Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Any Pixma iP4000 users?

Last response: in Computer Peripherals
Share
Anonymous
March 25, 2005 5:00:18 AM

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

Can I get some yeas or nays on this printer from owners? Most of the reviews
are favorable, but I put more stock in comments from day-to-day users. TIA.

More about : pixma ip4000 users

Anonymous
March 25, 2005 5:07:09 AM

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

Read the reviews on it at PC MAG.com. You can believe what they say. I
think this is a fantastic photo printer that does OK on business text
documents and is very fast. It has great features like full duplexing
and twin paper feeds. I use paper in the bottom cassette and use photo
paper in the tip auto sheet feeder. I also allow access to it, both
cabled and wireless, on my network.

I do wish that business documents were as dark as my HP990 but the Canon
is much faster and the HP is not a photo printer.

KnumbKnuts wrote:

>Can I get some yeas or nays on this printer from owners? Most of the reviews
>are favorable, but I put more stock in comments from day-to-day users. TIA.
>
>
>
>
Anonymous
March 25, 2005 6:12:42 AM

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

This is a superb printer. Fast, quiet, and terriffic results when using
photo paper. I have 2 Canons and 3 Epson printers in my business. The
Canons produce better prints, and use a lot less ink.

Highest recommendation!!
Related resources
Anonymous
March 25, 2005 6:35:26 PM

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

ISZ wrote:

>This is a superb printer. Fast, quiet, and terriffic results when using
>photo paper. I have 2 Canons and 3 Epson printers in my business. The
>Canons produce better prints, and use a lot less ink.
>
>

Do you feel that the Epsons have any advantage over the Canon. Do you
use OEM ink in both? What brand of photo paper do you use?

>Highest recommendation!!
>
>
>
Anonymous
March 25, 2005 7:24:43 PM

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

"KnumbKnuts" <[nospam[jhansman@pacbell.net> wrote in message
news:SgK0e.2251$zl.1161@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
> Can I get some yeas or nays on this printer from owners? Most of the
> reviews
> are favorable, but I put more stock in comments from day-to-day users.
> TIA.


The only complaint I have is when trying to print CDs. The software program
seems to take forever on WinXP SP2. But once it started up, all is fine.
--
Steven Ung
Anonymous
March 25, 2005 8:54:44 PM

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

"KnumbKnuts" <[nospam[jhansman@pacbell.net> wrote in message
news:SgK0e.2251$zl.1161@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
> Can I get some yeas or nays on this printer from owners? Most of the
> reviews
> are favorable, but I put more stock in comments from day-to-day users.
> TIA.
>

If you tell us what you want to use it for we will be able to give more
detailed feedback.
Anonymous
March 26, 2005 3:57:03 AM

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

KnumbKnuts wrote:
> Can I get some yeas or nays on this printer from owners? Most of the reviews
> are favorable, but I put more stock in comments from day-to-day users. TIA.
>
>
I liked the 1st one I got so good that I bought 3 more. Fast, Quiet,
Easy on ink, and with rebates -cheap. Uses most photo paper and I refill
cartridges in spite of what some say with no problem so far in about 13
changes.
Anonymous
March 26, 2005 4:32:25 AM

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

Thanks for the recommedations. On the strength of these and the good
reviews, I picked one up today at Office Depot for $129.00. With the current
rebate of $20, this should be a good deal all around. I plan to use it
primarily for 4x6 photo printing, with the occasional text job thrown in.
"Mudflap" <gcdoss@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:zr21e.4040$gI5.342@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> KnumbKnuts wrote:
> > Can I get some yeas or nays on this printer from owners? Most of the
reviews
> > are favorable, but I put more stock in comments from day-to-day users.
TIA.
> >
> >
> I liked the 1st one I got so good that I bought 3 more. Fast, Quiet,
> Easy on ink, and with rebates -cheap. Uses most photo paper and I refill
> cartridges in spite of what some say with no problem so far in about 13
> changes.
Anonymous
March 26, 2005 4:49:55 AM

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

Mudflap wrote:

> KnumbKnuts wrote:
>
>> Can I get some yeas or nays on this printer from owners? Most of the
>> reviews
>> are favorable, but I put more stock in comments from day-to-day
>> users. TIA.
>>
>>
> I liked the 1st one I got so good that I bought 3 more. Fast, Quiet,
> Easy on ink, and with rebates -cheap. Uses most photo paper and I
> refill cartridges in spite of what some say with no problem so far in
> about 13 changes.


I find it difficult to understand why some people have problems with 3rd
party ink while others do not. I was in Costco the other day and
purchase OEM HP and OEM Canon ink. The guys next to me was doing the
same for his Canon i960. I asked him if he tried 3rd party ink. He did
and said that it clogged the print head and he had to purchase a new
one. He forgot the brand/source of what he used. I said brand source
since other than Formulabs branded manufactured formulated ink, I do not
know of another manufacturer. Most of the names attached to ink appears
to come from resellers and dealers who buy brand x ink.
Anonymous
March 26, 2005 4:54:09 AM

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

KnumbKnuts wrote:

>Thanks for the recommedations. On the strength of these and the good
>reviews, I picked one up today at Office Depot for $129.00. With the current
>rebate of $20, this should be a good deal all around.
>
A net of $100 is the cheapest I have seen on the IP4000. Frys had that
deal last month. I am sure you will like the printer. Costco sells OEM
ink for $9.00 a cart and 88inkjets.com sells Formulabs branded ink (do
not know the cartridge mfg or filler) for $5.00 with discounts for 7 or
more. They also have combo packs.

>I plan to use it
>primarily for 4x6 photo printing, with the occasional text job thrown in.
>"Mudflap" <gcdoss@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>news:zr21e.4040$gI5.342@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>
>
>>KnumbKnuts wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Can I get some yeas or nays on this printer from owners? Most of the
>>>
>>>
>reviews
>
>
>>>are favorable, but I put more stock in comments from day-to-day users.
>>>
>>>
>TIA.
>
>
>>>
>>>
>>I liked the 1st one I got so good that I bought 3 more. Fast, Quiet,
>>Easy on ink, and with rebates -cheap. Uses most photo paper and I refill
>>cartridges in spite of what some say with no problem so far in about 13
>>changes.
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
Anonymous
March 26, 2005 9:17:06 AM

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

I've been using 3rd party carts in my Epson for years. No problem for
general printing, but I've not used them yet for photos. I am hopeful I can
find an affordable source suitable for photos.

"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:7d31e.15537$C47.5411@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com...
>
>
> Mudflap wrote:
>
> > KnumbKnuts wrote:
> >
> >> Can I get some yeas or nays on this printer from owners? Most of the
> >> reviews
> >> are favorable, but I put more stock in comments from day-to-day
> >> users. TIA.
> >>
> >>
> > I liked the 1st one I got so good that I bought 3 more. Fast, Quiet,
> > Easy on ink, and with rebates -cheap. Uses most photo paper and I
> > refill cartridges in spite of what some say with no problem so far in
> > about 13 changes.
>
>
> I find it difficult to understand why some people have problems with 3rd
> party ink while others do not. I was in Costco the other day and
> purchase OEM HP and OEM Canon ink. The guys next to me was doing the
> same for his Canon i960. I asked him if he tried 3rd party ink. He did
> and said that it clogged the print head and he had to purchase a new
> one. He forgot the brand/source of what he used. I said brand source
> since other than Formulabs branded manufactured formulated ink, I do not
> know of another manufacturer. Most of the names attached to ink appears
> to come from resellers and dealers who buy brand x ink.
Anonymous
March 26, 2005 3:44:21 PM

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

"KnumbKnuts" <[nospam[jhansman@pacbell.net> wrote in message
news:JY21e.15532$C47.9587@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com...
> Thanks for the recommedations. On the strength of these and the good
> reviews, I picked one up today at Office Depot for $129.00. With the
> current
> rebate of $20, this should be a good deal all around. I plan to use it
> primarily for 4x6 photo printing, with the occasional text job thrown in.

OK - if you had said that BEFORE you had bought it I would have said - if
your main requirement is to print 4x6 photos you would be better off going
for a specialised photo-printer which are designed specifically to make good
4x6 photos and use pigment ink, or at least a pigment inkjet printer -
prints from these are a bit more expensive, but will last into future
generations. Any standard dye based inkjet printer will not. Apart from that
the IP4000 is a great printer, but is suitable for day-to-day use, not for
family memories.
Anonymous
March 26, 2005 3:44:22 PM

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

Caitlin wrote:

>"KnumbKnuts" <[nospam[jhansman@pacbell.net> wrote in message
>news:JY21e.15532$C47.9587@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com...
>
>
>>Thanks for the recommedations. On the strength of these and the good
>>reviews, I picked one up today at Office Depot for $129.00. With the
>>current
>>rebate of $20, this should be a good deal all around. I plan to use it
>>primarily for 4x6 photo printing, with the occasional text job thrown in.
>>
>>
>
>OK - if you had said that BEFORE you had bought it I would have said - if
>your main requirement is to print 4x6 photos you would be better off going
>for a specialised photo-printer which are designed specifically to make good
>4x6 photos and use pigment ink, or at least a pigment inkjet printer -
>prints from these are a bit more expensive, but will last into future
>generations. Any standard dye based inkjet printer will not. Apart from that
>the IP4000 is a great printer, but is suitable for day-to-day use, not for
>family memories.
>
>
He also said that he will also print text documents. Anyway, I believe
you when you say that dye based inks will not last as long as pigment
base inks but myself and others have not seen any fading since the PIXMA
series came out. The i series use the same inks. I just came from
Aaron Bros Picture Framing and spoke to the framer about this issue.
She deals with many photographers who are their clients. She told me
she has not heard much about fading from any of the photo printers.

It may be the atmosphere in certain parts of the world affect prints
differently. I hope for the best. I like the printer and the speed.
Epson is rather slow.

>
>
>
Anonymous
March 26, 2005 4:18:31 PM

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

"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:zm31e.2676$zl.95@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
>
>
> Caitlin wrote:
>
>>"KnumbKnuts" <[nospam[jhansman@pacbell.net> wrote in message
>>news:JY21e.15532$C47.9587@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com...
>>
>>>Thanks for the recommedations. On the strength of these and the good
>>>reviews, I picked one up today at Office Depot for $129.00. With the
>>>current
>>>rebate of $20, this should be a good deal all around. I plan to use it
>>>primarily for 4x6 photo printing, with the occasional text job thrown in.
>>>
>>
>>OK - if you had said that BEFORE you had bought it I would have said - if
>>your main requirement is to print 4x6 photos you would be better off going
>>for a specialised photo-printer which are designed specifically to make
>>good 4x6 photos and use pigment ink, or at least a pigment inkjet
>>printer - prints from these are a bit more expensive, but will last into
>>future generations. Any standard dye based inkjet printer will not. Apart
>>from that the IP4000 is a great printer, but is suitable for day-to-day
>>use, not for family memories.
> He also said that he will also print text documents. Anyway, I believe you
> when you say that dye based inks will not last as long as pigment base
> inks but myself and others have not seen any fading since the PIXMA series
> came out. The i series use the same inks. I just came from Aaron Bros
> Picture Framing and spoke to the framer about this issue. She deals with
> many photographers who are their clients. She told me she has not heard
> much about fading from any of the photo printers.
>
> It may be the atmosphere in certain parts of the world affect prints
> differently. I hope for the best. I like the printer and the speed.
> Epson is rather slow.
>
>>

*sigh* Its not a case of believing me - it's believing the number of
scientific studies that have been conducted on this. Once they have had
experience of 50 year old prints then the experiences of individuals will
become meaningful.

I work in a film archive, and believe me - it is quite tragic to see history
fade away - this is the future of home printing if people are not aware of
the issue.
Anonymous
March 26, 2005 4:18:32 PM

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

Caitlin wrote:

>"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:zm31e.2676$zl.95@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
>
>
>>Caitlin wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>"KnumbKnuts" <[nospam[jhansman@pacbell.net> wrote in message
>>>news:JY21e.15532$C47.9587@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Thanks for the recommedations. On the strength of these and the good
>>>>reviews, I picked one up today at Office Depot for $129.00. With the
>>>>current
>>>>rebate of $20, this should be a good deal all around. I plan to use it
>>>>primarily for 4x6 photo printing, with the occasional text job thrown in.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>OK - if you had said that BEFORE you had bought it I would have said - if
>>>your main requirement is to print 4x6 photos you would be better off going
>>>for a specialised photo-printer which are designed specifically to make
>>>good 4x6 photos and use pigment ink, or at least a pigment inkjet
>>>printer - prints from these are a bit more expensive, but will last into
>>>future generations. Any standard dye based inkjet printer will not. Apart
>>>
>>>
>>>from that the IP4000 is a great printer, but is suitable for day-to-day
>>
>>
>>>use, not for family memories.
>>>
>>>
>>He also said that he will also print text documents. Anyway, I believe you
>>when you say that dye based inks will not last as long as pigment base
>>inks but myself and others have not seen any fading since the PIXMA series
>>came out. The i series use the same inks. I just came from Aaron Bros
>>Picture Framing and spoke to the framer about this issue. She deals with
>>many photographers who are their clients. She told me she has not heard
>>much about fading from any of the photo printers.
>>
>>It may be the atmosphere in certain parts of the world affect prints
>>differently. I hope for the best. I like the printer and the speed.
>>Epson is rather slow.
>>
>>
>>
>
>*sigh* Its not a case of believing me - it's believing the number of
>scientific studies that have been conducted on this. Once they have had
>experience of 50 year old prints then the experiences of individuals will
>become meaningful.
>
>I work in a film archive, and believe me - it is quite tragic to see history
>fade away - this is the future of home printing if people are not aware of
>the issue.
>
>

I think that the future of home printing has not even been dreamed of yet.

>
>
>
Anonymous
March 26, 2005 4:18:32 PM

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

History may fade away, but (*sigh*) digital photos do not. I can print a
thousand photos if I like, so of what possible relevance is your point?

"Caitlin" <caitlin_online_spamtrap@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:4244c679$0$27616$61c65585@un-2park-reader-02.sydney.pipenetworks.com.au...
>
> "measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:zm31e.2676$zl.95@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
> >
> >
> > Caitlin wrote:
> >
> >>"KnumbKnuts" <[nospam[jhansman@pacbell.net> wrote in message
> >>news:JY21e.15532$C47.9587@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com...
> >>
> >>>Thanks for the recommedations. On the strength of these and the good
> >>>reviews, I picked one up today at Office Depot for $129.00. With the
> >>>current
> >>>rebate of $20, this should be a good deal all around. I plan to use it
> >>>primarily for 4x6 photo printing, with the occasional text job thrown
in.
> >>>
> >>
> >>OK - if you had said that BEFORE you had bought it I would have said -
if
> >>your main requirement is to print 4x6 photos you would be better off
going
> >>for a specialised photo-printer which are designed specifically to make
> >>good 4x6 photos and use pigment ink, or at least a pigment inkjet
> >>printer - prints from these are a bit more expensive, but will last into
> >>future generations. Any standard dye based inkjet printer will not.
Apart
> >>from that the IP4000 is a great printer, but is suitable for day-to-day
> >>use, not for family memories.
> > He also said that he will also print text documents. Anyway, I believe
you
> > when you say that dye based inks will not last as long as pigment base
> > inks but myself and others have not seen any fading since the PIXMA
series
> > came out. The i series use the same inks. I just came from Aaron Bros
> > Picture Framing and spoke to the framer about this issue. She deals
with
> > many photographers who are their clients. She told me she has not heard
> > much about fading from any of the photo printers.
> >
> > It may be the atmosphere in certain parts of the world affect prints
> > differently. I hope for the best. I like the printer and the speed.
> > Epson is rather slow.
> >
> >>
>
> *sigh* Its not a case of believing me - it's believing the number of
> scientific studies that have been conducted on this. Once they have had
> experience of 50 year old prints then the experiences of individuals will
> become meaningful.
>
> I work in a film archive, and believe me - it is quite tragic to see
history
> fade away - this is the future of home printing if people are not aware of
> the issue.
>
>
Anonymous
March 26, 2005 8:56:37 PM

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

KnumbKnuts wrote:

>I've been using 3rd party carts in my Epson for years. No problem for
>general printing, but I've not used them yet for photos. I am hopeful I can
>find an affordable source suitable for photos.
>
>

www.88inkjets.com for Formulabs Ink fopr the IP4000

>"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:7d31e.15537$C47.5411@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com...
>
>
>>Mudflap wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>KnumbKnuts wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Can I get some yeas or nays on this printer from owners? Most of the
>>>>reviews
>>>>are favorable, but I put more stock in comments from day-to-day
>>>>users. TIA.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>I liked the 1st one I got so good that I bought 3 more. Fast, Quiet,
>>>Easy on ink, and with rebates -cheap. Uses most photo paper and I
>>>refill cartridges in spite of what some say with no problem so far in
>>>about 13 changes.
>>>
>>>
>>I find it difficult to understand why some people have problems with 3rd
>>party ink while others do not. I was in Costco the other day and
>>purchase OEM HP and OEM Canon ink. The guys next to me was doing the
>>same for his Canon i960. I asked him if he tried 3rd party ink. He did
>>and said that it clogged the print head and he had to purchase a new
>>one. He forgot the brand/source of what he used. I said brand source
>>since other than Formulabs branded manufactured formulated ink, I do not
>>know of another manufacturer. Most of the names attached to ink appears
>>to come from resellers and dealers who buy brand x ink.
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
Anonymous
March 26, 2005 9:22:42 PM

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

"KnumbKnuts" <[nospam[jhansman@pacbell.net> wrote in message
news:_571e.2763$zl.1012@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
> History may fade away, but (*sigh*) digital photos do not. I can print a
> thousand photos if I like, so of what possible relevance is your point?
>

Your regular home user is going to keep and look after their digital files
about as much as they do their negs now. ie. not often, not well. For those
that do - they can reprint. I have no negs for any of the photos from my
parents and granparents era, and I am not unique in that. Digital files are
likely to be treated by most users in much the same way.
Anonymous
March 26, 2005 9:22:43 PM

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

Caitlin wrote:

>"KnumbKnuts" <[nospam[jhansman@pacbell.net> wrote in message
>news:_571e.2763$zl.1012@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
>
>
>>History may fade away, but (*sigh*) digital photos do not. I can print a
>>thousand photos if I like, so of what possible relevance is your point?
>>
>>
>>
>
>Your regular home user is going to keep and look after their digital files
>about as much as they do their negs now. ie. not often, not well. For those
>that do - they can reprint. I have no negs for any of the photos from my
>parents and granparents era, and I am not unique in that. Digital files are
>likely to be treated by most users in much the same way.
>
>
The one thing I will agree with you on regarding digital files is that
they are like any other group of digital files. Home users have a
strong tendency of not backing up their work. One worm, bad hard disk
or some other problem, it is GoodBye Files.

Even if they had good backup software like Dantz Retrospect (the best)
that can be put on an automatic schedule at the night and backed up to a
second hard disk and then off loaded from there, most users would not
use it on a regular basis.

So this problem is even worse than lost negatives. With negatives the
user just has to store them someplace reasonable.

On the other side of the coin, negatives do fade but digital files do
not. They are always the same.

Even if you do have a point, I think the Canon IP4000 dye base printer
is better than the Epson. And the i9900 is better than the R800 for
producing the most stunning results. Since the engine of the R1800 is
the same as the R800, I would also include that.

>
>
>
March 27, 2005 12:19:16 AM

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

I have had excellent results with MIS bulk ink refilling OEM carts. Others
report excellent results buying formulabs inks and also prefilled carts
(Arrow brand, not Rainbow) from Alotofthings. Although Meesekite has not
used any of these products, he had posted vitriolic comments about
Alotofthings because, in his view, their web site isn't professional, an
answer to an email was not to his liking, and they only sell thorugh their
ebay store. Read the comments of people who have actually done business
with these companies and can tell you from their own experience. Another
excellent source is Neil Slade's web site. The link is
http://www.neilslade.com/papers/inkjetstuff.html . Read his very long,
run-on info for excellent hands-on information and advice. I followed it
and am very happy. Meesekite is very bright and knowledgeable in many areas,
but he sometimes gives what appears to be informative advice without having
the specific experience to do so. Case in point - third party and refill
inks.

"KnumbKnuts" <[nospam[jhansman@pacbell.net> wrote in message
news:C771e.2764$zl.1272@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
> I've been using 3rd party carts in my Epson for years. No problem for
> general printing, but I've not used them yet for photos. I am hopeful I
> can
> find an affordable source suitable for photos.
>
> "measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:7d31e.15537$C47.5411@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com...
>>
>>
>> Mudflap wrote:
>>
>> > KnumbKnuts wrote:
>> >
>> >> Can I get some yeas or nays on this printer from owners? Most of the
>> >> reviews
>> >> are favorable, but I put more stock in comments from day-to-day
>> >> users. TIA.
>> >>
>> >>
>> > I liked the 1st one I got so good that I bought 3 more. Fast, Quiet,
>> > Easy on ink, and with rebates -cheap. Uses most photo paper and I
>> > refill cartridges in spite of what some say with no problem so far in
>> > about 13 changes.
>>
>>
>> I find it difficult to understand why some people have problems with 3rd
>> party ink while others do not. I was in Costco the other day and
>> purchase OEM HP and OEM Canon ink. The guys next to me was doing the
>> same for his Canon i960. I asked him if he tried 3rd party ink. He did
>> and said that it clogged the print head and he had to purchase a new
>> one. He forgot the brand/source of what he used. I said brand source
>> since other than Formulabs branded manufactured formulated ink, I do not
>> know of another manufacturer. Most of the names attached to ink appears
>> to come from resellers and dealers who buy brand x ink.
>
>
Anonymous
March 27, 2005 1:51:25 AM

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

Burt wrote:

>I have had excellent results with MIS bulk ink refilling OEM carts. Others
>report excellent results buying formulabs inks and also prefilled carts
>(Arrow brand, not Rainbow) from Alotofthings. Although Meesekite has not
>used any of these products, he had posted vitriolic comments about
>Alotofthings because, in his view, their web site isn't professional, an
>answer to an email was not to his liking, and they only sell thorugh their
>ebay store.
>

You do have an alternative. Goto 88inkjets.com and you can buy
Formulabs carts. See their website. See the information there. See
how you are encouraged to call their TOLL FREE number. You be the judge.

>Read the comments of people who have actually done business
>with these companies and can tell you from their own experience. Another
>excellent source is Neil Slade's web site. The link is
>http://www.neilslade.com/papers/inkjetstuff.html . Read his very long,
>run-on info for excellent hands-on information and advice. I followed it
>and am very happy. Meesekite is very bright and knowledgeable in many areas,
>but he sometimes gives what appears to be informative advice without having
>the specific experience to do so. Case in point - third party and refill
>inks.
>
>

It is difficult to tell the difference between a FEW good 3rd party inks
and the host of bad ones. It is also difficult to foresee consistency
due to the fact that most carry only a reseller's name and these small
companies usually buy from the lowest bidder; but not all. One thing I
do know is that many people on this site post problems they have with
clogged print heads. And the majority of these people are usually using
3rd party ink. If more of the 3rd party suppliers sold BRANDED 3rd
party ink, for example Formulabs, then you could trace the problems down
to poor brands. I did not use MIS as an example of a BRANDED ink
because I do not know if they are a mfg/formulator or a name given by
inksupply. the Dealer. Burt says that MIS has not been a problem for
you and I believe him; however because of the volume Burt prints,
marginal inks may not pose a problem. I certainly would like to know
if MIS is a mfg/formulator. I would also like to know why inksupply
does NOT sell MIS in their prefilled carts. They sell a noname ink from
China.

Be that as it may, if my Printing volume increases I may be tempted to
buy Formulabs prefilled carts from 88inkjets.com. Currently, they do
not sell bulk ink for Canon and Epson, only for HP. I am not sure that
I would want to go through the work of doing that anyway unless by
volume would justify it. 88inkjets.com can save around 60% to 70% of
OEM depending on where you buy OEM and the quality you buy.

>"KnumbKnuts" <[nospam[jhansman@pacbell.net> wrote in message
>news:C771e.2764$zl.1272@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
>
>
>>I've been using 3rd party carts in my Epson for years. No problem for
>>general printing, but I've not used them yet for photos. I am hopeful I
>>can
>>find an affordable source suitable for photos.
>>
>>"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>news:7d31e.15537$C47.5411@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com...
>>
>>
>>>Mudflap wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>KnumbKnuts wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Can I get some yeas or nays on this printer from owners? Most of the
>>>>>reviews
>>>>>are favorable, but I put more stock in comments from day-to-day
>>>>>users. TIA.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>I liked the 1st one I got so good that I bought 3 more. Fast, Quiet,
>>>>Easy on ink, and with rebates -cheap. Uses most photo paper and I
>>>>refill cartridges in spite of what some say with no problem so far in
>>>>about 13 changes.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>I find it difficult to understand why some people have problems with 3rd
>>>party ink while others do not. I was in Costco the other day and
>>>purchase OEM HP and OEM Canon ink. The guys next to me was doing the
>>>same for his Canon i960. I asked him if he tried 3rd party ink. He did
>>>and said that it clogged the print head and he had to purchase a new
>>>one. He forgot the brand/source of what he used. I said brand source
>>>since other than Formulabs branded manufactured formulated ink, I do not
>>>know of another manufacturer. Most of the names attached to ink appears
>>>to come from resellers and dealers who buy brand x ink.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
March 27, 2005 4:19:13 AM

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

And Alotofthings carts are a few cents more than $2 each in sets for your
individual printer. I spoke to Joe, the owner, prior to my purchase of
these carts and he told me that the Arrow carts on his ebay store are filled
with Formulabs inks. They are also refillable and his site sells Formulabs
inks in bulk. I have not yet used the Formulabs inks, but there are a few
people posting to this newsgroup that have used them very successfully. I
have had excellent experience with the MIS inks. I have not purchased their
prefilled carts (not filled with MIS inks) but they had assured me that the
ink in the prefilled carts was as good as the MIS ink. Since I have not
personally used their prefilled carts I can not comment on them. I am
looking forward to using the Alotofthings Arrow carts as I have read
excellent reports on the Formulabs inks that they contain. Look through the
posts on this NG for Ron Cohen and Taliesyn for their comments on the
Formulabs inks and Arrow prefilled carts from Alotofthings. (Taliesyn would
prefer to buy from Alotofthings but they will not ship to Canada.) They
have used these products and can report accurately on the products and the
company from which they were purchased. My purchase from Alotofthings
through ebay went smoothly and the delivery was in just a few days. One of
Meesekite's complaints is that this firm only sells through ebay and he
doesn't want to use the ebay Paypal system. So far, that has not been a
problem for me with several Paypal/ebay purchases. My best advice, however,
is to look at the posts of people who have used the products and also check
out Neil Slade's info. In conclusion, I would add that many of the posts
about head clogs are from people using OEM Canon inks! Infrequent use and
inadequate cleaning or printing of "purge" pages accounts for most of the
clogs. Also, as carts are repeatedly refilled they may not work as well and
must be discarded. I have read of techniques for reviving some of these
marginally functional carts, but I have not yet tried them. Probably best
to occasionally buy new OEM carts and start the refill cycle over for any
color cart that starts to malfunction.

"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:xPk1e.2981$zl.2240@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
>
>
> Burt wrote:
>
>>I have had excellent results with MIS bulk ink refilling OEM carts.
>>Others report excellent results buying formulabs inks and also prefilled
>>carts (Arrow brand, not Rainbow) from Alotofthings. Although Meesekite
>>has not used any of these products, he had posted vitriolic comments about
>>Alotofthings because, in his view, their web site isn't professional, an
>>answer to an email was not to his liking, and they only sell thorugh their
>>ebay store.
>
> You do have an alternative. Goto 88inkjets.com and you can buy Formulabs
> carts. See their website. See the information there. See how you are
> encouraged to call their TOLL FREE number. You be the judge.
>
>>Read the comments of people who have actually done business with these
>>companies and can tell you from their own experience. Another excellent
>>source is Neil Slade's web site. The link is
>>http://www.neilslade.com/papers/inkjetstuff.html . Read his very long,
>>run-on info for excellent hands-on information and advice. I followed it
>>and am very happy. Meesekite is very bright and knowledgeable in many
>>areas, but he sometimes gives what appears to be informative advice
>>without having the specific experience to do so. Case in point - third
>>party and refill inks.
>>
>
> It is difficult to tell the difference between a FEW good 3rd party inks
> and the host of bad ones. It is also difficult to foresee consistency due
> to the fact that most carry only a reseller's name and these small
> companies usually buy from the lowest bidder; but not all. One thing I do
> know is that many people on this site post problems they have with clogged
> print heads. And the majority of these people are usually using 3rd party
> ink. If more of the 3rd party suppliers sold BRANDED 3rd party ink, for
> example Formulabs, then you could trace the problems down to poor brands.
> I did not use MIS as an example of a BRANDED ink because I do not know if
> they are a mfg/formulator or a name given by inksupply. the Dealer. Burt
> says that MIS has not been a problem for you and I believe him; however
> because of the volume Burt prints, marginal inks may not pose a problem.
> I certainly would like to know if MIS is a mfg/formulator. I would also
> like to know why inksupply does NOT sell MIS in their prefilled carts.
> They sell a noname ink from China.
>
> Be that as it may, if my Printing volume increases I may be tempted to buy
> Formulabs prefilled carts from 88inkjets.com. Currently, they do not sell
> bulk ink for Canon and Epson, only for HP. I am not sure that I would
> want to go through the work of doing that anyway unless by volume would
> justify it. 88inkjets.com can save around 60% to 70% of OEM depending on
> where you buy OEM and the quality you buy.
>
>>"KnumbKnuts" <[nospam[jhansman@pacbell.net> wrote in message
>>news:C771e.2764$zl.1272@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
>>
>>>I've been using 3rd party carts in my Epson for years. No problem for
>>>general printing, but I've not used them yet for photos. I am hopeful I
>>>can
>>>find an affordable source suitable for photos.
>>>
>>>"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>>news:7d31e.15537$C47.5411@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com...
>>>
>>>>Mudflap wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>KnumbKnuts wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Can I get some yeas or nays on this printer from owners? Most of the
>>>>>>reviews
>>>>>>are favorable, but I put more stock in comments from day-to-day
>>>>>>users. TIA.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>I liked the 1st one I got so good that I bought 3 more. Fast, Quiet,
>>>>>Easy on ink, and with rebates -cheap. Uses most photo paper and I
>>>>>refill cartridges in spite of what some say with no problem so far in
>>>>>about 13 changes.
>>>>>
>>>>I find it difficult to understand why some people have problems with 3rd
>>>>party ink while others do not. I was in Costco the other day and
>>>>purchase OEM HP and OEM Canon ink. The guys next to me was doing the
>>>>same for his Canon i960. I asked him if he tried 3rd party ink. He did
>>>>and said that it clogged the print head and he had to purchase a new
>>>>one. He forgot the brand/source of what he used. I said brand source
>>>>since other than Formulabs branded manufactured formulated ink, I do not
>>>>know of another manufacturer. Most of the names attached to ink appears
>>>>to come from resellers and dealers who buy brand x ink.
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
Anonymous
March 28, 2005 2:22:05 AM

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

measekite wrote:
> Caitlin wrote:
>
>> "KnumbKnuts" <[nospam[jhansman@pacbell.net> wrote in message
>> news:_571e.2763$zl.1012@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
>>
>>
>>> History may fade away, but (*sigh*) digital photos do not. I can
>>> print a thousand photos if I like, so of what possible relevance is
>>> your point?
>>
>> Your regular home user is going to keep and look after their digital
>> files about as much as they do their negs now. ie. not often, not
>> well. For those that do - they can reprint. I have no negs for any
>> of the photos from my parents and granparents era, and I am not
>> unique in that. Digital files are likely to be treated by most users
>> in much the same way.
> The one thing I will agree with you on regarding digital files is that
> they are like any other group of digital files. Home users have a
> strong tendency of not backing up their work. One worm, bad hard disk
> or some other problem, it is GoodBye Files.
>
> Even if they had good backup software like Dantz Retrospect (the best)
> that can be put on an automatic schedule at the night and backed up
> to a second hard disk and then off loaded from there, most users
> would not use it on a regular basis.
>
> So this problem is even worse than lost negatives. With negatives the
> user just has to store them someplace reasonable.
>
> On the other side of the coin, negatives do fade but digital files do
> not. They are always the same.
>
> Even if you do have a point, I think the Canon IP4000 dye base printer
> is better than the Epson. And the i9900 is better than the R800 for
> producing the most stunning results. Since the engine of the R1800 is
> the same as the R800, I would also include that.

Isn't it funny...all owners of Epson printers always tend to switch
conversation on fading...i guess it's because they know that life is ONLY
good thinf on Epson printers, so they stick to it like a man in the water
sticks to a piece of wood in order not to drown...
They just can't understand that times has changed over last 50 years...

regarding those who don't keep backups...same users don't keep
negatives...so here is not any difference really...
here is not really any matter if print fades in 2 years or 20 years...result
is exactly the same: you end up without a photo. This is really stupid to
claim, as this could be claiming for each thing, like if you don't keep a
second key, you will sooner or later end up without it.
Anonymous
March 28, 2005 2:22:06 AM

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

SleeperMan wrote:

>measekite wrote:
>
>
>>Caitlin wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>"KnumbKnuts" <[nospam[jhansman@pacbell.net> wrote in message
>>>news:_571e.2763$zl.1012@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>History may fade away, but (*sigh*) digital photos do not. I can
>>>>print a thousand photos if I like, so of what possible relevance is
>>>>your point?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>Your regular home user is going to keep and look after their digital
>>>files about as much as they do their negs now. ie. not often, not
>>>well. For those that do - they can reprint. I have no negs for any
>>>of the photos from my parents and granparents era, and I am not
>>>unique in that. Digital files are likely to be treated by most users
>>>in much the same way.
>>>
>>>
>>The one thing I will agree with you on regarding digital files is that
>>they are like any other group of digital files. Home users have a
>>strong tendency of not backing up their work. One worm, bad hard disk
>>or some other problem, it is GoodBye Files.
>>
>>Even if they had good backup software like Dantz Retrospect (the best)
>>that can be put on an automatic schedule at the night and backed up
>>to a second hard disk and then off loaded from there, most users
>>would not use it on a regular basis.
>>
>>So this problem is even worse than lost negatives. With negatives the
>>user just has to store them someplace reasonable.
>>
>>On the other side of the coin, negatives do fade but digital files do
>>not. They are always the same.
>>
>>Even if you do have a point, I think the Canon IP4000 dye base printer
>>is better than the Epson. And the i9900 is better than the R800 for
>>producing the most stunning results. Since the engine of the R1800 is
>>the same as the R800, I would also include that.
>>
>>
>
>Isn't it funny...all owners of Epson printers always tend to switch
>conversation on fading...i guess it's because they know that life is ONLY
>good thinf on Epson printers, so they stick to it like a man in the water
>sticks to a piece of wood in order not to drown...
>They just can't understand that times has changed over last 50 years...
>
>regarding those who don't keep backups...same users don't keep
>negatives...so here is not any difference really...
>
>


This is where I disagree with you. Users need some degree of
sophistication and computer understanding to properly keep backups and
insure the safety of their work. Keeping negatives does not require any
expertise. Right now I prefer Canon because it is faster, produces
better results, and does NOT have permenant print heads. The PIXMAs
also have duplexing and twin paper feeds and the ink costs far less. (OEM)

However, if they fade (so far mine have not) I may change. In the
future discussions like these may have no significance as technology
will mute the outcry.

>here is not really any matter if print fades in 2 years or 20 years...result
>is exactly the same: you end up without a photo. This is really stupid to
>claim, as this could be claiming for each thing, like if you don't keep a
>second key, you will sooner or later end up without it.
>
>
>
>
Anonymous
March 28, 2005 1:53:23 PM

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

measekite wrote:
> SleeperMan wrote:
>
>
>
> This is where I disagree with you. Users need some degree of
> sophistication and computer understanding to properly keep backups and
> insure the safety of their work. Keeping negatives does not require
> any expertise.

well, it is desired to keep negatives in some dry, dark place etc...
Also putting blank CDR into the drive and hit copy is pretty simple, in
fact, 6 year old sister's son these days teaches her how to do it...
It's like that - who doesn't know how to do it, he/she has nothing to do
with digital camera.

Or alternative - It's same as in old days some didn't even know how to
insert a film, so they went to a photo shop to put it in and to get it out
later. Same here...you can go to a shop, they will remove your card, make a
copy to CDR (or two, 3 of them), erase card and put it back into camera.


> better results, and does NOT have permenant print heads. The PIXMAs
> also have duplexing and twin paper feeds and the ink costs far less. (OEM)
> However, if they fade (so far mine have not) I may change.


If they do fade, i'll make another one. As simple as that. I NEVER look
anything regarding fading, only quality vs. price (and this includes printer
price). Period.
Anonymous
March 28, 2005 1:53:24 PM

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

SleeperMan wrote:

>measekite wrote:
>
>
>>SleeperMan wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>This is where I disagree with you. Users need some degree of
>>sophistication and computer understanding to properly keep backups and
>>insure the safety of their work. Keeping negatives does not require
>>any expertise.
>>
>>
>
>well, it is desired to keep negatives in some dry, dark place etc...
>Also putting blank CDR into the drive and hit copy is pretty simple, in
>fact, 6 year old sister's son these days teaches her how to do it...
>It's like that - who doesn't know how to do it, he/she has nothing to do
>with digital camera.
>
>Or alternative - It's same as in old days some didn't even know how to
>insert a film, so they went to a photo shop to put it in and to get it out
>later. Same here...you can go to a shop, they will remove your card, make a
>copy to CDR (or two, 3 of them), erase card and put it back into camera.
>
>
>
>
>>better results, and does NOT have permenant print heads. The PIXMAs
>>also have duplexing and twin paper feeds and the ink costs far less. (OEM)
>>However, if they fade (so far mine have not) I may change.
>>
>>
>
>
>If they do fade, i'll make another one. As simple as that. I NEVER look
>anything regarding fading, only quality vs. price (and this includes printer
>price). Period.
>
>
>
>
>
Anonymous
March 28, 2005 1:53:24 PM

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

Depending on the brand of the CDR, the media has a finite life. Every 5
to 10 years they will have to be recopied to insure the digital backup.

SleeperMan wrote:

>measekite wrote:
>
>
>>SleeperMan wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>This is where I disagree with you. Users need some degree of
>>sophistication and computer understanding to properly keep backups and
>>insure the safety of their work. Keeping negatives does not require
>>any expertise.
>>
>>
>
>well, it is desired to keep negatives in some dry, dark place etc...
>Also putting blank CDR into the drive and hit copy is pretty simple, in
>fact, 6 year old sister's son these days teaches her how to do it...
>It's like that - who doesn't know how to do it, he/she has nothing to do
>with digital camera.
>
>Or alternative - It's same as in old days some didn't even know how to
>insert a film, so they went to a photo shop to put it in and to get it out
>later. Same here...you can go to a shop, they will remove your card, make a
>copy to CDR (or two, 3 of them), erase card and put it back into camera.
>
>
>
>
>>better results, and does NOT have permenant print heads. The PIXMAs
>>also have duplexing and twin paper feeds and the ink costs far less. (OEM)
>>However, if they fade (so far mine have not) I may change.
>>
>>
>
>
>If they do fade, i'll make another one. As simple as that. I NEVER look
>anything regarding fading, only quality vs. price (and this includes printer
>price). Period.
>
>
>
>
>
Anonymous
March 28, 2005 3:06:30 PM

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

measekite wrote:
> Depending on the brand of the CDR, the media has a finite life. Every 5 to
> 10 years they will have to be recopied to insure the
> digital backup.

True. That is downside of CDR, once advertising as "infinite lasting"...
But, smart ones makes two or more copies, and also in a period of 5-10 years
CDR's will become obsolete and thus requiring to copy all existing photos on
CDR's on some different media, like bluray, (maybe) DVD, or even some
currently unknown. Same happened with floppies.
But look in this way: if you do re-copy every 5-10 years, then after , say,
50 years you still have a perfect original, while negatives after 50
years... oh, mamma mia... it's hard to copy negatives, impossible without
quality loss.

>
> SleeperMan wrote:
>
>> measekite wrote:
>>
>>
>>> SleeperMan wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> This is where I disagree with you. Users need some degree of
>>> sophistication and computer understanding to properly keep backups
>>> and insure the safety of their work. Keeping negatives does not
>>> require any expertise.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> well, it is desired to keep negatives in some dry, dark place etc...
>> Also putting blank CDR into the drive and hit copy is pretty
>> simple, in fact, 6 year old sister's son these days teaches her how
>> to do it... It's like that - who doesn't know how to do it, he/she has
>> nothing
>> to do with digital camera.
>>
>> Or alternative - It's same as in old days some didn't even know how
>> to insert a film, so they went to a photo shop to put it in and to
>> get it out later. Same here...you can go to a shop, they will remove
>> your card, make a copy to CDR (or two, 3 of them), erase card and
>> put it back into camera.
>>> better results, and does NOT have permenant print heads. The PIXMAs
>>> also have duplexing and twin paper feeds and the ink costs far
>>> less. (OEM) However, if they fade (so far mine have not) I may
>>> change.
>>
>>
>> If they do fade, i'll make another one. As simple as that. I NEVER
>> look anything regarding fading, only quality vs. price (and this
>> includes printer price). Period.
Anonymous
March 28, 2005 8:57:41 PM

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

AGREED :-)

SleeperMan wrote:

>measekite wrote:
>
>
>>Depending on the brand of the CDR, the media has a finite life. Every 5 to
>>10 years they will have to be recopied to insure the
>>digital backup.
>>
>>
>
>True. That is downside of CDR, once advertising as "infinite lasting"...
>But, smart ones makes two or more copies, and also in a period of 5-10 years
>CDR's will become obsolete and thus requiring to copy all existing photos on
>CDR's on some different media, like bluray, (maybe) DVD, or even some
>currently unknown. Same happened with floppies.
>But look in this way: if you do re-copy every 5-10 years, then after , say,
>50 years you still have a perfect original, while negatives after 50
>years... oh, mamma mia... it's hard to copy negatives, impossible without
>quality loss.
>
>
>
>>SleeperMan wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>measekite wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>SleeperMan wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>This is where I disagree with you. Users need some degree of
>>>>sophistication and computer understanding to properly keep backups
>>>>and insure the safety of their work. Keeping negatives does not
>>>>require any expertise.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>well, it is desired to keep negatives in some dry, dark place etc...
>>>Also putting blank CDR into the drive and hit copy is pretty
>>>simple, in fact, 6 year old sister's son these days teaches her how
>>>to do it... It's like that - who doesn't know how to do it, he/she has
>>>nothing
>>>to do with digital camera.
>>>
>>>Or alternative - It's same as in old days some didn't even know how
>>>to insert a film, so they went to a photo shop to put it in and to
>>>get it out later. Same here...you can go to a shop, they will remove
>>>your card, make a copy to CDR (or two, 3 of them), erase card and
>>>put it back into camera.
>>>
>>>
>>>>better results, and does NOT have permenant print heads. The PIXMAs
>>>>also have duplexing and twin paper feeds and the ink costs far
>>>>less. (OEM) However, if they fade (so far mine have not) I may
>>>>change.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>If they do fade, i'll make another one. As simple as that. I NEVER
>>>look anything regarding fading, only quality vs. price (and this
>>>includes printer price). Period.
>>>
>>>
>
>
>
>
>
!