|
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
~~NoMad~~
Guest
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
Frank
Guest
|
 Posted: Sat Apr 21, 2007 9:55 pm Post subject: Re: Inkjet Ripoff? |
 |
|
~~NoMad~~ wrote:
but the key one is: Our panel preferred prints produced with third-party
inks over those produced with manufacturer’s own products.
With each manufacturer, third-party ink and paper combinations won more
top scores than prints produced with own-brand inks and papers. In the
case of Canon, none of the photo paper prints produced with its own ink
got a top score. With the Canon, Epson and HP printers, Cartridge World
received more top scores than using manufacturers’ ink and with Lexmark,
the same is true of the ink sold by InkTecShop.
The highest score for a paper and ink is shared by three different
combinations, on three different printers, all of which scored 8.29/10
overall: the Canon printer using InkTecShop ink on Kodak paper, the HP
machine printing on HP paper with Cartridge World ink and the Lexmark
device using InkTecShop ink on Staples paper."
Read'em and weep meashershithead!
Frank |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Frank
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 12:12 am Post subject: Re: Inkjet Ripoff? |
|
|
ray wrote:
| Quote: | On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 10:01:39 -0600, "~~NoMad~~"
understanding.engine@gmail.com> wrote:
Finally a real test of aftermarket ink:
http://www.trustedreviews.com/printers/review/2007/04/21/The-Inkjet-Investigation/p1
Enjoy!
NM
Too bad they didn't test some of the inks popular in the US. They are
a bit premature on publishing results before they did the fade test.
Some testing I have done show while color match can be fine, photo
prints fade about 20 times faster with aftermarket ink as compared to
Canon. Accelerated life testing for UV can be done in a few hours
under controlled and repeatable conditions. Sticking them in a window
for 6 months is not very scientific
|
Well I've used after market inks/carts for over a decade and I don't see
any of my prints fading.
So the oem'ers put enough chemicals in their over priced inks so that
they will last presumably for centuries.
If that is what you're looking for...then pay for it. I don't care.
But think about, we're talking digital prints...just re-print another one!
Frank |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ray
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 12:12 am Post subject: Re: Inkjet Ripoff? |
|
|
On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 10:01:39 -0600, "~~NoMad~~"
<understanding.engine@gmail.com> wrote:
Too bad they didn't test some of the inks popular in the US. They are
a bit premature on publishing results before they did the fade test.
Some testing I have done show while color match can be fine, photo
prints fade about 20 times faster with aftermarket ink as compared to
Canon. Accelerated life testing for UV can be done in a few hours
under controlled and repeatable conditions. Sticking them in a window
for 6 months is not very scientific |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nicolaas Hawkins
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 12:12 am Post subject: Re: Inkjet Ripoff? |
|
|
On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 14:25:19 -0700, ray <spammers@do.not.reply.com> wrote
in <news:f10l23d7uh9jmalbebbeieqab6seedluct@4ax.com>:
| Quote: | On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 10:01:39 -0600, "~~NoMad~~"
understanding.engine@gmail.com> wrote:
Finally a real test of aftermarket ink:
http://www.trustedreviews.com/printers/review/2007/04/21/The-Inkjet-Investigation/p1
Enjoy!
NM
Too bad they didn't test some of the inks popular in the US. They are
a bit premature on publishing results before they did the fade test.
Some testing I have done show while color match can be fine, photo
prints fade about 20 times faster with aftermarket ink as compared to
Canon. Accelerated life testing for UV can be done in a few hours
under controlled and repeatable conditions. Sticking them in a window
for 6 months is not very scientific
|
but is far closer to real life conditions and therefore the results will
be more realistic than a "pressure cooker" simulation.
--
Regards,
Nicolaas.
2007 Pricelessware CD now available. 600Mb of the best of the best in
Freeware. E-Mail me for details.
.... Fourteen is WAY too old to put them up for adoption! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
Dan G
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 12:12 am Post subject: Re: Inkjet Ripoff? |
|
|
"ray" <spammers@do.not.reply.com> wrote in message
news:f10l23d7uh9jmalbebbeieqab6seedluct@4ax.com...
| Quote: | Too bad they didn't test some of the inks popular in the US. They are
a bit premature on publishing results before they did the fade test.
Some testing I have done show while color match can be fine, photo
prints fade about 20 times faster with aftermarket ink as compared to
Canon. Accelerated life testing for UV can be done in a few hours
under controlled and repeatable conditions. Sticking them in a window
for 6 months is not very scientific
|
I did some of my own fade tests on my Canon printers, without even using
direct sunlight, and the ink/paper combination that faded the fastest was
Canon ink on Canon paper. Best result was with Formulabs ink on Office
Depot Pro Photo paper. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
measekite
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 5:33 am Post subject: Re: Inkjet Ripoff? |
|
|
ray wrote:
| Quote: | On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 10:01:39 -0600, "~~NoMad~~"
understanding.engine@gmail.com> wrote:
Finally a real test of aftermarket ink:
http://www.trustedreviews.com/printers/review/2007/04/21/The-Inkjet-Investigation/p1
Enjoy!
NM
Too bad they didn't test some of the inks popular in the US. They are
a bit premature on publishing results before they did the fade test.
Some testing I have done show while color match can be fine, photo
prints fade about 20 times faster with aftermarket ink as compared to
Canon. Accelerated life testing for UV can be done in a few hours
under controlled and repeatable conditions. Sticking them in a window
for 6 months is not very scientific
|
The problem with them is that they did not evaluate photographs but
based their evaluations on looking at subjective snapshots and birthday
type photos on glossy paper and totally left out fine art photography
and matte papers.
Basically, OEM ink produces only a little better on OEM paper than on
good major brand paper. Now Epson is not an OEM paper on a Canon
printer and Canon paper is not an OEM paper on an Epson printer. And
Kodak paper printed on a Canon printer is very poor.
As for fading, the generics have not contest with the OEM ink on a high
quality paper. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
measekite
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 5:36 am Post subject: Re: Inkjet Ripoff? |
|
|
Dan G wrote:
| Quote: | "ray" <spammers@do.not.reply.com> wrote in message
news:f10l23d7uh9jmalbebbeieqab6seedluct@4ax.com...
Too bad they didn't test some of the inks popular in the US. They are
a bit premature on publishing results before they did the fade test.
Some testing I have done show while color match can be fine, photo
prints fade about 20 times faster with aftermarket ink as compared to
Canon. Accelerated life testing for UV can be done in a few hours
under controlled and repeatable conditions. Sticking them in a window
for 6 months is not very scientific
I did some of my own fade tests on my Canon printers, without even using
direct sunlight, and the ink/paper combination that faded the fastest was
Canon ink on Canon paper. Best result was with Formulabs ink on Office
Depot Pro Photo paper.
|
That statement is not very accurate for I have prints on my desk under
an Eastern facing window that (printing using Canon ink and Canon,
Costco Ilford and Epson Glossy and Epson matte and also Ilford Gallerie
Classic Pearl) for over 2 years that show no sign of fading. Office
Depot paper, while satisfactory, did not produce as higher a quality
result and was more expensive then Costco paper even when on sale.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Frank
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 5:53 am Post subject: Re: Inkjet Ripoff? |
|
|
Dan G wrote:
| Quote: | "ray" <spammers@do.not.reply.com> wrote in message
news:f10l23d7uh9jmalbebbeieqab6seedluct@4ax.com...
Too bad they didn't test some of the inks popular in the US. They are
a bit premature on publishing results before they did the fade test.
Some testing I have done show while color match can be fine, photo
prints fade about 20 times faster with aftermarket ink as compared to
Canon. Accelerated life testing for UV can be done in a few hours
under controlled and repeatable conditions. Sticking them in a window
for 6 months is not very scientific
I did some of my own fade tests on my Canon printers, without even using
direct sunlight, and the ink/paper combination that faded the fastest was
Canon ink on Canon paper. Best result was with Formulabs ink on Office
Depot Pro Photo paper.
|
Yeah and I've had some very good, very high quality results with Staples
photo paper.
At least this article serves notice that excellent results can be
obtained with some aftermarket inks.
Damned if I'll ever go back to the overpriced oem inks as there is
qualified proof that I don't have to!
You hear that meashershithead?
(smirk)
Frank |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nicolaas Hawkins
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 7:21 am Post subject: Re: Inkjet Ripoff? |
|
|
On Sun, 22 Apr 2007 00:36:58 GMT, measekite <inkystinky@oem.com> wrote in
<news:K6yWh.18096$Um6.527@newssvr12.news.prodigy.net>:
| Quote: | Dan G wrote:
"ray" <spammers@do.not.reply.com> wrote in message
news:f10l23d7uh9jmalbebbeieqab6seedluct@4ax.com...
Too bad they didn't test some of the inks popular in the US. They are
a bit premature on publishing results before they did the fade test.
Some testing I have done show while color match can be fine, photo
prints fade about 20 times faster with aftermarket ink as compared to
Canon. Accelerated life testing for UV can be done in a few hours
under controlled and repeatable conditions. Sticking them in a window
for 6 months is not very scientific
I did some of my own fade tests on my Canon printers, without even using
direct sunlight, and the ink/paper combination that faded the fastest was
Canon ink on Canon paper. Best result was with Formulabs ink on Office
Depot Pro Photo paper.
That statement is not very accurate for I have prints on my desk under
an Eastern facing window that (printing using Canon ink and Canon,
Costco Ilford and Epson Glossy and Epson matte and also Ilford Gallerie
Classic Pearl) for over 2 years that show no sign of fading. Office
Depot paper, while satisfactory, did not produce as higher a quality
result and was more expensive then Costco paper even when on sale.
|
On the contrary, Dan G's statement is not one whit less 'accurate'
(whatever that means in this context) than yours. What is it, precisely,
that causes you to imagine his statement is 'not very accurate' and your
statement is any more so - apart, that is, from your excessively high
subjective opinion of yourself? FACTS, please.
--
Regards,
Nicolaas.
2007 Pricelessware CD now available. 600Mb of the best of the best in
Freeware. E-Mail me for details.
.... When you argue with a fool, the fool you are arguing with is doing the
same. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Watched Topics
Search
Register
Log in to check your private messages
Profile
Log in
Memberlist
Usergroups