Inkjet ink "more expensive than vintage champagne"

[No-one]

http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/54/31569.html

 

[Deathwalker]

I read that report. the canon i950 was a best buy for quality speed ease of
use and running costs.

 

[Smith]

Refill Refill Refill ;-)))

 

[John Houghton]

Is there really any point in comparing ink to champagne? They are
different products for different purposes. So what if the IJ ink is
ten times more expensive than champagne?

Fair point. A more relevant comparison is with the price of bulk ink. The
Which report gives an example of the cost of ink in a cartridge as £1.70 per
ml. I use a top quality ink in my CIS that costs £40 for 500ml, which works
out at £0.08 per ml, i.e. a factor of 21 times cheaper. And my 1290 has not
clogged once since I installed the CIS over a year ago.

John

 

[Wayne]

http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/54/31569.html

It reminds me Canon's move with replacing the BCI-3* tanks with
BCI-3e* ones which contain less ink and cost more.

wayne

 

[Deathwalker]

don p is ridiculously expensive. Yet coloured pigmented water costs more.

 

[Taliesyn]

don p is ridiculously expensive. Yet coloured pigmented water costs more.

Frankly, I'm surprised some of the more expensive cartridges aren't
"served" in crystal. My Lexmark, for example, with taxes comes to about
$75 Canadian. If I had a love for alcohol I would probably debate
whether the $75 might be better spent on a good bottle. $75 used to be
my week's salary at one time. Bit much for a "bottle" of ink, me thinks.

Compare:

1 (individual) colour cartridge for my Canon i850 sells for about $23 in
Canada (before taxes).

1 quality - 8 oz refill bottle (individual) colour sells for $17.50
and will refill about 25 cartridges! Cost per refill = 70 Canadian
cents (taxes and shipping costs not included).

-Taliesyn

 

[John Mills]

My suggestion...

Try using a fine champagne in your printer
and see what happens.

If you can get a good quality color photo
that has any longevity, use the champagne
instead of ink.


--
John Mills ( (e-mail address removed) )
*comp.periphs.printers FAQ Archive
http://www.cppfaq.com/


: don p is ridiculously expensive. Yet coloured pigmented water costs more.
:
: --
: Ian Lincoln Independent I.T Consultant
: : > Is there really any point in comparing ink to champagne? They are
: > different products for different purposes. So what if the IJ ink is
: > ten times more expensive than champagne?
: >
: > One can also twist it a little further and claim that IJ ink is a
: > thousand times more expensive than tap water. So does it mean
: > Canon/HP/Epson should sell their ink for 1 cent per bucket?
: >
: >
: : > > http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/54/31569.html
:
:

 

[Lee Babcock]

Frankly, I'm surprised some of the more expensive cartridges aren't
"served" in crystal. My Lexmark, for example, with taxes comes to about
$75 Canadian. If I had a love for alcohol I would probably debate
whether the $75 might be better spent on a good bottle. $75 used to be
my week's salary at one time. Bit much for a "bottle" of ink, me thinks.

Compare:

1 (individual) colour cartridge for my Canon i850 sells for about $23 in
Canada (before taxes).

1 quality - 8 oz refill bottle (individual) colour sells for $17.50
and will refill about 25 cartridges! Cost per refill = 70 Canadian
cents (taxes and shipping costs not included).

-Taliesyn

The cost of the cartridges are meaningless unless you look at the volume
of ink in them!
Regards
Lee

 

[Taliesyn]

The cost of the cartridges are meaningless unless you look at the volume
of ink in them!

For you ....

A new cartridge holds about 12 ml of ink - cost $23 Canadian.

250 ml bulk ink, enough to refill about 25 cartridges (because refills
only accept about 10 ml due to residual ink in cartridges), costs
$17.50, or about .70 cents per filling.

-Taliesyn

 

[Safetymom123]

Hanging a print in your kitchen is not a good test. Inks and papers weren't
designed for kitchens with all the fumes, etc. If you found something that
worked in the kitchen great.

 

[Trev]

Hi,
more to the point how do you by-pass the chip.

Trev

 

[Taliesyn]

Hanging a print in your kitchen is not a good test. Inks and papers weren't
designed for kitchens with all the fumes, etc. If you found something that
worked in the kitchen great.

I think it's a very good test... If you can't stand the heat, get out
of the kitchen! Call it an accelerated test. I can't recommend it.

-Taliesyn

 

[Taliesyn]

I know I hang all my fine photos in the kitchen. Not. If you consider that
a good testing ground good for you but that is not where the experts test.

And who am I, Emeril??

Whether or not experts test there is irrelevant. My tests show Canon
Photo Paper Pro to fade the fastest. My tests also show a paper bought
on eBay to be superior in contrast to Canon's best. Side-by-side tests
showed a "foggy film" on Canon's Photo Paper Pro and none on a paper
called Print Pro. I will now do accelerated longevity tests. By the
way, all Canon's longevity tests are accelerated too. They do not wait
75 years to see what the results are. And my kitchen is not bathed in
fumes... well, okay, my dad is into garlic sometimes. ;-)

-Taliesyn