the top research
    >>and ink producers in the industry (OCP, Europe).
    >>Like the oem producers, large amounts of money are spent in formulating
    >>the ink we use for refilling and our own brand cartridges, to be as
    >>identical as the oem product as possible. It is fair to say that due to
    >>trading standards we are not allowed to say that our ink is the same as
    >>the original, however, we can say that the technical make-up is no
    >>different to the original.
    >>At the same time we can also say and guarantee (unconditionally), that the
    >>end user will find no difference between them. We also guarantee the end
    >>users printer against any problems caused by using our inks, How many
    >>other suppliers are that confident!
    >>
    >
    > So if we get a clogged printhead you will just send us a brand new
    > printer?

    Please check the website for your reply, But basically, if proven to be
    either the refilled cartridge or compatible at fault then, yes.

    >
    > Also, once is OK but if you repeatedly hawk your company on this NG that
    > it is considered spamming.
    >

    It is not my intention to 'hawk' the company nor spam, but, rather show a
    response from a producer and, also, an end user perspective.

    >>Having used our ink both in refilling and prefills I have had no problems
    >>with the various Canon printers I have owned. I can accept that some end
    >>users have had problems that were caused by the ink they used, Generic ink
    >>being the worse and certainly a no no!. It is also fair to say that
    >>problems can be from other causes and should not be discounted.
    >>At the end of the day end users will purchase what they feel comfortable
    >>with, both in effect and cost.
    >>
    >>regards
    >>Dave
    >>
    >>
  15. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    measekite <measekite@yahoo.com>
    wrotenews:ur54e.7826$FN4.7550@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com:

    >
    >
    > Mapanari wrote:
    >
    >>"Bob Headrick" <bobh@proaxis.com>
    >>wrotenews:114pef3n8psai84@corp.supernews.com:
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>>"Mapanari" <whosthat@anonmail.com> wrote in message
    >>>news:Xns962AB5F2C2A0Amapi@216.168.3.64...
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>The research I've done, and as a former purchasing manger/buyer, leads
    >>>>me to believe that almost all OEM ink comes from only a few places,
    >>>>and they sell the same bulk ink to online resellers; with the caveat
    >>>>that they can't say "Same as HP ink!" because that would screw their
    >>>>sales of bulk ink to HP and Canon et al.
    >>>>
    >>>>The formula and the ink is pretty basic.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>Your research is faulty. Making an ink formulation that gives optimum
    >>>lightfastness, black to color bleed, print quality, image quality,
    >>>optical density, color balance and other parameters while still
    >>>maintaining nozzle health is not something printer manufacturers just
    >>>pick off the shelf. Printer companies invest heavily in ink chemistry
    >>>and they typically own the intellectual property of given formulations.
    >>>HP, Epson and Cannon have hundred of ink related patents.
    >>>
    >>>- Bob Headrick, not speaking for my employer HP
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>
    >>Right...and Exxon gas will put a tiger in your tank and BP gas will help
    >>clean your valves and Texaco gas will give you better milage....and
    >>yet....all the tanker trucks stop off at the same HESS Refinary depot
    >>every morning from every station and refill their tanker trucks with the
    >>same gas.
    >>
    >>And yet, millions of mooing morons will swear they get better gas milage
    >>by using Exxon instead of that "no name gas on the corner, which has
    >>water in it it and is cheap bad gas!", and pay an extra 30c a gallon
    >>too!
    >>
    >>Son, you really are a child of the 80's advertising mass media
    >>consumption market.
    >>
    >>Granted, there is a slight diference in some inks, but 90% of the
    >>diference is in advertising, not physical properties.
    >>
    >>
    >
    > And that is why you hear of printhead clogs all over this NG. And the
    > majority of the users reporting these problems are not using OEM BRANDED
    > inks.
    >
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >

    The majority of printhead clogs, from EPSON AND HP and CANON, is due to
    leaving the ink carts out too long to dry.

    They warn you about this all over the place, they all do, and yet, most
    people complaining about printers complain about printhead clogs.

    Go figure.

    In simple terms, it's not the ink, it's the user.

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

    Larry <lastingimagery@comcast.dotnet>
    wrotenews:MPG.1cbb62dc8bfc9c1598996d@news.comcast.giganews.com:

    > In article <blg4e.7934$FN4.6023@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com>,
    > measekite@yahoo.com says...
    >> Without real BRANDING by a real manufacturer/formulator; how do you
    >> tell real quality?
    >>
    >
    > Didn't you read the whole post???
    >

    Obviously he didn't, but felt the need to put it all in his one line
    response.


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

    measekite <measekite@yahoo.com> wrotenews:I7g4e.1387$qD2.156
    @newssvr14.news.prodigy.com:

    >
    >
    > Arthur Entlich wrote:
    >
    >> "Son" you really don't know what you are speaking of, about gasoline
    >> or about inks. In my neck of the woods, people like you are referred
    >> to (in polite circles) as "Sophomores" it's greek and it means "wise
    >> foolish" because you think you know a great deal more than you do.
    >>
    >> You are correct that gas is often refined at a centralized locale and
    >> that the companies use each others refineries and trucking, because it
    >> makes no sense at all to ship the gasoline hundreds of miles when
    >> their is a much closer refinery or distribution point. However, what
    >> makes gasoline unique and cost different amounts, other than some
    >> distilling properties, is additives. And additives are just that,
    >> they are added to the gasoline either in the tanker itself, at the
    >> refinery just as it is pumped, or sometimes even at the gas station.
    >
    >
    > Hooray! Perfectly said. >:o

    Not really. Yawl obviusly know nothing about the gas and distribution
    industy since the 90's.

    It was true at one time that Texaco tankers delivered Texaco gas, then it
    was true that they centralized for cost all gas and then added this and
    that, but now, it's all the same gas and all the same additives; more cost
    effective and why, if you listen and watch closely the ads for Shell and
    other gases, they won't claim exclusivity nor will you be able to nail
    anything down in the ad that states catagorically that ONLY with Shell gas,
    for example, after filling your tank with special blended Shell gas, and
    while you're tootling down the highway can you hear the agonized mewing
    screams coming from the back of your car as Tony slowly suffocates an
    agonizing death and faint sound of claw scratching coming from your trunk
    that slowly disappears and then everything become silent.



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

    Mapanari wrote:

    > <snip>
    >
    >>>
    >>>
    >>And that is why you hear of printhead clogs all over this NG. And the
    >>majority of the users reporting these problems are not using OEM BRANDED
    >>inks.
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >
    >The majority of printhead clogs, from EPSON AND HP and CANON, is due to
    >leaving the ink carts out too long to dry.
    >
    >

    I left my HP990 unused for 3 months. I then pick up printing with it
    without a problem.

    >They warn you about this all over the place, they all do, and yet, most
    >people complaining about printers complain about printhead clogs.
    >
    >Go figure.
    >
    >In simple terms, it's not the ink, it's the user.
    >
    >
    >
  19. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    measekite <measekite@yahoo.com> wrotenews:0m17e.1112$J12.489
    @newssvr14.news.prodigy.com:


    >>The majority of printhead clogs, from EPSON AND HP and CANON, is due to
    >>leaving the ink carts out too long to dry.
    >>
    >>
    >
    > I left my HP990 unused for 3 months. I then pick up printing with it
    > without a problem.
    >

    Please re-read my sentence above, think about it for a while, then get back
    to me.

    --
    ---Mapanari---
Ask a new question

Read More

Printers Pixma Canon Peripherals