Chipped Epson cartridges.

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

Due to problems with a clogged printer head, and repeated cleaning
operations, my new epson original ink cartridges report that they are only
60% full now - when in fact I know they must be 100% since there hasn't been
a drop out of them yet.

I have an Epson CX5200 and wonder if there is a simple way of resetting the
chip, or indeed if they will run as an unknown vendor if the chip is
removed. I am aware that some of Epson inkjet printers (ie C680) will run on
chipped and unchipped - a message just appears which you ignore.

So can I simply remove or short the chip on the refill cartridge to get to
my remaining ink?

The cartridge numbers are (EPSON: T0321, T0422, T0423, T0424).

Thanks in advance for feedback.

Terry
37 answers Last reply
More about chipped epson cartridges
  1. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    Attention Epson Owners:

    I am not saying that Epson is not a good printer. The only truly bad
    printer is Lexmark. However, you just do not here of as many problems.
    with this as a typical example, from users of HP and Canon inkjets.
    Epson owners are just like Apple owners and in the order days
    WordPerfect owners. It is like a cult or a religion.

    anon wrote:

    >Due to problems with a clogged printer head, and repeated cleaning
    >operations, my new epson original ink cartridges report that they are only
    >60% full now - when in fact I know they must be 100% since there hasn't been
    >a drop out of them yet.
    >
    >I have an Epson CX5200 and wonder if there is a simple way of resetting the
    >chip, or indeed if they will run as an unknown vendor if the chip is
    >removed. I am aware that some of Epson inkjet printers (ie C680) will run on
    >chipped and unchipped - a message just appears which you ignore.
    >
    >So can I simply remove or short the chip on the refill cartridge to get to
    >my remaining ink?
    >
    >The cartridge numbers are (EPSON: T0321, T0422, T0423, T0424).
    >
    >Thanks in advance for feedback.
    >
    >Terry
    >
    >
    >
    >
  2. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    ok, it's very possible to make it.
    however, you need to make sure the chipset is sticking with the
    cartridge tightly when the cartridge housing travel from right to left,
    left to right.
    also, make sure you get a auto-resetable chipset which doesnt need the
    resetter to reset the ink level. this can eliminate the chance of
    damage the golden part of print head - the part to read up the chipset.

    Another alternative way to get rid of clogging nightmare is to use the
    spongeless bulk ink kit:
    for example:
    http://www.inkrepublic.com

    their chipset is designed to avoid cleaning operation, it can save you
    a lot of ink. (of course, save $$$ too)
  3. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    "measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    news:nGV7e.2018$J12.1325@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com...
    > Attention Epson Owners:
    >
    > I am not saying that Epson is not a good printer. The only truly bad
    > printer is Lexmark. However, you just do not here of as many problems.
    > with this as a typical example, from users of HP and Canon inkjets. Epson
    > owners are just like Apple owners and in the order days WordPerfect
    > owners. It is like a cult or a religion.
    >
    Yea, its a good job Epson printers produce some the best quality photo-image
    printouts, have reliable mechanism that don't fall to bits after a couple of
    years, don't normally clog for 90% of people who use their printers on a
    semi-regular basis (more than once a month or so - although that said I have
    a an Epson 460 that got used about twice last year and it didn't clog), can
    generally be cleaned if blocked when you know the trick of cleaning solution
    on the cap assembly's pad, and have prints that have been shown to last for
    more than 6 months before fading (with one or two exceptions)... otherwise
    nobody would bother buying their printers would they?
  4. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 20:41:55 GMT, measekite <measekite@yahoo.com>
    wrote:

    >Attention Epson Owners:
    >
    >I am not saying that Epson is not a good printer. The only truly bad
    >printer is Lexmark. However, you just do not here of as many problems.
    >with this as a typical example, from users of HP and Canon inkjets.
    >Epson owners are just like Apple owners and in the order days
    >WordPerfect owners. It is like a cult or a religion.
    >
    The difference is that on newsgroups like these you get a greater
    number of professional users - and they use Epson printers more often
    than the general public. If you just used Google you'd find just as
    many problems for Canon or HP. And if you add together the problems
    for Canon, HP & Epson you might even see as many problems as for
    Lexmark...


    --

    Hecate - The Real One
    Hecate@newsguy.com
    Fashion: Buying things you don't need, with money
    you don't have, to impress people you don't like...
  5. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    Hecate wrote:

    >On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 20:41:55 GMT, measekite <measekite@yahoo.com>
    >wrote:
    >
    >
    >
    >>Attention Epson Owners:
    >>
    >>I am not saying that Epson is not a good printer. The only truly bad
    >>printer is Lexmark. However, you just do not here of as many problems.
    >>with this as a typical example, from users of HP and Canon inkjets.
    >>Epson owners are just like Apple owners and in the order days
    >>WordPerfect owners. It is like a cult or a religion.
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >The difference is that on newsgroups like these you get a greater
    >number of professional users - and they use Epson printers more often
    >than the general public. If you just used Google you'd find just as
    >many problems for Canon or HP. And if you add together the problems
    >for Canon, HP & Epson you might even see as many problems as for
    >Lexmark...
    >
    >

    I totally disagree. As Ken Rockwell says, a professional photographer,
    most of the true professional photographers do not frequent this type of
    NG. What is found on this group are mainly Hobbyists and Serious
    amateurs. So I stand by what I said.

    >
    > --
    >
    >Hecate - The Real One
    >Hecate@newsguy.com
    >Fashion: Buying things you don't need, with money
    >you don't have, to impress people you don't like...
    >
    >
  6. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    Ivor Floppy wrote:

    >"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    >news:nGV7e.2018$J12.1325@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com...
    >
    >
    >>Attention Epson Owners:
    >>
    >>I am not saying that Epson is not a good printer. The only truly bad
    >>printer is Lexmark. However, you just do not here of as many problems.
    >>with this as a typical example, from users of HP and Canon inkjets. Epson
    >>owners are just like Apple owners and in the order days WordPerfect
    >>owners. It is like a cult or a religion.
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >Yea, its a good job Epson printers produce some the best quality photo-image
    >printouts, have reliable mechanism that don't fall to bits after a couple of
    >years, don't normally clog for 90% of people
    >

    I guess we find the other 10% here! :-)

    >who use their printers on a
    >semi-regular basis (more than once a month or so - although that said I have
    >a an Epson 460 that got used about twice last year and it didn't clog), can
    >generally be cleaned if blocked when you know the trick of cleaning solution
    >on the cap assembly's pad, and have prints that have been shown to last for
    >more than 6 months before fading (with one or two exceptions)... otherwise
    >nobody would bother buying their printers would they?
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
  7. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    Well I have been a wedding photographer for 35 years,and I frequent this
    group! I use Epson inkjets,as do 90% of the pros! Canon makes decent
    printers,for the hobbiest.As I have read in measekites previous posts,he has
    NEVER printed anything larger than 4x6 with his ip4000! That doesn't push
    any printer.The only 4x6 prints I make are from my Mitsubishi 9000W.I also
    have my own darkroom,and at times,still use film!I went through this same
    thing in the 70s.Some people were pro-Canon,some pro-Nikon 35mm slrs.I had
    both,and used both! I still use both makes of digital slrs!I don't buy
    anything by brand,I buy the BEST camera or printer,or anything else,for the
    job at hand!Epson at the moment is the tool for me,tomorrow it could be
    Canon!
    "measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    news:OtZ7e.2796$t85.460@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
    >
    >
    > Hecate wrote:
    >
    >>On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 20:41:55 GMT, measekite <measekite@yahoo.com>
    >>wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>Attention Epson Owners:
    >>>
    >>>I am not saying that Epson is not a good printer. The only truly bad
    >>>printer is Lexmark. However, you just do not here of as many problems.
    >>>with this as a typical example, from users of HP and Canon inkjets.
    >>>Epson owners are just like Apple owners and in the order days WordPerfect
    >>>owners. It is like a cult or a religion.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>The difference is that on newsgroups like these you get a greater
    >>number of professional users - and they use Epson printers more often
    >>than the general public. If you just used Google you'd find just as
    >>many problems for Canon or HP. And if you add together the problems
    >>for Canon, HP & Epson you might even see as many problems as for
    >>Lexmark...
    >>
    >
    > I totally disagree. As Ken Rockwell says, a professional photographer,
    > most of the true professional photographers do not frequent this type of
    > NG. What is found on this group are mainly Hobbyists and Serious
    > amateurs. So I stand by what I said.
    >
    >>
    >> --
    >>
    >>Hecate - The Real One
    >>Hecate@newsguy.com Fashion: Buying things you don't need, with money
    >>you don't have, to impress people you don't like...
    >>
  8. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    measekite wrote:

    >
    >
    > Hecate wrote:
    >
    >> On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 20:41:55 GMT, measekite <measekite@yahoo.com>
    >> wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>> Attention Epson Owners:
    >>>
    >>> I am not saying that Epson is not a good printer. The only truly bad
    >>> printer is Lexmark. However, you just do not here of as many
    >>> problems. with this as a typical example, from users of HP and Canon
    >>> inkjets. Epson owners are just like Apple owners and in the order
    >>> days WordPerfect owners. It is like a cult or a religion.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>
    >> The difference is that on newsgroups like these you get a greater
    >> number of professional users - and they use Epson printers more often
    >> than the general public. If you just used Google you'd find just as
    >> many problems for Canon or HP. And if you add together the problems
    >> for Canon, HP & Epson you might even see as many problems as for
    >> Lexmark...
    >>
    >>
    >
    > I totally disagree. As Ken Rockwell says, a professional photographer,
    > most of the true professional photographers do not frequent this type of
    > NG. What is found on this group are mainly Hobbyists and Serious
    > amateurs. So I stand by what I said.
    >
    >>
    >> --
    >>
    >> Hecate - The Real One
    >> Hecate@newsguy.com Fashion: Buying things you don't need, with money
    >> you don't have, to impress people you don't like...
    >>
    >>
    You have no idea what you're talking about. My brother is a professional
    products photographer for over 30 years and uses Epson printers.
    BTW, you're a hobbyists right so what do you photograph and what do you
    print?
    Frank
  9. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    My niece just graduated from a highly regarded graphics design program.
    When she entered that program she was advised to purchase an Epson 1280
    printer. Epsons are apparently the choice of graphics professionals as
    well as professional photographers.

    "Douglas" <.> wrote in message news:iYCdnW31fKnILP3fRVn-2w@centurytel.net...
    > Well I have been a wedding photographer for 35 years,and I frequent this
    > group! I use Epson inkjets,as do 90% of the pros! Canon makes decent
    > printers,for the hobbiest.As I have read in measekites previous posts,he
    > has NEVER printed anything larger than 4x6 with his ip4000! That doesn't
    > push any printer.The only 4x6 prints I make are from my Mitsubishi 9000W.I
    > also have my own darkroom,and at times,still use film!I went through this
    > same thing in the 70s.Some people were pro-Canon,some pro-Nikon 35mm
    > slrs.I had both,and used both! I still use both makes of digital slrs!I
    > don't buy anything by brand,I buy the BEST camera or printer,or anything
    > else,for the job at hand!Epson at the moment is the tool for me,tomorrow
    > it could be Canon!
    > "measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    > news:OtZ7e.2796$t85.460@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
    >>
    >>
    >> Hecate wrote:
    >>
    >>>On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 20:41:55 GMT, measekite <measekite@yahoo.com>
    >>>wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>Attention Epson Owners:
    >>>>
    >>>>I am not saying that Epson is not a good printer. The only truly bad
    >>>>printer is Lexmark. However, you just do not here of as many problems.
    >>>>with this as a typical example, from users of HP and Canon inkjets.
    >>>>Epson owners are just like Apple owners and in the order days
    >>>>WordPerfect owners. It is like a cult or a religion.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>The difference is that on newsgroups like these you get a greater
    >>>number of professional users - and they use Epson printers more often
    >>>than the general public. If you just used Google you'd find just as
    >>>many problems for Canon or HP. And if you add together the problems
    >>>for Canon, HP & Epson you might even see as many problems as for
    >>>Lexmark...
    >>>
    >>
    >> I totally disagree. As Ken Rockwell says, a professional photographer,
    >> most of the true professional photographers do not frequent this type of
    >> NG. What is found on this group are mainly Hobbyists and Serious
    >> amateurs. So I stand by what I said.
    >>
    >>>
    >>> --
    >>>
    >>>Hecate - The Real One
    >>>Hecate@newsguy.com Fashion: Buying things you don't need, with money
    >>>you don't have, to impress people you don't like...
    >>>
    >
    >
  10. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    On Sat, 16 Apr 2005 01:01:34 GMT, measekite <measekite@yahoo.com>
    wrote:

    >
    >
    >Hecate wrote:
    >
    >>On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 20:41:55 GMT, measekite <measekite@yahoo.com>
    >>wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>>Attention Epson Owners:
    >>>
    >>>I am not saying that Epson is not a good printer. The only truly bad
    >>>printer is Lexmark. However, you just do not here of as many problems.
    >>>with this as a typical example, from users of HP and Canon inkjets.
    >>>Epson owners are just like Apple owners and in the order days
    >>>WordPerfect owners. It is like a cult or a religion.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>The difference is that on newsgroups like these you get a greater
    >>number of professional users - and they use Epson printers more often
    >>than the general public. If you just used Google you'd find just as
    >>many problems for Canon or HP. And if you add together the problems
    >>for Canon, HP & Epson you might even see as many problems as for
    >>Lexmark...
    >>
    >>
    >
    >I totally disagree. As Ken Rockwell says, a professional photographer,
    >most of the true professional photographers do not frequent this type of
    >NG. What is found on this group are mainly Hobbyists and Serious
    >amateurs. So I stand by what I said.
    >
    >>
    <shrug>

    --

    Hecate - The Real One
    Hecate@newsguy.com
    Fashion: Buying things you don't need, with money
    you don't have, to impress people you don't like...
  11. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    On Sat, 16 Apr 2005 01:04:09 GMT, measekite <measekite@yahoo.com>
    wrote:

    >
    >
    >
    >I guess we find the other 10% here! :-)
    >
    No, you just make the assumption that what is reported here is
    representative. It isn't.

    --

    Hecate - The Real One
    Hecate@newsguy.com
    Fashion: Buying things you don't need, with money
    you don't have, to impress people you don't like...
  12. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    Douglas wrote:

    >Well I have been a wedding photographer for 35 years,and I frequent this
    >group! I use Epson inkjets,as do 90% of the pros! Canon makes decent
    >printers,for the hobbiest.As I have read in measekites previous posts,he has
    >NEVER printed anything larger than 4x6 with his ip4000!
    >

    No true. 8.5x11

    >That doesn't push
    >any printer.The only 4x6 prints I make are from my Mitsubishi 9000W.I also
    >have my own darkroom,and at times,still use film!I went through this same
    >thing in the 70s.Some people were pro-Canon,some pro-Nikon 35mm slrs.I had
    >both,and used both! I still use both makes of digital slrs!I don't buy
    >anything by brand,I buy the BEST camera or printer,or anything else,for the
    >job at hand!Epson at the moment is the tool for me,tomorrow it could be
    >Canon!
    >"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    >news:OtZ7e.2796$t85.460@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
    >
    >
    >>Hecate wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>>On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 20:41:55 GMT, measekite <measekite@yahoo.com>
    >>>wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>Attention Epson Owners:
    >>>>
    >>>>I am not saying that Epson is not a good printer. The only truly bad
    >>>>printer is Lexmark. However, you just do not here of as many problems.
    >>>>with this as a typical example, from users of HP and Canon inkjets.
    >>>>Epson owners are just like Apple owners and in the order days WordPerfect
    >>>>owners. It is like a cult or a religion.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>The difference is that on newsgroups like these you get a greater
    >>>number of professional users - and they use Epson printers more often
    >>>than the general public. If you just used Google you'd find just as
    >>>many problems for Canon or HP. And if you add together the problems
    >>>for Canon, HP & Epson you might even see as many problems as for
    >>>Lexmark...
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>I totally disagree. As Ken Rockwell says, a professional photographer,
    >>most of the true professional photographers do not frequent this type of
    >>NG. What is found on this group are mainly Hobbyists and Serious
    >>amateurs. So I stand by what I said.
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>>--
    >>>
    >>>Hecate - The Real One
    >>>Hecate@newsguy.com Fashion: Buying things you don't need, with money
    >>>you don't have, to impress people you don't like...
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >
    >
    >
    >
  13. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    Do you remember this?You posted it!

    I have not tried an 8x10 (I am cheap) but before I do buy it I will do
    that. I expect to make the purchase in the middle of summer. I hope by
    then the price will soften a bit. Also, a new long zoom Sony will be
    out in June. It looks more like it would be in the same size and weight
    class as the FZ20 but I do want to turn over all of the stones.
    "measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    news:JSj8e.5700$t85.2123@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
    >
    >
    > Douglas wrote:
    >
    >>Well I have been a wedding photographer for 35 years,and I frequent this
    >>group! I use Epson inkjets,as do 90% of the pros! Canon makes decent
    >>printers,for the hobbiest.As I have read in measekites previous posts,he
    >>has NEVER printed anything larger than 4x6 with his ip4000!
    >
    > No true. 8.5x11
    >
    >>That doesn't push any printer.The only 4x6 prints I make are from my
    >>Mitsubishi 9000W.I also have my own darkroom,and at times,still use film!I
    >>went through this same thing in the 70s.Some people were pro-Canon,some
    >>pro-Nikon 35mm slrs.I had both,and used both! I still use both makes of
    >>digital slrs!I don't buy anything by brand,I buy the BEST camera or
    >>printer,or anything else,for the job at hand!Epson at the moment is the
    >>tool for me,tomorrow it could be Canon!
    >>"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    >>news:OtZ7e.2796$t85.460@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
    >>
    >>>Hecate wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 20:41:55 GMT, measekite <measekite@yahoo.com>
    >>>>wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>Attention Epson Owners:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>I am not saying that Epson is not a good printer. The only truly bad
    >>>>>printer is Lexmark. However, you just do not here of as many problems.
    >>>>>with this as a typical example, from users of HP and Canon inkjets.
    >>>>>Epson owners are just like Apple owners and in the order days
    >>>>>WordPerfect owners. It is like a cult or a religion.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>The difference is that on newsgroups like these you get a greater
    >>>>number of professional users - and they use Epson printers more often
    >>>>than the general public. If you just used Google you'd find just as
    >>>>many problems for Canon or HP. And if you add together the problems
    >>>>for Canon, HP & Epson you might even see as many problems as for
    >>>>Lexmark...
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>I totally disagree. As Ken Rockwell says, a professional photographer,
    >>>most of the true professional photographers do not frequent this type of
    >>>NG. What is found on this group are mainly Hobbyists and Serious
    >>>amateurs. So I stand by what I said.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>--
    >>>>
    >>>>Hecate - The Real One
    >>>>Hecate@newsguy.com Fashion: Buying things you don't need, with money
    >>>>you don't have, to impress people you don't like...
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>
    >>
    >>
  14. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    Douglas wrote:

    >Do you remember this?You posted it!
    >
    >I have not tried an 8x10
    >

    That is different from 8.5x11.

    >(I am cheap) but before I do buy it I will do
    >that. I expect to make the purchase in the middle of summer. I hope by
    >then the price will soften a bit. Also, a new long zoom Sony will be
    >out in June. It looks more like it would be in the same size and weight
    >class as the FZ20 but I do want to turn over all of the stones.
    >"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    >news:JSj8e.5700$t85.2123@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
    >
    >
    >>Douglas wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>>Well I have been a wedding photographer for 35 years,and I frequent this
    >>>group! I use Epson inkjets,as do 90% of the pros! Canon makes decent
    >>>printers,for the hobbiest.As I have read in measekites previous posts,he
    >>>has NEVER printed anything larger than 4x6 with his ip4000!
    >>>
    >>>
    >>No true. 8.5x11
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>>That doesn't push any printer.The only 4x6 prints I make are from my
    >>>Mitsubishi 9000W.I also have my own darkroom,and at times,still use film!I
    >>>went through this same thing in the 70s.Some people were pro-Canon,some
    >>>pro-Nikon 35mm slrs.I had both,and used both! I still use both makes of
    >>>digital slrs!I don't buy anything by brand,I buy the BEST camera or
    >>>printer,or anything else,for the job at hand!Epson at the moment is the
    >>>tool for me,tomorrow it could be Canon!
    >>>"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    >>>news:OtZ7e.2796$t85.460@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>Hecate wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 20:41:55 GMT, measekite <measekite@yahoo.com>
    >>>>>wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>Attention Epson Owners:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>I am not saying that Epson is not a good printer. The only truly bad
    >>>>>>printer is Lexmark. However, you just do not here of as many problems.
    >>>>>>with this as a typical example, from users of HP and Canon inkjets.
    >>>>>>Epson owners are just like Apple owners and in the order days
    >>>>>>WordPerfect owners. It is like a cult or a religion.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>The difference is that on newsgroups like these you get a greater
    >>>>>number of professional users - and they use Epson printers more often
    >>>>>than the general public. If you just used Google you'd find just as
    >>>>>many problems for Canon or HP. And if you add together the problems
    >>>>>for Canon, HP & Epson you might even see as many problems as for
    >>>>>Lexmark...
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>I totally disagree. As Ken Rockwell says, a professional photographer,
    >>>>most of the true professional photographers do not frequent this type of
    >>>>NG. What is found on this group are mainly Hobbyists and Serious
    >>>>amateurs. So I stand by what I said.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>--
    >>>>>
    >>>>>Hecate - The Real One
    >>>>>Hecate@newsguy.com Fashion: Buying things you don't need, with money
    >>>>>you don't have, to impress people you don't like...
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >
    >
    >
    >
  15. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    Good try ! I think we ALL can see you are full of it!
    "measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    news:CEl8e.5795$t85.4024@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
    >
    >
    > Douglas wrote:
    >
    >>Do you remember this?You posted it!
    >>
    >>I have not tried an 8x10
    >
    > That is different from 8.5x11.
    >
    >>(I am cheap) but before I do buy it I will do
    >>that. I expect to make the purchase in the middle of summer. I hope by
    >>then the price will soften a bit. Also, a new long zoom Sony will be
    >>out in June. It looks more like it would be in the same size and weight
    >>class as the FZ20 but I do want to turn over all of the stones.
    >>"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    >>news:JSj8e.5700$t85.2123@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
    >>
    >>>Douglas wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>Well I have been a wedding photographer for 35 years,and I frequent this
    >>>>group! I use Epson inkjets,as do 90% of the pros! Canon makes decent
    >>>>printers,for the hobbiest.As I have read in measekites previous posts,he
    >>>>has NEVER printed anything larger than 4x6 with his ip4000!
    >>>>
    >>>No true. 8.5x11
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>That doesn't push any printer.The only 4x6 prints I make are from my
    >>>>Mitsubishi 9000W.I also have my own darkroom,and at times,still use
    >>>>film!I went through this same thing in the 70s.Some people were
    >>>>pro-Canon,some pro-Nikon 35mm slrs.I had both,and used both! I still use
    >>>>both makes of digital slrs!I don't buy anything by brand,I buy the BEST
    >>>>camera or printer,or anything else,for the job at hand!Epson at the
    >>>>moment is the tool for me,tomorrow it could be Canon!
    >>>>"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    >>>>news:OtZ7e.2796$t85.460@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>Hecate wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 20:41:55 GMT, measekite <measekite@yahoo.com>
    >>>>>>wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>>Attention Epson Owners:
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>I am not saying that Epson is not a good printer. The only truly bad
    >>>>>>>printer is Lexmark. However, you just do not here of as many
    >>>>>>>problems. with this as a typical example, from users of HP and Canon
    >>>>>>>inkjets. Epson owners are just like Apple owners and in the order
    >>>>>>>days WordPerfect owners. It is like a cult or a religion.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>The difference is that on newsgroups like these you get a greater
    >>>>>>number of professional users - and they use Epson printers more often
    >>>>>>than the general public. If you just used Google you'd find just as
    >>>>>>many problems for Canon or HP. And if you add together the problems
    >>>>>>for Canon, HP & Epson you might even see as many problems as for
    >>>>>>Lexmark...
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>I totally disagree. As Ken Rockwell says, a professional photographer,
    >>>>>most of the true professional photographers do not frequent this type
    >>>>>of NG. What is found on this group are mainly Hobbyists and Serious
    >>>>>amateurs. So I stand by what I said.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>--
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>Hecate - The Real One
    >>>>>>Hecate@newsguy.com Fashion: Buying things you don't need, with money
    >>>>>>you don't have, to impress people you don't like...
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>
    >>
    >>
  16. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    How many people here print 8.5x11 photos? You might use that size paper,but
    8x10 is the standard size!I think you should wait to respond on digital
    cameras.Another subject you pretend to have knowledge of!Just remember,what
    you write can come back to make you look foolish!
    "measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    news:CEl8e.5795$t85.4024@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
    >
    >
    > Douglas wrote:
    >
    >>Do you remember this?You posted it!
    >>
    >>I have not tried an 8x10
    >
    > That is different from 8.5x11.
    >
    >>(I am cheap) but before I do buy it I will do
    >>that. I expect to make the purchase in the middle of summer. I hope by
    >>then the price will soften a bit. Also, a new long zoom Sony will be
    >>out in June. It looks more like it would be in the same size and weight
    >>class as the FZ20 but I do want to turn over all of the stones.
    >>"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    >>news:JSj8e.5700$t85.2123@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
    >>
    >>>Douglas wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>Well I have been a wedding photographer for 35 years,and I frequent this
    >>>>group! I use Epson inkjets,as do 90% of the pros! Canon makes decent
    >>>>printers,for the hobbiest.As I have read in measekites previous posts,he
    >>>>has NEVER printed anything larger than 4x6 with his ip4000!
    >>>>
    >>>No true. 8.5x11
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>That doesn't push any printer.The only 4x6 prints I make are from my
    >>>>Mitsubishi 9000W.I also have my own darkroom,and at times,still use
    >>>>film!I went through this same thing in the 70s.Some people were
    >>>>pro-Canon,some pro-Nikon 35mm slrs.I had both,and used both! I still use
    >>>>both makes of digital slrs!I don't buy anything by brand,I buy the BEST
    >>>>camera or printer,or anything else,for the job at hand!Epson at the
    >>>>moment is the tool for me,tomorrow it could be Canon!
    >>>>"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    >>>>news:OtZ7e.2796$t85.460@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>Hecate wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 20:41:55 GMT, measekite <measekite@yahoo.com>
    >>>>>>wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>>Attention Epson Owners:
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>I am not saying that Epson is not a good printer. The only truly bad
    >>>>>>>printer is Lexmark. However, you just do not here of as many
    >>>>>>>problems. with this as a typical example, from users of HP and Canon
    >>>>>>>inkjets. Epson owners are just like Apple owners and in the order
    >>>>>>>days WordPerfect owners. It is like a cult or a religion.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>The difference is that on newsgroups like these you get a greater
    >>>>>>number of professional users - and they use Epson printers more often
    >>>>>>than the general public. If you just used Google you'd find just as
    >>>>>>many problems for Canon or HP. And if you add together the problems
    >>>>>>for Canon, HP & Epson you might even see as many problems as for
    >>>>>>Lexmark...
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>I totally disagree. As Ken Rockwell says, a professional photographer,
    >>>>>most of the true professional photographers do not frequent this type
    >>>>>of NG. What is found on this group are mainly Hobbyists and Serious
    >>>>>amateurs. So I stand by what I said.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>--
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>Hecate - The Real One
    >>>>>>Hecate@newsguy.com Fashion: Buying things you don't need, with money
    >>>>>>you don't have, to impress people you don't like...
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>
    >>
    >>
  17. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    No one can accuse me of being brand loyal, because if you saw my home,
    you'd know that's just not the case. I buy what is, as well as I can
    determine at the time, the best quality at the lowest price, with et
    best reliability.

    The reason, in spite of some adversity, people go to Epson is that they
    see a quality difference in the output, or the output has certain
    qualities they were attempting to reach.

    With very few exceptions, Epson heads almost never burn out and they can
    handle, within reason, a great variety of ink. They have a great many
    paper media to choose from.

    No one I know likes Epson's methods of marketing "techniques" to sell
    more ink. People don't appreciate the ink level chips, the waste ink
    and pad replacement, etc. I don't own a single Epson printer with those
    chips. I no longer buy Epson ink.

    However, in terms of general durability and quality of build, overall,
    Epson has had good designs, and image quality is also toward if not at
    the top.

    Art


    measekite wrote:

    > Attention Epson Owners:
    >
    > I am not saying that Epson is not a good printer. The only truly bad
    > printer is Lexmark. However, you just do not here of as many problems.
    > with this as a typical example, from users of HP and Canon inkjets.
    > Epson owners are just like Apple owners and in the order days
    > WordPerfect owners. It is like a cult or a religion.
    >
  18. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    Interesting, I wrote my reply before seeing yours, and I basically said
    the same thing.

    Art

    Hecate wrote:

    > On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 20:41:55 GMT, measekite <measekite@yahoo.com>
    > wrote:
    >
    >
    >>Attention Epson Owners:
    >>
    >>I am not saying that Epson is not a good printer. The only truly bad
    >>printer is Lexmark. However, you just do not here of as many problems.
    >>with this as a typical example, from users of HP and Canon inkjets.
    >>Epson owners are just like Apple owners and in the order days
    >>WordPerfect owners. It is like a cult or a religion.
    >>
    >
    > The difference is that on newsgroups like these you get a greater
    > number of professional users - and they use Epson printers more often
    > than the general public. If you just used Google you'd find just as
    > many problems for Canon or HP. And if you add together the problems
    > for Canon, HP & Epson you might even see as many problems as for
    > Lexmark...
    >
    >
    > --
    >
    > Hecate - The Real One
    > Hecate@newsguy.com
    > Fashion: Buying things you don't need, with money
    > you don't have, to impress people you don't like...
  19. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    Actually, that's a true statement. A certain percentage of people come
    to these NGs because they are having a problem, and they will be gone
    again as soon as it is resolved. However, if you search the groups on
    printing, you will still probably find more Epson users, and that is due
    to the slant to professionals who use them.

    Art

    measekite wrote:


    >>>
    >>
    >> Yea, its a good job Epson printers produce some the best quality
    >> photo-image printouts, have reliable mechanism that don't fall to bits
    >> after a couple of years, don't normally clog for 90% of people
    >
    >
    > I guess we find the other 10% here! :-)
    >
    >> who use their printers on a semi-regular basis (more than once a month
    >> or so - although that said I have a an Epson 460 that got used about
    >> twice last year and it didn't clog), can generally be cleaned if
    >> blocked when you know the trick of cleaning solution on the cap
    >> assembly's pad, and have prints that have been shown to last for more
    >> than 6 months before fading (with one or two exceptions)... otherwise
    >> nobody would bother buying their printers would they?
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
  20. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    8x10 has been the standard size for film. Letter size is fast becoming
    the standard size for digital. 16x20 has been another large standard
    size for film. Now how are you going to print that on a 13x19 printer?
    Look for a new standard size for large format.

    Douglas wrote:

    >How many people here print 8.5x11 photos? You might use that size paper,but
    >8x10 is the standard size!I think you should wait to respond on digital
    >cameras.Another subject you pretend to have knowledge of!Just remember,what
    >you write can come back to make you look foolish!
    >"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    >news:CEl8e.5795$t85.4024@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
    >
    >
    >>Douglas wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>>Do you remember this?You posted it!
    >>>
    >>>I have not tried an 8x10
    >>>
    >>>
    >>That is different from 8.5x11.
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>>(I am cheap) but before I do buy it I will do
    >>>that. I expect to make the purchase in the middle of summer. I hope by
    >>>then the price will soften a bit. Also, a new long zoom Sony will be
    >>>out in June. It looks more like it would be in the same size and weight
    >>>class as the FZ20 but I do want to turn over all of the stones.
    >>>"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    >>>news:JSj8e.5700$t85.2123@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>Douglas wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>Well I have been a wedding photographer for 35 years,and I frequent this
    >>>>>group! I use Epson inkjets,as do 90% of the pros! Canon makes decent
    >>>>>printers,for the hobbiest.As I have read in measekites previous posts,he
    >>>>>has NEVER printed anything larger than 4x6 with his ip4000!
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>No true. 8.5x11
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>That doesn't push any printer.The only 4x6 prints I make are from my
    >>>>>Mitsubishi 9000W.I also have my own darkroom,and at times,still use
    >>>>>film!I went through this same thing in the 70s.Some people were
    >>>>>pro-Canon,some pro-Nikon 35mm slrs.I had both,and used both! I still use
    >>>>>both makes of digital slrs!I don't buy anything by brand,I buy the BEST
    >>>>>camera or printer,or anything else,for the job at hand!Epson at the
    >>>>>moment is the tool for me,tomorrow it could be Canon!
    >>>>>"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    >>>>>news:OtZ7e.2796$t85.460@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>Hecate wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>>On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 20:41:55 GMT, measekite <measekite@yahoo.com>
    >>>>>>>wrote:
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>Attention Epson Owners:
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>I am not saying that Epson is not a good printer. The only truly bad
    >>>>>>>>printer is Lexmark. However, you just do not here of as many
    >>>>>>>>problems. with this as a typical example, from users of HP and Canon
    >>>>>>>>inkjets. Epson owners are just like Apple owners and in the order
    >>>>>>>>days WordPerfect owners. It is like a cult or a religion.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>The difference is that on newsgroups like these you get a greater
    >>>>>>>number of professional users - and they use Epson printers more often
    >>>>>>>than the general public. If you just used Google you'd find just as
    >>>>>>>many problems for Canon or HP. And if you add together the problems
    >>>>>>>for Canon, HP & Epson you might even see as many problems as for
    >>>>>>>Lexmark...
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>I totally disagree. As Ken Rockwell says, a professional photographer,
    >>>>>>most of the true professional photographers do not frequent this type
    >>>>>>of NG. What is found on this group are mainly Hobbyists and Serious
    >>>>>>amateurs. So I stand by what I said.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>>--
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>Hecate - The Real One
    >>>>>>>Hecate@newsguy.com Fashion: Buying things you don't need, with money
    >>>>>>>you don't have, to impress people you don't like...
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >
    >
    >
    >
  21. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    The reason "letter size" paper is used is because most prints that large
    still require borders! Most printers will print borderless 4x6,but not
    8.5x11! If you look at ANY of the photo programs,8x10 will be a default size
    print.The size of paper a printer will except does not mean that is the
    largest size it will print! When you start printing larger than 4x6,you will
    see that!
    The more you go on,the more foolish you look!
    "measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    news:hYu8e.32$Xb4.12@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
    > 8x10 has been the standard size for film. Letter size is fast becoming
    > the standard size for digital. 16x20 has been another large standard size
    > for film. Now how are you going to print that on a 13x19 printer? Look
    > for a new standard size for large format.
    >
    > Douglas wrote:
    >
    >>How many people here print 8.5x11 photos? You might use that size
    >>paper,but 8x10 is the standard size!I think you should wait to respond on
    >>digital cameras.Another subject you pretend to have knowledge of!Just
    >>remember,what you write can come back to make you look foolish!
    >>"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    >>news:CEl8e.5795$t85.4024@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
    >>
    >>>Douglas wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>Do you remember this?You posted it!
    >>>>
    >>>>I have not tried an 8x10
    >>>>
    >>>That is different from 8.5x11.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>(I am cheap) but before I do buy it I will do
    >>>>that. I expect to make the purchase in the middle of summer. I hope by
    >>>>then the price will soften a bit. Also, a new long zoom Sony will be
    >>>>out in June. It looks more like it would be in the same size and weight
    >>>>class as the FZ20 but I do want to turn over all of the stones.
    >>>>"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    >>>>news:JSj8e.5700$t85.2123@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>Douglas wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>Well I have been a wedding photographer for 35 years,and I frequent
    >>>>>>this group! I use Epson inkjets,as do 90% of the pros! Canon makes
    >>>>>>decent printers,for the hobbiest.As I have read in measekites previous
    >>>>>>posts,he has NEVER printed anything larger than 4x6 with his ip4000!
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>No true. 8.5x11
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>That doesn't push any printer.The only 4x6 prints I make are from my
    >>>>>>Mitsubishi 9000W.I also have my own darkroom,and at times,still use
    >>>>>>film!I went through this same thing in the 70s.Some people were
    >>>>>>pro-Canon,some pro-Nikon 35mm slrs.I had both,and used both! I still
    >>>>>>use both makes of digital slrs!I don't buy anything by brand,I buy the
    >>>>>>BEST camera or printer,or anything else,for the job at hand!Epson at
    >>>>>>the moment is the tool for me,tomorrow it could be Canon!
    >>>>>>"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    >>>>>>news:OtZ7e.2796$t85.460@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>>Hecate wrote:
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 20:41:55 GMT, measekite <measekite@yahoo.com>
    >>>>>>>>wrote:
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>Attention Epson Owners:
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>I am not saying that Epson is not a good printer. The only truly
    >>>>>>>>>bad printer is Lexmark. However, you just do not here of as many
    >>>>>>>>>problems. with this as a typical example, from users of HP and
    >>>>>>>>>Canon inkjets. Epson owners are just like Apple owners and in the
    >>>>>>>>>order days WordPerfect owners. It is like a cult or a religion.
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>The difference is that on newsgroups like these you get a greater
    >>>>>>>>number of professional users - and they use Epson printers more
    >>>>>>>>often
    >>>>>>>>than the general public. If you just used Google you'd find just as
    >>>>>>>>many problems for Canon or HP. And if you add together the problems
    >>>>>>>>for Canon, HP & Epson you might even see as many problems as for
    >>>>>>>>Lexmark...
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>I totally disagree. As Ken Rockwell says, a professional
    >>>>>>>photographer, most of the true professional photographers do not
    >>>>>>>frequent this type of NG. What is found on this group are mainly
    >>>>>>>Hobbyists and Serious amateurs. So I stand by what I said.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>--
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>Hecate - The Real One
    >>>>>>>>Hecate@newsguy.com Fashion: Buying things you don't need, with money
    >>>>>>>>you don't have, to impress people you don't like...
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>
    >>
    >>
  22. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    I almost forgot your remark on 13x19 printers.My new EPSON takes 17x22
    media,resulting in the 16x20 trimmed print!The 13x19 printer is designed to
    top out at a 12" wide print.You can make 4 4x6 prints on a sheet of 8x12
    paper.You get 3 on a sheet of 8.5x11,the rest is waste.Before you say no one
    uses 8x12,I do!Now I will be sure to let ALL the printer manufacturers know
    they should contact you for the "NEW"standard photo sizes!
    "Douglas" <.> wrote in message news:mtmdnYDBnu2HGv_fRVn-vA@centurytel.net...
    > The reason "letter size" paper is used is because most prints that large
    > still require borders! Most printers will print borderless 4x6,but not
    > 8.5x11! If you look at ANY of the photo programs,8x10 will be a default
    > size print.The size of paper a printer will except does not mean that is
    > the largest size it will print! When you start printing larger than
    > 4x6,you will see that!
    > The more you go on,the more foolish you look!
    > "measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    > news:hYu8e.32$Xb4.12@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
    >> 8x10 has been the standard size for film. Letter size is fast becoming
    >> the standard size for digital. 16x20 has been another large standard
    >> size for film. Now how are you going to print that on a 13x19 printer?
    >> Look for a new standard size for large format.
    >>
    >> Douglas wrote:
    >>
    >>>How many people here print 8.5x11 photos? You might use that size
    >>>paper,but 8x10 is the standard size!I think you should wait to respond on
    >>>digital cameras.Another subject you pretend to have knowledge of!Just
    >>>remember,what you write can come back to make you look foolish!
    >>>"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    >>>news:CEl8e.5795$t85.4024@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
    >>>
    >>>>Douglas wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>Do you remember this?You posted it!
    >>>>>
    >>>>>I have not tried an 8x10
    >>>>>
    >>>>That is different from 8.5x11.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>(I am cheap) but before I do buy it I will do
    >>>>>that. I expect to make the purchase in the middle of summer. I hope
    >>>>>by
    >>>>>then the price will soften a bit. Also, a new long zoom Sony will be
    >>>>>out in June. It looks more like it would be in the same size and
    >>>>>weight
    >>>>>class as the FZ20 but I do want to turn over all of the stones.
    >>>>>"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    >>>>>news:JSj8e.5700$t85.2123@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>Douglas wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>>Well I have been a wedding photographer for 35 years,and I frequent
    >>>>>>>this group! I use Epson inkjets,as do 90% of the pros! Canon makes
    >>>>>>>decent printers,for the hobbiest.As I have read in measekites
    >>>>>>>previous posts,he has NEVER printed anything larger than 4x6 with his
    >>>>>>>ip4000!
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>No true. 8.5x11
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>>That doesn't push any printer.The only 4x6 prints I make are from my
    >>>>>>>Mitsubishi 9000W.I also have my own darkroom,and at times,still use
    >>>>>>>film!I went through this same thing in the 70s.Some people were
    >>>>>>>pro-Canon,some pro-Nikon 35mm slrs.I had both,and used both! I still
    >>>>>>>use both makes of digital slrs!I don't buy anything by brand,I buy
    >>>>>>>the BEST camera or printer,or anything else,for the job at hand!Epson
    >>>>>>>at the moment is the tool for me,tomorrow it could be Canon!
    >>>>>>>"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    >>>>>>>news:OtZ7e.2796$t85.460@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>Hecate wrote:
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 20:41:55 GMT, measekite <measekite@yahoo.com>
    >>>>>>>>>wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>Attention Epson Owners:
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>I am not saying that Epson is not a good printer. The only truly
    >>>>>>>>>>bad printer is Lexmark. However, you just do not here of as many
    >>>>>>>>>>problems. with this as a typical example, from users of HP and
    >>>>>>>>>>Canon inkjets. Epson owners are just like Apple owners and in the
    >>>>>>>>>>order days WordPerfect owners. It is like a cult or a religion.
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>The difference is that on newsgroups like these you get a greater
    >>>>>>>>>number of professional users - and they use Epson printers more
    >>>>>>>>>often
    >>>>>>>>>than the general public. If you just used Google you'd find just as
    >>>>>>>>>many problems for Canon or HP. And if you add together the problems
    >>>>>>>>>for Canon, HP & Epson you might even see as many problems as for
    >>>>>>>>>Lexmark...
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>I totally disagree. As Ken Rockwell says, a professional
    >>>>>>>>photographer, most of the true professional photographers do not
    >>>>>>>>frequent this type of NG. What is found on this group are mainly
    >>>>>>>>Hobbyists and Serious amateurs. So I stand by what I said.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>--
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>Hecate - The Real One
    >>>>>>>>>Hecate@newsguy.com Fashion: Buying things you don't need, with
    >>>>>>>>>money
    >>>>>>>>>you don't have, to impress people you don't like...
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >
    >
  23. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    Arthur Entlich wrote:

    > No one can accuse me of being brand loyal, because if you saw my home,
    > you'd know that's just not the case. I buy what is, as well as I can
    > determine at the time, the best quality at the lowest price, with et
    > best reliability.
    >
    > The reason, in spite of some adversity, people go to Epson is that
    > they see a quality difference in the output, or the output has certain
    > qualities they were attempting to reach.
    >
    > With very few exceptions, Epson heads almost never burn out and they
    > can handle, within reason, a great variety of ink. They have a great
    > many paper media to choose from.


    Do you also include the R800/1800 in this statement? You also said that
    most of these users stick with OEM Epson ink.

    >
    > No one I know likes Epson's methods of marketing "techniques" to sell
    > more ink. People don't appreciate the ink level chips, the waste ink
    > and pad replacement, etc.


    Each of these items screams to buy a Canon. Epson, in an abstract sort
    of way, can be perceived as 2 companys. One making dye based printers
    like the R300 and another making archival based pigmented printers like
    the R800.

    When comparing the R300 dye based printer against the Canon Pixma dye
    based printers Canon appears to get higher quality photo results, much
    better business document results, substantially faster, more features in
    the fact that they have two paper feeds coupled with duplex capability
    and cost less. The carts have not chips, far less residual ink to toss,
    and are about 20% less on the average.

    As fat as comparing the PIXMA to the R800, the analysis will require
    some deeper comparisons because this thing of archival ability is really
    not down to a science at the present time.

    > I don't own a single Epson printer with those chips. I no longer buy
    > Epson ink.


    If you think the current line of Epson (R300) is so good why don't you
    get one? If you think that the pigmented inks of the R800 are have such
    longevity that is so important then why don't you have one? And if you
    think Epson inks and papers are the cats meow then why aren't you using
    them. My guess is that you think they may be better but not enough to
    justify the cost.

    >
    > However, in terms of general durability and quality of build, overall,
    > Epson has had good designs, and image quality is also toward if not at
    > the top.
    >
    > Art
    >
    >
    >
    > measekite wrote:
    >
    >> Attention Epson Owners:
    >>
    >> I am not saying that Epson is not a good printer. The only truly bad
    >> printer is Lexmark. However, you just do not here of as many
    >> problems. with this as a typical example, from users of HP and Canon
    >> inkjets. Epson owners are just like Apple owners and in the order
    >> days WordPerfect owners. It is like a cult or a religion.
    >>
  24. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    Another thing I noticed in this NG. There are very few regular
    players. You got a couple of regular hawkers, a few Epson supporters, a
    few Canon supporters, far fewer HP supporters and no real Lexmark
    supporters. The rest are people that come and ago according to their
    problems.

    Therefore, the information you get about any one group of printer is far
    from a consensus of the way people really feel out there in many cases.

    However, in all cases, the majority of inkjet users feel that the price
    of ink is out of line, that Epson printers users more ink than others,
    that Epson chips are a pain in the ass, that Epson and HP ink costs too
    much, and that notwithstanding costs, HP probably has the best idea
    using replaceable heads.

    But many of the quotes here are also from detailed tests from
    professional reviewers that do have some credibility even though you
    should question some of their motivations.

    Arthur Entlich wrote:

    > Actually, that's a true statement. A certain percentage of people
    > come to these NGs because they are having a problem, and they will be
    > gone again as soon as it is resolved. However, if you search the
    > groups on printing, you will still probably find more Epson users, and
    > that is due to the slant to professionals who use them.
    >
    > Art
    >
    > measekite wrote:
    >
    >
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Yea, its a good job Epson printers produce some the best quality
    >>> photo-image printouts, have reliable mechanism that don't fall to
    >>> bits after a couple of years, don't normally clog for 90% of people
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> I guess we find the other 10% here! :-)
    >>
    >>> who use their printers on a semi-regular basis (more than once a
    >>> month or so - although that said I have a an Epson 460 that got used
    >>> about twice last year and it didn't clog), can generally be cleaned
    >>> if blocked when you know the trick of cleaning solution on the cap
    >>> assembly's pad, and have prints that have been shown to last for
    >>> more than 6 months before fading (with one or two exceptions)...
    >>> otherwise nobody would bother buying their printers would they?
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
  25. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    On Sun, 17 Apr 2005 13:21:01 GMT, Arthur Entlich <artistic@telus.net>
    wrote:

    >Interesting, I wrote my reply before seeing yours, and I basically said
    >the same thing.
    >
    That's cause great minds think alike ;-)

    --

    Hecate - The Real One
    Hecate@newsguy.com
    Fashion: Buying things you don't need, with money
    you don't have, to impress people you don't like...
  26. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    The original question I asked was about can I simply remove or short the
    chip on the refill cartridge to get to my remaining ink?

    I did not intend this topic to become a discussion of whose printer is best.
    I personally like Epson printers, and to me their drawbacks are only in two
    areas as far as I am concerned.
    1. clogging
    2. cost of inks.

    As commented to someone else - if Epson were to have simple transparent ink
    cartridges like the Canon so that the user could see when they need
    replacing then chipping
    would be unnecessary. Most of my cartridges are still over half full when
    the printer says they are empty.

    However - at this moment in time I point everyone to the original question.
    Can I remove or somehow get the printer to ignore the chip?
  27. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    In article <d4009c$7vd$1@newsg4.svr.pol.co.uk>, ngr@tdrd.freeserve.co.uk
    says...
    > The original question I asked was about can I simply remove or short the
    > chip on the refill cartridge to get to my remaining ink?
    >
    > I did not intend this topic to become a discussion of whose printer is best.
    > I personally like Epson printers, and to me their drawbacks are only in two
    > areas as far as I am concerned.
    > 1. clogging
    > 2. cost of inks.
    >
    > As commented to someone else - if Epson were to have simple transparent ink
    > cartridges like the Canon so that the user could see when they need
    > replacing then chipping
    > would be unnecessary. Most of my cartridges are still over half full when
    > the printer says they are empty.
    >
    > However - at this moment in time I point everyone to the original question.
    > Can I remove or somehow get the printer to ignore the chip?
    >
    For about $25 or so you can buy an electronic device that will reset the
    chips to indicate that they are full. Then you can continue to use the
    cartridge until you run out of ink.
    At this point you will have air in the supply lines and will waste just
    as much ink running a series of cleaning cycles to get the air out.

    If you want to buy a resetter a simple online search will find several
    dealers.

    --
    Robert D Feinman
    Landscapes, Cityscapes and Panoramic Photographs
    http://robertdfeinman.com
    mail: robertdfeinman@netscape.net
  28. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    measekite wrote:

    >
    >
    > Arthur Entlich wrote:
    >
    >> No one can accuse me of being brand loyal, because if you saw my home,
    >> you'd know that's just not the case. I buy what is, as well as I can
    >> determine at the time, the best quality at the lowest price, with et
    >> best reliability.
    >>
    >> The reason, in spite of some adversity, people go to Epson is that
    >> they see a quality difference in the output, or the output has certain
    >> qualities they were attempting to reach.
    >>
    >> With very few exceptions, Epson heads almost never burn out and they
    >> can handle, within reason, a great variety of ink. They have a great
    >> many paper media to choose from.
    >
    >
    >
    > Do you also include the R800/1800 in this statement? You also said that
    > most of these users stick with OEM Epson ink.

    These printers, in specific, are the state of the art in color photo
    printers. Until very recently, there were no 3rd party inks made for
    them. The inks are just now appearing and I have no idea how close in
    color they are to the originals, or how well they mimic the qualities
    Ultrachrome inks supply. For people who need absolute color accuracy,
    these printers with Epson OEM inks, provide archival quality and color
    accuracy. Those are things people are willing to pay for, and do. For
    those selling their work in galleries, these printers provide the tools
    they need. For others, they are less important features, and other less
    costly printers supply alternatives.
    >
    >>
    >> No one I know likes Epson's methods of marketing "techniques" to sell
    >> more ink. People don't appreciate the ink level chips, the waste ink
    >> and pad replacement, etc.
    >
    >
    > Each of these items screams to buy a Canon. Epson, in an abstract sort
    > of way, can be perceived as 2 companys. One making dye based printers
    > like the R300 and another making archival based pigmented printers like
    > the R800.
    >

    Each of these issues needs to be weighed by the potential client. Some
    people buy 3rd party inks or ink resetters and refill their cartridges.
    You'll get no argument from me that the waste ink pad game Epson plays
    is not ethical (IMHO).

    I have also proposed that Epson could easily go into the professional
    printer market and drop the consumer market, in terms of market share,
    BUT, the consumer general market buy a LOT of ink and many still buy
    OEM, so for Epson that's an advantage they are unwilling to let go of.

    > When comparing the R300 dye based printer against the Canon Pixma dye
    > based printers Canon appears to get higher quality photo results, much
    > better business document results, substantially faster, more features in
    > the fact that they have two paper feeds coupled with duplex capability
    > and cost less. The carts have not chips, far less residual ink to toss,
    > and are about 20% less on the average.

    The only problem I see with this issue is the Canon inks are still too
    fugitive, and for some the idea of a head that is "semi-permament"
    doesn't sit well.

    > As fat as comparing the PIXMA to the R800, the analysis will require
    > some deeper comparisons because this thing of archival ability is really
    > not down to a science at the present time.
    >
    >> I don't own a single Epson printer with those chips. I no longer buy
    >> Epson ink.
    >
    >
    >
    > If you think the current line of Epson (R300) is so good why don't you
    > get one? If you think that the pigmented inks of the R800 are have such
    > longevity that is so important then why don't you have one? And if you
    > think Epson inks and papers are the cats meow then why aren't you using
    > them. My guess is that you think they may be better but not enough to
    > justify the cost.
    >

    I explained... I) I don't need another printer, I have half a dozen
    which I use for differing output. I don't even own a "photo" printer
    (one with the light dye load inks) because I was opposed to that
    technology being used as the way to improve color accuracy and
    smoothness. I always advocated for smaller dot size. I don't like low
    dye load inks. They are more vulnerable to fading as far as I can
    logically determine. They waste ink to get to the same place, so I
    won't buy into that option either.

    I do use a number of Epson papers, and have hundreds of dollars worth
    right next to me. I also use other brands, for specific applications.

    You see, I don't see things in black and white (or should I say stark
    contrasts) as you tend to. I like having a wide paper use available,
    and ultimately a wide ink market, as well. I am not a "loupehead". I
    believe if the image looks good from appropriate viewing distance, it's
    a reasonable print.

    I can appreciate tight sharp prints, but I'm not obsessed to produce
    them at this time, so I use older printers. I have one that can go to
    2880 dpi, but I still only use it at 720 dpi or 1440 dpi when I print in
    it, because it is too slow otherwise, and I can barely see any difference.

    Art

    >>
    >> However, in terms of general durability and quality of build, overall,
    >> Epson has had good designs, and image quality is also toward if not at
    >> the top.
    >>
    >> Art
    >>
    >>
    >
  29. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    The easiest way to empty the cartridge of ink is to buy a cheap ink
    resetter (probably under $5 these days on ebay) that will reset the
    cartridge chip to read "new" and then use the cartridge until it runs
    dry. It could introduce air locks into the head however.

    Art


    anon wrote:

    > The original question I asked was about can I simply remove or short the
    > chip on the refill cartridge to get to my remaining ink?
    >
    > I did not intend this topic to become a discussion of whose printer is best.
    > I personally like Epson printers, and to me their drawbacks are only in two
    > areas as far as I am concerned.
    > 1. clogging
    > 2. cost of inks.
    >
    > As commented to someone else - if Epson were to have simple transparent ink
    > cartridges like the Canon so that the user could see when they need
    > replacing then chipping
    > would be unnecessary. Most of my cartridges are still over half full when
    > the printer says they are empty.
    >
    > However - at this moment in time I point everyone to the original question.
    > Can I remove or somehow get the printer to ignore the chip?
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
  30. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    Douglas wrote:

    >The reason "letter size" paper is used is because most prints that large
    >still require borders! Most printers will print borderless 4x6,but not
    >8.5x11!
    >

    Wake up and smell the roses. Go look at the Canon Pixma IP series of
    printers.

    >If you look at ANY of the photo programs,8x10 will be a default size
    >print.
    >

    The too will catch up.

    >The size of paper a printer will except does not mean that is the
    >largest size it will print! When you start printing larger than 4x6,you will
    >see that!
    >
    >

    It will be a cute trick when I can print a 13x19 print in my Canon IP4000.

    >The more you go on,the more foolish you look!
    >
    >
    ha ha ha ha ha ha
    :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D

    >"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    >news:hYu8e.32$Xb4.12@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
    >
    >
    >>8x10 has been the standard size for film. Letter size is fast becoming
    >>the standard size for digital. 16x20 has been another large standard size
    >>for film. Now how are you going to print that on a 13x19 printer? Look
    >>for a new standard size for large format.
    >>
    >>Douglas wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>>How many people here print 8.5x11 photos? You might use that size
    >>>paper,but 8x10 is the standard size!I think you should wait to respond on
    >>>digital cameras.Another subject you pretend to have knowledge of!Just
    >>>remember,what you write can come back to make you look foolish!
    >>>"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    >>>news:CEl8e.5795$t85.4024@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>Douglas wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>Do you remember this?You posted it!
    >>>>>
    >>>>>I have not tried an 8x10
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>That is different from 8.5x11.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>(I am cheap) but before I do buy it I will do
    >>>>>that. I expect to make the purchase in the middle of summer. I hope by
    >>>>>then the price will soften a bit. Also, a new long zoom Sony will be
    >>>>>out in June. It looks more like it would be in the same size and weight
    >>>>>class as the FZ20 but I do want to turn over all of the stones.
    >>>>>"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    >>>>>news:JSj8e.5700$t85.2123@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>Douglas wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>>Well I have been a wedding photographer for 35 years,and I frequent
    >>>>>>>this group! I use Epson inkjets,as do 90% of the pros! Canon makes
    >>>>>>>decent printers,for the hobbiest.As I have read in measekites previous
    >>>>>>>posts,he has NEVER printed anything larger than 4x6 with his ip4000!
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>No true. 8.5x11
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>>That doesn't push any printer.The only 4x6 prints I make are from my
    >>>>>>>Mitsubishi 9000W.I also have my own darkroom,and at times,still use
    >>>>>>>film!I went through this same thing in the 70s.Some people were
    >>>>>>>pro-Canon,some pro-Nikon 35mm slrs.I had both,and used both! I still
    >>>>>>>use both makes of digital slrs!I don't buy anything by brand,I buy the
    >>>>>>>BEST camera or printer,or anything else,for the job at hand!Epson at
    >>>>>>>the moment is the tool for me,tomorrow it could be Canon!
    >>>>>>>"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    >>>>>>>news:OtZ7e.2796$t85.460@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>Hecate wrote:
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 20:41:55 GMT, measekite <measekite@yahoo.com>
    >>>>>>>>>wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>Attention Epson Owners:
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>I am not saying that Epson is not a good printer. The only truly
    >>>>>>>>>>bad printer is Lexmark. However, you just do not here of as many
    >>>>>>>>>>problems. with this as a typical example, from users of HP and
    >>>>>>>>>>Canon inkjets. Epson owners are just like Apple owners and in the
    >>>>>>>>>>order days WordPerfect owners. It is like a cult or a religion.
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>The difference is that on newsgroups like these you get a greater
    >>>>>>>>>number of professional users - and they use Epson printers more
    >>>>>>>>>often
    >>>>>>>>>than the general public. If you just used Google you'd find just as
    >>>>>>>>>many problems for Canon or HP. And if you add together the problems
    >>>>>>>>>for Canon, HP & Epson you might even see as many problems as for
    >>>>>>>>>Lexmark...
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>I totally disagree. As Ken Rockwell says, a professional
    >>>>>>>>photographer, most of the true professional photographers do not
    >>>>>>>>frequent this type of NG. What is found on this group are mainly
    >>>>>>>>Hobbyists and Serious amateurs. So I stand by what I said.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>--
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>Hecate - The Real One
    >>>>>>>>>Hecate@newsguy.com Fashion: Buying things you don't need, with money
    >>>>>>>>>you don't have, to impress people you don't like...
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >
    >
    >
    >
  31. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    Douglas wrote:

    >I almost forgot your remark on 13x19 printers.My new EPSON takes 17x22
    >media,resulting in the 16x20 trimmed print!
    >


    So you place a sheet of paper in your printer that is 13" wide by 19"
    long and the printer spits out a piece of paper that is 16" wide x 20"
    long. That is 8-)

    >The 13x19 printer is designed to
    >top out at a 12" wide print.You can make 4 4x6 prints on a sheet of 8x12
    >paper.You get 3 on a sheet of 8.5x11,the rest is waste.Before you say no one
    >uses 8x12,I do!Now I will be sure to let ALL the printer manufacturers know
    >they should contact you for the "NEW"standard photo sizes!
    >"Douglas" <.> wrote in message news:mtmdnYDBnu2HGv_fRVn-vA@centurytel.net...
    >
    >
    >>The reason "letter size" paper is used is because most prints that large
    >>still require borders! Most printers will print borderless 4x6,but not
    >>8.5x11! If you look at ANY of the photo programs,8x10 will be a default
    >>size print.The size of paper a printer will except does not mean that is
    >>the largest size it will print! When you start printing larger than
    >>4x6,you will see that!
    >>The more you go on,the more foolish you look!
    >>"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    >>news:hYu8e.32$Xb4.12@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
    >>
    >>
    >>>8x10 has been the standard size for film. Letter size is fast becoming
    >>>the standard size for digital. 16x20 has been another large standard
    >>>size for film. Now how are you going to print that on a 13x19 printer?
    >>>Look for a new standard size for large format.
    >>>
    >>>Douglas wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>How many people here print 8.5x11 photos? You might use that size
    >>>>paper,but 8x10 is the standard size!I think you should wait to respond on
    >>>>digital cameras.Another subject you pretend to have knowledge of!Just
    >>>>remember,what you write can come back to make you look foolish!
    >>>>"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    >>>>news:CEl8e.5795$t85.4024@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>Douglas wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>Do you remember this?You posted it!
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>I have not tried an 8x10
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>That is different from 8.5x11.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>(I am cheap) but before I do buy it I will do
    >>>>>>that. I expect to make the purchase in the middle of summer. I hope
    >>>>>>by
    >>>>>>then the price will soften a bit. Also, a new long zoom Sony will be
    >>>>>>out in June. It looks more like it would be in the same size and
    >>>>>>weight
    >>>>>>class as the FZ20 but I do want to turn over all of the stones.
    >>>>>>"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    >>>>>>news:JSj8e.5700$t85.2123@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>>Douglas wrote:
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>Well I have been a wedding photographer for 35 years,and I frequent
    >>>>>>>>this group! I use Epson inkjets,as do 90% of the pros! Canon makes
    >>>>>>>>decent printers,for the hobbiest.As I have read in measekites
    >>>>>>>>previous posts,he has NEVER printed anything larger than 4x6 with his
    >>>>>>>>ip4000!
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>No true. 8.5x11
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>That doesn't push any printer.The only 4x6 prints I make are from my
    >>>>>>>>Mitsubishi 9000W.I also have my own darkroom,and at times,still use
    >>>>>>>>film!I went through this same thing in the 70s.Some people were
    >>>>>>>>pro-Canon,some pro-Nikon 35mm slrs.I had both,and used both! I still
    >>>>>>>>use both makes of digital slrs!I don't buy anything by brand,I buy
    >>>>>>>>the BEST camera or printer,or anything else,for the job at hand!Epson
    >>>>>>>>at the moment is the tool for me,tomorrow it could be Canon!
    >>>>>>>>"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    >>>>>>>>news:OtZ7e.2796$t85.460@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>Hecate wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 20:41:55 GMT, measekite <measekite@yahoo.com>
    >>>>>>>>>>wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>Attention Epson Owners:
    >>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>I am not saying that Epson is not a good printer. The only truly
    >>>>>>>>>>>bad printer is Lexmark. However, you just do not here of as many
    >>>>>>>>>>>problems. with this as a typical example, from users of HP and
    >>>>>>>>>>>Canon inkjets. Epson owners are just like Apple owners and in the
    >>>>>>>>>>>order days WordPerfect owners. It is like a cult or a religion.
    >>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>The difference is that on newsgroups like these you get a greater
    >>>>>>>>>>number of professional users - and they use Epson printers more
    >>>>>>>>>>often
    >>>>>>>>>>than the general public. If you just used Google you'd find just as
    >>>>>>>>>>many problems for Canon or HP. And if you add together the problems
    >>>>>>>>>>for Canon, HP & Epson you might even see as many problems as for
    >>>>>>>>>>Lexmark...
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>I totally disagree. As Ken Rockwell says, a professional
    >>>>>>>>>photographer, most of the true professional photographers do not
    >>>>>>>>>frequent this type of NG. What is found on this group are mainly
    >>>>>>>>>Hobbyists and Serious amateurs. So I stand by what I said.
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>--
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>Hecate - The Real One
    >>>>>>>>>>Hecate@newsguy.com Fashion: Buying things you don't need, with
    >>>>>>>>>>money
    >>>>>>>>>>you don't have, to impress people you don't like...
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>
    >>
    >
    >
    >
    >
  32. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    How about READING the part that says my EPSON takes 17x22 media! It is the
    4000PRO,look it up! Where do I say you can print 16x20 on a 13x19 printer? I
    know you aren't the brightest,but I thought you could at least read at third
    grade level!
    As I said,you are looking more FOOLISH all the time! I think if I were you,I
    would keep quiet for a few days!
    "measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    news:FuR8e.2930$J12.845@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com...
    >
    >
    > Douglas wrote:
    >
    >>I almost forgot your remark on 13x19 printers.My new EPSON takes 17x22
    >>media,resulting in the 16x20 trimmed print!
    >>
    >
    >
    > So you place a sheet of paper in your printer that is 13" wide by 19" long
    > and the printer spits out a piece of paper that is 16" wide x 20" long.
    > That is 8-)
    >
    >>The 13x19 printer is designed to top out at a 12" wide print.You can make
    >>4 4x6 prints on a sheet of 8x12 paper.You get 3 on a sheet of 8.5x11,the
    >>rest is waste.Before you say no one uses 8x12,I do!Now I will be sure to
    >>let ALL the printer manufacturers know they should contact you for the
    >>"NEW"standard photo sizes!
    >>"Douglas" <.> wrote in message
    >>news:mtmdnYDBnu2HGv_fRVn-vA@centurytel.net...
    >>
    >>>The reason "letter size" paper is used is because most prints that large
    >>>still require borders! Most printers will print borderless 4x6,but not
    >>>8.5x11! If you look at ANY of the photo programs,8x10 will be a default
    >>>size print.The size of paper a printer will except does not mean that is
    >>>the largest size it will print! When you start printing larger than
    >>>4x6,you will see that!
    >>>The more you go on,the more foolish you look!
    >>>"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    >>>news:hYu8e.32$Xb4.12@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
    >>>
    >>>>8x10 has been the standard size for film. Letter size is fast becoming
    >>>>the standard size for digital. 16x20 has been another large standard
    >>>>size for film. Now how are you going to print that on a 13x19 printer?
    >>>>Look for a new standard size for large format.
    >>>>
    >>>>Douglas wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>How many people here print 8.5x11 photos? You might use that size
    >>>>>paper,but 8x10 is the standard size!I think you should wait to respond
    >>>>>on digital cameras.Another subject you pretend to have knowledge
    >>>>>of!Just remember,what you write can come back to make you look foolish!
    >>>>>"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    >>>>>news:CEl8e.5795$t85.4024@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>Douglas wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>>Do you remember this?You posted it!
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>I have not tried an 8x10
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>That is different from 8.5x11.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>>(I am cheap) but before I do buy it I will do
    >>>>>>>that. I expect to make the purchase in the middle of summer. I hope
    >>>>>>>by
    >>>>>>>then the price will soften a bit. Also, a new long zoom Sony will be
    >>>>>>>out in June. It looks more like it would be in the same size and
    >>>>>>>weight
    >>>>>>>class as the FZ20 but I do want to turn over all of the stones.
    >>>>>>>"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    >>>>>>>news:JSj8e.5700$t85.2123@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>Douglas wrote:
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>Well I have been a wedding photographer for 35 years,and I frequent
    >>>>>>>>>this group! I use Epson inkjets,as do 90% of the pros! Canon makes
    >>>>>>>>>decent printers,for the hobbiest.As I have read in measekites
    >>>>>>>>>previous posts,he has NEVER printed anything larger than 4x6 with
    >>>>>>>>>his ip4000!
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>No true. 8.5x11
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>That doesn't push any printer.The only 4x6 prints I make are from
    >>>>>>>>>my Mitsubishi 9000W.I also have my own darkroom,and at times,still
    >>>>>>>>>use film!I went through this same thing in the 70s.Some people were
    >>>>>>>>>pro-Canon,some pro-Nikon 35mm slrs.I had both,and used both! I
    >>>>>>>>>still use both makes of digital slrs!I don't buy anything by
    >>>>>>>>>brand,I buy the BEST camera or printer,or anything else,for the job
    >>>>>>>>>at hand!Epson at the moment is the tool for me,tomorrow it could be
    >>>>>>>>>Canon!
    >>>>>>>>>"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    >>>>>>>>>news:OtZ7e.2796$t85.460@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>Hecate wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 20:41:55 GMT, measekite <measekite@yahoo.com>
    >>>>>>>>>>>wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>Attention Epson Owners:
    >>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>I am not saying that Epson is not a good printer. The only
    >>>>>>>>>>>>truly bad printer is Lexmark. However, you just do not here of
    >>>>>>>>>>>>as many problems. with this as a typical example, from users of
    >>>>>>>>>>>>HP and Canon inkjets. Epson owners are just like Apple owners
    >>>>>>>>>>>>and in the order days WordPerfect owners. It is like a cult or
    >>>>>>>>>>>>a religion.
    >>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>The difference is that on newsgroups like these you get a greater
    >>>>>>>>>>>number of professional users - and they use Epson printers more
    >>>>>>>>>>>often
    >>>>>>>>>>>than the general public. If you just used Google you'd find just
    >>>>>>>>>>>as
    >>>>>>>>>>>many problems for Canon or HP. And if you add together the
    >>>>>>>>>>>problems
    >>>>>>>>>>>for Canon, HP & Epson you might even see as many problems as for
    >>>>>>>>>>>Lexmark...
    >>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>I totally disagree. As Ken Rockwell says, a professional
    >>>>>>>>>>photographer, most of the true professional photographers do not
    >>>>>>>>>>frequent this type of NG. What is found on this group are mainly
    >>>>>>>>>>Hobbyists and Serious amateurs. So I stand by what I said.
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>--
    >>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>Hecate - The Real One
    >>>>>>>>>>>Hecate@newsguy.com Fashion: Buying things you don't need, with
    >>>>>>>>>>>money
    >>>>>>>>>>>you don't have, to impress people you don't like...
    >>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>
    >>
    >>
    >>
  33. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    Staples has started carrying a chip resetter for Epson. Seems to be fairly
    universal for the later printer models.
    "anon" <ngr@tdrd.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
    news:d3p8j5$3ns$1@newsg4.svr.pol.co.uk...
    > Due to problems with a clogged printer head, and repeated cleaning
    > operations, my new epson original ink cartridges report that they are only
    > 60% full now - when in fact I know they must be 100% since there hasn't
    > been
    > a drop out of them yet.
    >
    > I have an Epson CX5200 and wonder if there is a simple way of resetting
    > the
    > chip, or indeed if they will run as an unknown vendor if the chip is
    > removed. I am aware that some of Epson inkjet printers (ie C680) will run
    > on
    > chipped and unchipped - a message just appears which you ignore.
    >
    > So can I simply remove or short the chip on the refill cartridge to get to
    > my remaining ink?
    >
    > The cartridge numbers are (EPSON: T0321, T0422, T0423, T0424).
    >
    > Thanks in advance for feedback.
    >
    > Terry
    >
    >
  34. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    Like I said

    If Brains were Dynamite

    You would not have enough to blow your Nose.

    Douglas wrote:

    >How about READING the part that says my EPSON takes 17x22 media! It is the
    >4000PRO,look it up! Where do I say you can print 16x20 on a 13x19 printer? I
    >know you aren't the brightest,but I thought you could at least read at third
    >grade level!
    >As I said,you are looking more FOOLISH all the time! I think if I were you,I
    >would keep quiet for a few days!
    >"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    >news:FuR8e.2930$J12.845@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com...
    >
    >
    >>Douglas wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>>I almost forgot your remark on 13x19 printers.My new EPSON takes 17x22
    >>>media,resulting in the 16x20 trimmed print!
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>So you place a sheet of paper in your printer that is 13" wide by 19" long
    >>and the printer spits out a piece of paper that is 16" wide x 20" long.
    >>That is 8-)
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>>The 13x19 printer is designed to top out at a 12" wide print.You can make
    >>>4 4x6 prints on a sheet of 8x12 paper.You get 3 on a sheet of 8.5x11,the
    >>>rest is waste.Before you say no one uses 8x12,I do!Now I will be sure to
    >>>let ALL the printer manufacturers know they should contact you for the
    >>>"NEW"standard photo sizes!
    >>>"Douglas" <.> wrote in message
    >>>news:mtmdnYDBnu2HGv_fRVn-vA@centurytel.net...
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>The reason "letter size" paper is used is because most prints that large
    >>>>still require borders! Most printers will print borderless 4x6,but not
    >>>>8.5x11! If you look at ANY of the photo programs,8x10 will be a default
    >>>>size print.The size of paper a printer will except does not mean that is
    >>>>the largest size it will print! When you start printing larger than
    >>>>4x6,you will see that!
    >>>>The more you go on,the more foolish you look!
    >>>>"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    >>>>news:hYu8e.32$Xb4.12@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>8x10 has been the standard size for film. Letter size is fast becoming
    >>>>>the standard size for digital. 16x20 has been another large standard
    >>>>>size for film. Now how are you going to print that on a 13x19 printer?
    >>>>>Look for a new standard size for large format.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>Douglas wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>How many people here print 8.5x11 photos? You might use that size
    >>>>>>paper,but 8x10 is the standard size!I think you should wait to respond
    >>>>>>on digital cameras.Another subject you pretend to have knowledge
    >>>>>>of!Just remember,what you write can come back to make you look foolish!
    >>>>>>"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    >>>>>>news:CEl8e.5795$t85.4024@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>>Douglas wrote:
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>Do you remember this?You posted it!
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>I have not tried an 8x10
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>That is different from 8.5x11.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>(I am cheap) but before I do buy it I will do
    >>>>>>>>that. I expect to make the purchase in the middle of summer. I hope
    >>>>>>>>by
    >>>>>>>>then the price will soften a bit. Also, a new long zoom Sony will be
    >>>>>>>>out in June. It looks more like it would be in the same size and
    >>>>>>>>weight
    >>>>>>>>class as the FZ20 but I do want to turn over all of the stones.
    >>>>>>>>"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    >>>>>>>>news:JSj8e.5700$t85.2123@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>Douglas wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>Well I have been a wedding photographer for 35 years,and I frequent
    >>>>>>>>>>this group! I use Epson inkjets,as do 90% of the pros! Canon makes
    >>>>>>>>>>decent printers,for the hobbiest.As I have read in measekites
    >>>>>>>>>>previous posts,he has NEVER printed anything larger than 4x6 with
    >>>>>>>>>>his ip4000!
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>No true. 8.5x11
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>That doesn't push any printer.The only 4x6 prints I make are from
    >>>>>>>>>>my Mitsubishi 9000W.I also have my own darkroom,and at times,still
    >>>>>>>>>>use film!I went through this same thing in the 70s.Some people were
    >>>>>>>>>>pro-Canon,some pro-Nikon 35mm slrs.I had both,and used both! I
    >>>>>>>>>>still use both makes of digital slrs!I don't buy anything by
    >>>>>>>>>>brand,I buy the BEST camera or printer,or anything else,for the job
    >>>>>>>>>>at hand!Epson at the moment is the tool for me,tomorrow it could be
    >>>>>>>>>>Canon!
    >>>>>>>>>>"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    >>>>>>>>>>news:OtZ7e.2796$t85.460@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>Hecate wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 20:41:55 GMT, measekite <measekite@yahoo.com>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>Attention Epson Owners:
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>I am not saying that Epson is not a good printer. The only
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>truly bad printer is Lexmark. However, you just do not here of
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>as many problems. with this as a typical example, from users of
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>HP and Canon inkjets. Epson owners are just like Apple owners
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>and in the order days WordPerfect owners. It is like a cult or
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>a religion.
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>The difference is that on newsgroups like these you get a greater
    >>>>>>>>>>>>number of professional users - and they use Epson printers more
    >>>>>>>>>>>>often
    >>>>>>>>>>>>than the general public. If you just used Google you'd find just
    >>>>>>>>>>>>as
    >>>>>>>>>>>>many problems for Canon or HP. And if you add together the
    >>>>>>>>>>>>problems
    >>>>>>>>>>>>for Canon, HP & Epson you might even see as many problems as for
    >>>>>>>>>>>>Lexmark...
    >>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>I totally disagree. As Ken Rockwell says, a professional
    >>>>>>>>>>>photographer, most of the true professional photographers do not
    >>>>>>>>>>>frequent this type of NG. What is found on this group are mainly
    >>>>>>>>>>>Hobbyists and Serious amateurs. So I stand by what I said.
    >>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>--
    >>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>Hecate - The Real One
    >>>>>>>>>>>>Hecate@newsguy.com Fashion: Buying things you don't need, with
    >>>>>>>>>>>>money
    >>>>>>>>>>>>you don't have, to impress people you don't like...
    >>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >
    >
    >
    >
  35. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    "measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    news:8GT8e.382$zX7.182@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
    > Like I said
    >
    > If Brains were Dynamite
    >
    > You would not have enough to blow your Nose.
    >
    (snip)

    why not stay on topic and try to be helpful instead of posting your childish
    and offensive responses.
  36. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    I thought this thread was about a quanity of ink left after all the
    cleaning cycles.

    As all inkjet printers when you run a cleaning cycle ink is drawn out
    of the cartridges thru the nozzles to clear them. The more cycles
    you run the more ink that is drawn out of the cartridges. That is
    why your chip is telling you that your cartridge is only 60% full.

    That 60% is just an estimate done by your printer and it's firmware to
    give you an approximation of how much ink is left.

    If you want to reset the chip try this program:
    http://www.ssclg.com/epsone.shtml :lol:
  37. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    Thanks to Arthur Entlish for fixing my print head problems.
    Problem fixed.

    Terry
Ask a new question

Read More

Printers Chip Epson Peripherals