Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Canon Inks iP4000

Last response: in Computer Peripherals
Share
Anonymous
August 30, 2005 3:15:44 AM

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

I am looking for a new printer and am torn between the iP3000 and iP4000

I notice that the iP4000 has two black inks, why is this.
They are BCI-3eBk and BCI-6Bk

What are the differences between these inks and why two blacks???

Does the mono print use one and the colour print use the other or something.

What are the significant differences between the two models apart from the
additional tank?

Thanks.

More about : canon inks ip4000

August 30, 2005 3:15:45 AM

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

> I notice that the iP4000 has two black inks, why is this.
> They are BCI-3eBk and BCI-6Bk

Pigment black and dye black. The dye black is used for photo paper a
feature on the ip4000 but not the ip3000

I have the ip3000 and the mp760. Once and a while for photo paper the
pigment black kicks in on the ip3000 and you can see it's not as glossy
as the colors adding a 3d quality to some things. This can look good
as is the case with text, diagrams, outlines, or information, or bad as
is the case of shadows. I'm told black kicks in at 80%, and I believe
the small black is only used for glossy paper, but I'm not sure as much
of the printer's logic involving color is a mystery to me.

> What are the significant differences between the two models apart from the
> additional tank?

That's about it. Both are virtualy identical save the printhead and
it's older. I assume that the PC board and roms are different but
don't know that for a fact. The color of the printer is different.
Layout and features are identical. I went with the ip3000 because I
wanted to spend as little money as possible while I tested to see if I
could enable the CD-printing feature... a price roughly equal to the
cost of the ink it came with.
August 30, 2005 4:33:25 PM

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

I use the ip5000 but you can say this applies to the ip4000, for the
only difference on the ip5000 is the print head resolution of 1pl,
which is only attainable on 'Photo paper pro' setting.

The printer is awsome, I have had mine over three months and not one
single head clog, nor a manual head clean required to date, mind you
I've stuck with Canon ink.

As the previous posts say's, pigment black is the larger tank and is
used for text, the smaller black is a dye photo ink.

One good thing about the ip4000/5000, is that you can print a
composite document, it could be picture and text, or graphics and
text, this simply means you are using the large pigment black ink for
text and the dye for colours, these printers you'll find very
economical with the inks.

The ip3000 will use the same black for both text and colours.

Davy
Related resources
August 30, 2005 8:13:51 PM

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

Davy wrote:

>One good thing about the ip4000/5000, is that you can print a
>composite document, it could be picture and text, or graphics and
>text, this simply means you are using the large pigment black ink for
>text and the dye for colours,

Just to nit-pick, I don't believe the Canon printers are object oriented
for ink selection.

For instance, if you print a text document that is all black, with the
default plain paper selected, it will print with the pigment black ink.
But if you print the same document, and it has just one character that
is red, the entire document is printed using the dye CMY colours to
simulate black.

I know this was true of the entire i-series, and I don't think Canon
changed their print engine in the newer iP-series.
August 30, 2005 8:47:39 PM

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

> there are many sales and rebates going on now so the price difference is small

Near as i'm aware there is only that $20 rebate going on until
september... and that's it. And the ip3000 qualifies for the same
rebate as the ip4000. There are other rebates as well if you buy a
camera at the same time, but the ip3000 also qualifies for those as
well typicaly speaking. Your reccomendation is moot.

ip4000 amazon $104.95 + shipping
ip3000 amazon $69.99 + shipping
Difference 34.96

ip4000 newegg $124.00 shipped
ip3000 newegg $88.00 shipped
Difference $36

ip4000 compusa $129.99 + tax
ip3000 compusa $99.99 + tax
difference $30

One can expect to spend $30 to $40 more for the ip4000 over the ip3000.

The time to buy was two to three months ago when the price was about
$65 for the ip3000 or $100 for the ip4000.

Is it worth $30-$40? It's hard for me to say. I'd reccomend you go to
your local retail store with a digital camera and a pack of photo paper
and print off one of your own images to each printer. If you noticed a
remarkable improvement spend the extra money. If not, don't worry
about it and be happy.

But keep in mind there are new models as well.
August 30, 2005 9:01:01 PM

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

> So how do you know this to be true? Have you tried looking at the
> printhead laying down the ink on plain paper. You can easily see the
> pigment black AND the CMY both being used.

I noticed this once when on my ip3000 I was running out of a color,
probally magenta. I was printing some lyrics and wanted some cyan and
others black. All the colors were skewed due to the lack of the
magenta including the black text, which I found very odd as it was text
and assumed that was covered by the bci-3e black.

I don't understand the rhyme or reason of the driver choosing go to
color or dedicated black. I'm told 80% is the usual threthhold, but
when I observe things like this happening I simply have no idea.
Anonymous
August 30, 2005 9:45:34 PM

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

tHE DECISION IS A NO BRAINER - THE IP4000. THERE ARE MANY SALES AND
REBATES GOING ON NOW SO THE PRICE DIFFERENCE IS SMALL. THE LARGER BLACK
INK TANK IS FOR TEXT. THIS IS ON BOTH. THE SMALLER IS A PHOTO BLACK ON
THE IP4000 AND PROVIDES BETTER CONTRASTING PHOTOS.

BE SURE TO USE CANON OEM INK SO YOU DO NOT GET A PRINTHEAD CLOG

ngreplies wrote:

>I am looking for a new printer and am torn between the iP3000 and iP4000
>
>I notice that the iP4000 has two black inks, why is this.
>They are BCI-3eBk and BCI-6Bk
>
>What are the differences between these inks and why two blacks???
>
>Does the mono print use one and the colour print use the other or something.
>
>What are the significant differences between the two models apart from the
>additional tank?
>
>Thanks.
>
>
>
>
Anonymous
August 31, 2005 1:12:57 PM

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

In article Bill says...
> Just to nit-pick, I don't believe the Canon printers are object oriented
> for ink selection.
>
> For instance, if you print a text document that is all black, with the
> default plain paper selected, it will print with the pigment black ink.
> But if you print the same document, and it has just one character that
> is red, the entire document is printed using the dye CMY colours to
> simulate black.
>
> I know this was true of the entire i-series, and I don't think Canon
> changed their print engine in the newer iP-series.
>
So how do you know this to be true? Have you tried looking at the
printhead laying down the ink on plain paper. You can easily see the
pigment black AND the CMY both being used.
August 31, 2005 1:12:58 PM

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

colinco wrote:

>In article Bill says...
>> Just to nit-pick, I don't believe the Canon printers are object oriented
>> for ink selection.
>>
>> For instance, if you print a text document that is all black, with the
>> default plain paper selected, it will print with the pigment black ink.
>> But if you print the same document, and it has just one character that
>> is red, the entire document is printed using the dye CMY colours to
>> simulate black.
>>
>> I know this was true of the entire i-series, and I don't think Canon
>> changed their print engine in the newer iP-series.
>>
>So how do you know this to be true? Have you tried looking at the
>printhead laying down the ink on plain paper. You can easily see the
>pigment black AND the CMY both being used.

Actually we used magnification to see the colour of the dots. It's easy
to spot when CMY is mixed to produce black.

The reason we checked was the print speed changed depending on the
document being printed. When it printed with the black ink only, the
print speed was slightly higher and you could actually see the page
advance was greater. The printhead has a much larger swath across the
paper when laying black ink. But if there was any colour in the
document, the speed was slower and the page advance was smaller.

So we compared pages under magnification and found CMY was used to
create black.
Anonymous
August 31, 2005 1:12:59 PM

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

"Bill" <bill@c.a> wrote in message news:HPGdnUour6cGQYneRVn-1Q@golden.net...
> colinco wrote:
>
>>In article Bill says...
>>> Just to nit-pick, I don't believe the Canon printers are object oriented
>>> for ink selection.
>>>
>>> For instance, if you print a text document that is all black, with the
>>> default plain paper selected, it will print with the pigment black ink.
>>> But if you print the same document, and it has just one character that
>>> is red, the entire document is printed using the dye CMY colours to
>>> simulate black.
>>>
>>> I know this was true of the entire i-series, and I don't think Canon
>>> changed their print engine in the newer iP-series.
>>>
>>So how do you know this to be true? Have you tried looking at the
>>printhead laying down the ink on plain paper. You can easily see the
>>pigment black AND the CMY both being used.

My canon i850 has a completely blocked black ink head. yet it still
produces stunning photos even strong blacks. The only conclusion is that
black is made up of the other colours. It also explains why yellow runs out
much slower than cyan and magenta.
Anonymous
August 31, 2005 5:56:13 PM

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

In article ian lincoln says...
> My canon i850 has a completely blocked black ink head. yet it still
> produces stunning photos even strong blacks. The only conclusion is that
> black is made up of the other colours. It also explains why yellow runs out
> much slower than cyan and magenta.
>
>

On photo paper that would be correct. The i850 wouldn't use pigment
black. The i860 also has a photo black for even better blacks.
Anonymous
August 31, 2005 6:06:04 PM

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

In article Bill says...
> The printhead has a much larger swath across the
> paper when laying black ink. But if there was any colour in the
> document, the speed was slower and the page advance was smaller.
>
> So we compared pages under magnification and found CMY was used to
> create black.
>
>
On plain paper I have watched the larger swath of pigment black
preceding the colour inks on my i865, it wasn't switched off just
because the colour inks were firing. The 3e black is used in colour
graphics along with the CMY and on any text that is "black". On plain
paper the 6 black probably isn't used. Set for photo paper the 3e black
isn't used and you can see the text is higher resolution.
August 31, 2005 6:53:03 PM

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

> last week frys had the ip4000 for $79.00 after rebate. This is a sale price.

That would be $100 before rebate wouldn't it?

Perhaps I need to repeat my self. I only know of a $20 rebate that
doesn't require purchace of a camer or other equipment (pc or laptop)
Because that rebate is good for both the ip3000 and ip4000, not to
speak of the 4000r 5000 6000 you can not say it lowers the price of
either one in contrast to the other. The rebate is good till the end
of september.
http://image.compusa.com/pdfs/0014181.pdf#search='ip4000%20$20%20rebate'

Expect to spend about $30 to $40 more for the ip4000 than the ip3000.
You might get lucky and spend only $15ish to $20ish more for the ip4000
if you happen to find one on sale.... but at your average shop the
ip4000 is $30ish more.

Last time I checked my local frys didn't have any ip4000s, only the
ip4200.

I'm not saying buy one or the other. Rather i'm giving the person who
asked an accurate picture of how much one is to the other and letting
them decide if it's worth it.
Anonymous
August 31, 2005 8:52:15 PM

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

LAST WEEK FRYS HAD THE IP4000 FOR $79.00 AFTER REBATE. THIS IS A SALE
PRICE.

zakezuke wrote:

>>there are many sales and rebates going on now so the price difference is small
>>
>>
>
>Near as i'm aware there is only that $20 rebate going on until
>september... and that's it. And the ip3000 qualifies for the same
>rebate as the ip4000. There are other rebates as well if you buy a
>camera at the same time, but the ip3000 also qualifies for those as
>well typicaly speaking. Your reccomendation is moot.
>
>ip4000 amazon $104.95 + shipping
>ip3000 amazon $69.99 + shipping
>Difference 34.96
>
>ip4000 newegg $124.00 shipped
>ip3000 newegg $88.00 shipped
>Difference $36
>
>ip4000 compusa $129.99 + tax
>ip3000 compusa $99.99 + tax
>difference $30
>
>One can expect to spend $30 to $40 more for the ip4000 over the ip3000.
>
>The time to buy was two to three months ago when the price was about
>$65 for the ip3000 or $100 for the ip4000.
>
>Is it worth $30-$40? It's hard for me to say. I'd reccomend you go to
>your local retail store with a digital camera and a pack of photo paper
>and print off one of your own images to each printer. If you noticed a
>remarkable improvement spend the extra money. If not, don't worry
>about it and be happy.
>
>But keep in mind there are new models as well.
>
>
>
August 31, 2005 9:20:23 PM

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

zakezuke wrote:

>> So how do you know this to be true? Have you tried looking at the
>> printhead laying down the ink on plain paper. You can easily see the
>> pigment black AND the CMY both being used.
>
>I noticed this once when on my ip3000 I was running out of a color,
>probally magenta. I was printing some lyrics and wanted some cyan and
>others black. All the colors were skewed due to the lack of the
>magenta including the black text, which I found very odd as it was text
>and assumed that was covered by the bci-3e black.
>
>I don't understand the rhyme or reason of the driver choosing go to
>color or dedicated black.

The Canon print engine in these models is document oriented, so they do
not discern the difference between black and colour within a single
document. It converts the entire document and then uses either black or
colour inks for the document based on its minimum requirements.

HP print engines are object oriented and can print black text with black
ink, and colour graphs with the colour inks, all within the same
document.

> I'm told 80% is the usual threthhold, but
>when I observe things like this happening I simply have no idea.

The 80% threshold relates to photos and how the Canon iP3000 will lay
down the pigment-based black ink for very dark areas since the CMY black
is not as dark.

The iP4000 improves photos very slightly by using a dye-based black for
photos. But after viewing photos from both printers, it makes little
difference with glossy paper since Canon papers are nanoporous and
adsorb the ink below the surface. The final print is very glossy and the
pigment ink is barely noticed.

HP photo paper is of the swellable type, and the ink tends to sit near
the surface. The final print is very glossy, but at first appears etched
because the heavy layer of CMY to make black is thick and takes a while
to be adsorbed by the photo paper.

This is why Canon prints are so much more water resistant to HP prints.
You can actually run a Canon print under water, and gently wipe it dry.
But HP prints must be allowed to dry without wiping it or the ink will
be smudged. Once allowed to fully dry for 24 hours, HP prints are
generally smudge resistant. But fresh out of the printer they may smudge
with moist fingers.
Anonymous
September 1, 2005 3:28:16 PM

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

In article Bill says...
> The Canon print engine in these models is document oriented, so they do
> not discern the difference between black and colour within a single
> document. It converts the entire document and then uses either black or
> colour inks for the document based on its minimum requirements.
>
Are you saying either pigment black or colour but not both? Previous
explanations that I've seen refer to paper type setting being the
trigger and this seems to agree with my observations of the i865 output.
September 1, 2005 5:50:48 PM

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

> This is <bat guano>. I had a drop of water land on a photo and it made a
> round discoloration that could not be removed.

I just did a drop of water on the two prints I have taning in the
sun... and I whiped it off with my finger. No discoloration. The HP
print on canon photo paper plus on the other hand did discolor, both
been on the sill for an equal amount of time (30Jun). The epson print
I have on "epson photo paper" also discolored, but it's not been
tanning at all.
Anonymous
September 1, 2005 8:40:48 PM

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

Bill wrote:

>zakezuke wrote:
>
>
>
>>>So how do you know this to be true? Have you tried looking at the
>>>printhead laying down the ink on plain paper. You can easily see the
>>>pigment black AND the CMY both being used.
>>>
>>>
>>I noticed this once when on my ip3000 I was running out of a color,
>>probally magenta. I was printing some lyrics and wanted some cyan and
>>others black. All the colors were skewed due to the lack of the
>>magenta including the black text, which I found very odd as it was text
>>and assumed that was covered by the bci-3e black.
>>
>>I don't understand the rhyme or reason of the driver choosing go to
>>color or dedicated black.
>>
>>
>
>The Canon print engine in these models is document oriented, so they do
>not discern the difference between black and colour within a single
>document. It converts the entire document and then uses either black or
>colour inks for the document based on its minimum requirements.
>
>HP print engines are object oriented and can print black text with black
>ink, and colour graphs with the colour inks, all within the same
>document.
>
>
>
>> I'm told 80% is the usual threthhold, but
>>when I observe things like this happening I simply have no idea.
>>
>>
>
>The 80% threshold relates to photos and how the Canon iP3000 will lay
>down the pigment-based black ink for very dark areas since the CMY black
>is not as dark.
>
>The iP4000 improves photos very slightly by using a dye-based black for
>photos. But after viewing photos from both printers, it makes little
>difference with glossy paper since Canon papers are nanoporous and
>adsorb the ink below the surface. The final print is very glossy and the
>pigment ink is barely noticed.
>
>
>

Wrong. If you set your paper for plain it uses the glossy black. If
you set it for photo paper then it uses the dye black. It does not
consider the subject. In the case of the IP4/3000, the IP4000 uses dye
black when printing photos when photo paper is selected while the IP3000
mixes the black from the 3 colors. The difference is striking on
certain photos. Both printers use the pigmented black when plain paper
is selected.

>HP photo paper is of the swellable type, and the ink tends to sit near
>the surface. The final print is very glossy, but at first appears etched
>because the heavy layer of CMY to make black is thick and takes a while
>to be adsorbed by the photo paper.
>
>This is why Canon prints are so much more water resistant to HP prints.
>You can actually run a Canon print under water, and gently wipe it dry.
>
>

This is bullshit. I had a drop of water land on a photo and it made a
round discoloration that could not be removed.

>But HP prints must be allowed to dry without wiping it or the ink will
>be smudged. Once allowed to fully dry for 24 hours, HP prints are
>generally smudge resistant. But fresh out of the printer they may smudge
>with moist fingers.
>
>
September 1, 2005 9:27:33 PM

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

> Obviously a post from someone without any first-hand knowledge.

Well, the gent is probally using kirkland photopaper, which I don't
happen to have anything dry and handy to test. I have to say this is
the first time i've seen a solid reason why one should buy the canon
photo paper plus.
Anonymous
September 1, 2005 10:18:16 PM

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

On 1 Sep 2005 13:50:48 -0700, "zakezuke" <zakezuke_us@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>> This is <bat guano>. I had a drop of water land on a photo and it made a
>> round discoloration that could not be removed.
>
>I just did a drop of water on the two prints I have taning in the
>sun... and I whiped it off with my finger. No discoloration. The HP
>print on canon photo paper plus on the other hand did discolor, both
>been on the sill for an equal amount of time (30Jun). The epson print
>I have on "epson photo paper" also discolored, but it's not been
>tanning at all.

Enough with the censorship!
September 1, 2005 10:20:30 PM

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

> I guess you cannot see

I see perfectly well. You see I had two prints I used for contrast,
same paper, different ink. The light was bright sun, and the results
were painfully clear on the HP ink on Canon Photopaper Plus, and not
observable. I must conclude that the statement that canon inks on the
canon photo paper plus is reasonably water resistant. I just poured
some tapwater onto the same print and wiped with a hand towel. I did
scratch the print but the ink stayed.

I would sugest rather than being critical of my observation to observe
your self. When I'm less lazy i'll try this on the Kirkland paper.
September 1, 2005 11:33:44 PM

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

colinco wrote:

>In article Bill says...
>> The Canon print engine in these models is document oriented, so they do
>> not discern the difference between black and colour within a single
>> document. It converts the entire document and then uses either black or
>> colour inks for the document based on its minimum requirements.
>>
>Are you saying either pigment black or colour but not both? Previous
>explanations that I've seen refer to paper type setting being the
>trigger and this seems to agree with my observations of the i865 output.

I thought it was pretty clear, but apparently not since the subject line
does not currently reflect the model being discussed, nor does your
question refer to the specific situation being discussed.

On almost anything but photo paper, the Canon iP3000 model uses CMY
mixed for black.

On plain paper, the iP3000 uses either pigment black or CMY, but not
both for the same document.

With photos, the iP3000 printer will lay down black pigment ink for 80%
or darker black AS WELL AS using the CMY colours at the same time.
September 1, 2005 11:33:44 PM

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

zakezuke wrote:

>> This is <bat guano>. I had a drop of water land on a photo and it made a
>> round discoloration that could not be removed.

Obviously a post from someone without any first-hand knowledge.

>I just did a drop of water on the two prints I have taning in the
>sun... and I whiped it off with my finger. No discoloration.

Exactly.

The Canon paper with Canon OEM or even Canon-specific third party ink,
is surprisingly water resistant.

> The HP
>print on canon photo paper plus on the other hand did discolor,

I'm not surprised by that...the paper and ink formulations are different
and not intended to work together.

Canon paper is nanoporous, while HP paper is swellable.
Anonymous
September 2, 2005 4:42:47 AM

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

zakezuke wrote:

>>This is <BULLSHIT>. I had a drop of water land on a photo and it made a
>>round discoloration that could not be removed.
>>
>>
>
>I just did a drop of water on the two prints I have taning in the
>sun... and I whiped it off with my finger. No discoloration. The HP
>print on canon photo paper plus on the other hand did discolor, both
>been on the sill for an equal amount of time (30Jun). The epson print
>I have on "epson photo paper" also discolored, but it's not been
>tanning at all.
>
>

I GUESS YOU CANNOT SEE.
Anonymous
September 2, 2005 4:57:10 AM

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

Bill wrote:

>colinco wrote:
>
>
>
>>In article Bill says...
>>
>>
>>>The Canon print engine in these models is document oriented, so they do
>>>not discern the difference between black and colour within a single
>>>document. It converts the entire document and then uses either black or
>>>colour inks for the document based on its minimum requirements.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>Are you saying either pigment black or colour but not both? Previous
>>explanations that I've seen refer to paper type setting being the
>>trigger and this seems to agree with my observations of the i865 output.
>>
>>
>
>I thought it was pretty clear, but apparently not since the subject line
>does not currently reflect the model being discussed, nor does your
>question refer to the specific situation being discussed.
>
>On almost anything but photo paper, the Canon iP3000 model uses CMY
>mixed for black.
>
>

IT IS THE REVERSE : ON ANYTHING PUT PLAIN PAPER THE COLORS MIX THE
BLACK. THAT IS WHY THYE IP4000 (HAS AN EXTRA DYE BLACK) PRODUCES BETTER
PHOTOS

>On plain paper, the iP3000 uses either pigment black or CMY, but not
>both for the same document.
>
>
ONLY PIGMENT BLACK. I THINK YOU NEED TO TALK TO CANON OR READ THE
MANUAL. WITH THE MENTALITY OF SOME OF THE NG READERS AS LOW AS IT IS
YOU NEED TO BE ACCURATE.

>With photos, the iP3000 printer will lay down black pigment ink for 80%
>or darker black AS WELL AS using the CMY colours at the same time.
>
>
TOTALLY INCORRECT
Anonymous
September 2, 2005 5:06:38 AM

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

kIRKLAND, CANON AND OFFICE DEPOT DO NOT LIKE WATER

zakezuke wrote:

>>Obviously a post from someone without any first-hand knowledge.
>>
>>
>
>Well, the gent is probally using kirkland photopaper, which I don't
>happen to have anything dry and handy to test. I have to say this is
>the first time i've seen a solid reason why one should buy the canon
>photo paper plus.
>
>
>
Anonymous
September 2, 2005 4:10:05 PM

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

In article Bill says...
> I thought it was pretty clear, but apparently not since the subject line
> does not currently reflect the model being discussed, nor does your
> question refer to the specific situation being discussed.
>
> On almost anything but photo paper, the Canon iP3000 model uses CMY
> mixed for black.
>
> On plain paper, the iP3000 uses either pigment black or CMY, but not
> both for the same document.
>
> With photos, the iP3000 printer will lay down black pigment ink for 80%
> or darker black AS WELL AS using the CMY colours at the same time.
>
>
You previously mentioned that the print engine from the entire i series
had this behaviour. The reason I am questioning this is because my
i865/WinXP does use BOTH dye and pigment in the same document on plain
paper as required. This contradicts your findings. Is it OS or driver
related?
Anonymous
September 2, 2005 4:10:06 PM

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

THIS GUY BILL IS OVER DA HILL AND DOES NOT KNOW WHAT HE IS TALKING ABOUT.

colinco wrote:

>In article Bill says...
>
>
>>I thought it was pretty clear, but apparently not since the subject line
>>does not currently reflect the model being discussed, nor does your
>>question refer to the specific situation being discussed.
>>
>>On almost anything but photo paper, the Canon iP3000 model uses CMY
>>mixed for black.
>>
>>On plain paper, the iP3000 uses either pigment black or CMY, but not
>>both for the same document.
>>
>>With photos, the iP3000 printer will lay down black pigment ink for 80%
>>or darker black AS WELL AS using the CMY colours at the same time.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>You previously mentioned that the print engine from the entire i series
>had this behaviour. The reason I am questioning this is because my
>i865/WinXP does use BOTH dye and pigment in the same document on plain
>paper as required. This contradicts your findings. Is it OS or driver
>related?
>
>
!