Nozzle Test

Z

zakezuke

B.W. said:
Many thanks for all the help, I now understand a little how printer ink
cartridges work. Glad to report I removed my Canon 3e Bk to find it
completely dry. I repeat I did not receive any warning of it getting low at
all. I replaced it and now all appears to be working normally.

So am I right in thinking this had nothing really to do with using generic
inks or not?

The "only" way generic cartridges would be an issue is if the cartridge
does not include a prism. It is the prism that triggers the low ink
warning. However, this system has been known to be flacky and may not
be your root issue. It's easy enough to spot a plastic triangle at the
bottom of the reservoir.
 
B

Burt

zakezuke said:
The "only" way generic cartridges would be an issue is if the cartridge
does not include a prism. It is the prism that triggers the low ink
warning. However, this system has been known to be flacky and may not
be your root issue. It's easy enough to spot a plastic triangle at the
bottom of the reservoir.
Zakejuke - I noticed that when refilling the bci-3eBK carts the remaining
ink in the reservoir section seem to be more adherent to the inner surface
of the reservoir. Is is possible that this is blocking the light that would
shine through the prism when the reservoir first becomes empty?
 
F

frank

Ian said:
measekite wrote:





Who care's...It's just a Canon. Thier black ink is only as good as
standard generic black ink...any generic black ink. The OEM ink is not
as good as name brand black in...that's directly from Canon.
Ian, that frigging moron idiot meashershithead thinks that if the ink
supplier tell everyone what the exact chemical formulation of their is
it will make a difference in how they chose ink. This guy is a known
moron and couldn't tell the difference between beans and brains let
alone chemical formulations! You think knowing the chemical formulation
means anything to anyone? Think again...it makes no sense to anyone.
It's useless information.
Frank
 
Z

zakezuke

Burt said:
Zakejuke - I noticed that when refilling the bci-3eBK carts the remaining
ink in the reservoir section seem to be more adherent to the inner surface
of the reservoir. Is is possible that this is blocking the light that would
shine through the prism when the reservoir first becomes empty?

That is a likely theory, i've never noticed it personaly, but beads of
black could be serving to block the prism sensor. I read that in the
UK market that aftermarket cartridges are offered without prisms as the
prism sensor does violate canon's patent. I have no idea abou the
Australia market.
 
I

Irwin Peckinloomer

(e-mail address removed) says...
that may work if you total purge the crap out of the printer but it may
not if the printhead was damaged somehow. remember you did not have
this trouble before using the junk noname generic ink.
Measly. why don't you take the time to read his post: THE OEM CANON
BLACK INK IS CLOGGING, not the aftermarket cartridges he is using ... HE
HASN'T USED AFERMARKET BLACK YET!
 
A

Andrew McLean

What is in my ink is fully disclosed to my complete satisfaction on
their website - including ALL the special additives used. That my dear
claustrophobic friend is MUCH MUCH more than Canon has ever disclosed
about its OEM ink. You know NOTHING about Canon's ink because they
will tell you NOTHING, not even who makes it for them. So eat crow!
;-)

Go ahead, phone Canon. Ask them what's in their ink. Guess what, you
get no information because they will think you're a competitor.



That's a completely asinine comment! Canon itself will NEVER EVER
tell you on the cartridge box or website that they changed the formula
slightly or changed their supplier. This is information Canon has
deemed you do not need to know.

Go ahead, phone Canon. Ask them who makes their ink. Guess what, you
get no information because they will think you're a competitor.
Welcome to the real world of business!

We're not all dummies here that you can think you can preach your one
dimensional logic to. Your preaching is flawed!

-Taliesyn


Business people protect their trade. They may list ingredients but not
in what amounts or percentages. Forget inquiring about their suppliers.
Are you nuts! Only an idiot would ask such a question for which they
already know the answer they will receive. And you're absolutely right,
anyone who calls Canon and asks what exactly is in their ink and who
makes it for them will come back no wiser. These are trade secrets. Canon
won't tell in case generics come snooping, and most generics won't tell
in case Canon or other generics comes snooping. Those are the basic rules
of business. What ink do I use? I just told you, it's a secret. AMc
 
I

Ian

frank said:
Ian, that frigging moron idiot meashershithead thinks that if the ink
supplier tell everyone what the exact chemical formulation of their is
it will make a difference in how they chose ink. This guy is a known
moron and couldn't tell the difference between beans and brains let
alone chemical formulations! You think knowing the chemical formulation
means anything to anyone? Think again...it makes no sense to anyone.
It's useless information.
Frank

As I have said before...measekite has know impact on the original post.
B.W. realizes that measekite is an idiot, and has never posted directly
to her. In this thread allow she wasted 5 posting to spread lies. First
measekite has to learn to read, second to type and spell correctly. She
(measekite) appears very unprofessional and I don't blame B.W. for not
responding to her.

This post is proof positive on the impact measekite is having on the
forum. Her 1 statement creates several positive responses for
refilling. She is perceived as an idiot by almost everyone that enters
this forum.
 
M

measekite

Taliesyn said:
What is in my ink is fully disclosed to my complete satisfaction on
their website - including ALL the special additives used. That my dear
claustrophobic friend is MUCH MUCH more than Canon has ever disclosed
about its OEM ink. You know NOTHING about Canon's ink because they will
tell you NOTHING, not even who makes it for them. So eat crow! ;-)

Go ahead, phone Canon. Ask them what's in their ink. Guess what, you
get no information because they will think you're a competitor.




That's a completely asinine comment! Canon itself will NEVER EVER tell
you on the cartridge box or website that they changed the formula
slightly or changed their supplier. This is information Canon has deemed
you do not need to know.

Go ahead, phone Canon. Ask them who makes their ink. Guess what, you
get no information because they will think you're a competitor.
Welcome to the real world of business!

We're not all dummies here


I have corresponded with some of the smarter people. Some of these use
generic ink but they still agree that what I say is correct. They do
not know what they are buying and never know when their relabeler
changes suppliers and they also agree that generic ink fades more
rapidly and that the quality is not as good. But they say they print a
lot and are willing to accept the downside for the price savings. It is
the dummy who will not admit the truth and the dumb dummy who defends
the relabelers unless they have some interest in the relabeler community.
 
I

Ian

measekite said:
I have corresponded with some of the smarter people. Some of these use
generic ink but they still agree that what I say is correct. They do
not know what they are buying and never know when their relabeler
changes suppliers and they also agree that generic ink fades more
rapidly and that the quality is not as good. But they say they print a
lot and are willing to accept the downside for the price savings. It is
the dummy who will not admit the truth and the dumb dummy who defends
the relabelers unless they have some interest in the relabeler community.

Your a lier...no one has corresponded with you...I'll prove it.

If anyone has corresponded with measekite please post.
 
T

Taliesyn

measekite said:
I have corresponded with some of the smarter people.

That's impossible. You've been killfiled by 95% of the normal people and
100% of the "smarter people".
Some of these use
generic ink but they still agree that what I say is correct. They do
not know what they are buying and never know when their relabeler
changes suppliers and they also agree that generic ink fades more
rapidly and that the quality is not as good. But they say they print a
lot and are willing to accept the downside for the price savings. It is
the dummy who will not admit the truth and the dumb dummy who defends
the relabelers unless they have some interest in the relabeler community.

Once again you've avoided your own thread . . . You have not told me
what is in Canon ink and who makes it for them when they, ahem...
"label" it to read "Canon". When will you phone them and get told that
it's not your business what's in the ink or who makes it. We're still
waiting, Measekite. Go ahead, call Canon.

Actually, we know more about HobbiColors ink than we'll ever know what's
in Canon ink as HobbiColors lists the ingredients (not the actual
formula) on their website. Naturally, they run a business and cannot
divulge more than this, including who makes it for them. Personally, I
don't care who makes it, just like I don't know who makes Canon inks.

-Taliesyn
 
M

measekite

Taliesyn said:
That's impossible. You've been killfiled by 95% of the normal people and
100% of the "smarter people".


It is just the opposite except for one person. Guess Who :-D
 
B

Burt

Ian said:
Your a lier...no one has corresponded with you...I'll prove it.

If anyone has corresponded with measekite please post.
Ian - believe it or not, I actually corresponded with MK once! One of the
first posts of his that I read nearly two years ago had some errors in it
that I chose to email him about instead of risking embarrassing him
publicly. On this NG he inquired about aftermarket inks shortly after he
bought his ip4000 printer and I responded to his inquiry with my very
positive experience with MIS inks in my canon i960 printer. He also asked
about the Costco photo paper and I replied that I also had positive
experience with this product (which he now uses and touts as being 97% as
good as the Canon paper.)
 
I

Ian

Burt said:
Ian - believe it or not, I actually corresponded with MK once! One of the
first posts of his that I read nearly two years ago had some errors in it
that I chose to email him about instead of risking embarrassing him
publicly. On this NG he inquired about aftermarket inks shortly after he
bought his ip4000 printer and I responded to his inquiry with my very
positive experience with MIS inks in my canon i960 printer. He also asked
about the Costco photo paper and I replied that I also had positive
experience with this product (which he now uses and touts as being 97% as
good as the Canon paper.)

He said and I quote:

"I have corresponded with some of the smarter people."

I am still waiting.
 
T

Taliesyn

measekite said:
It is just the opposite except for one person. Guess Who :-D

I'm here to keep you honest. Let me rephrase that, as you've never
attempted to be honest, only something vaguely called your "truth."
George Costanza, on Seinfeld, once said: "It's not a lie, if you believe
it". But you seem to have missed the joke. :)

I'm here as your counterpoint, to give the other side of your "truth."

-Taliesyn
 
Z

zakezuke

measekite said:
I have corresponded with some of the smarter people. Some of these use
generic ink but they still agree that what I say is correct. They do
not know what they are buying and never know when their relabeler
changes suppliers and they also agree that generic ink fades more
rapidly and that the quality is not as good.

If you would stick to this basis thesis, no one would have a problem
with you. Most bulk ink resellers do not disclose what they sell.
This is true enough. If a reseller were to change suppliers, in many
cases i'm sure the consumer is the last to know but thankfully there is
always measekite who will rant for months in the unlikely event someone
does. And of all the bulk aftermarket inks i've seen, they do fade
more quickly than OEM. There may be some others which don't, but i've
not met or used them.

The issue with you sir is the fact that you employ emotional
manipluation to all users who have had a positive experence with
aftermarket ink, accepting the short commings. You rant and rave like
a ravid loon telling people who buy aftermarket products are stupid
dolts which will result in the total loss of their printer. Anytime
someone has a printer issue, even if it's clearly a software/hardware
issue, you assume it's the fault of aftermarket ink.

If you were to still to a reasonable explanation why someone should buy
OEM, this would be spiffy keen.
But they say they print a
lot and are willing to accept the downside for the price savings. It is
the dummy who will not admit the truth and the dumb dummy who defends
the relabelers unless they have some interest in the relabeler community.

This is where you start to lose credability. You see, there isn't a
grand conspiracy. There isn't really a community. The people who use
these products are not dummies. They are not "defending" the providers
of aftermarket ink or doing much of anything but sharing their
experence with a specific product. The only FACTS we can document are
that of aftermarket's color vs OEM, and measure how fast it fades,
which are reasonable things to consider.

You started this post in such a reasonable way, and it's so sad that
you had to fall back on OCD type logic. People who make the choice to
use aftermarket ink are not fools, or stupid, but those who simply
don't wish to pay OEM prices, and are willing to manualy refill and
risk a few drops of ink to do it, or buy prefilled aftermarket tanks.
And you know, for someone printing yahoo maps, they are not going to
want the whole of 2 years of lightfastness on plain paper when they
only need hardcopy for a day.
 
M

measekite

Taliesyn said:
I'm here to keep you honest. Let me rephrase that, as you've never
attempted to be honest, only something vaguely called your "truth."
George Costanza, on Seinfeld, once said: "It's not a lie, if you
believe it". But you seem to have missed the joke. :)

I'm here as your counterpoint, to give the other side of your "truth."


boy it sounds like its from da udder side of da uneverse
 
T

TJ

measekite said:
boy it sounds like its from da udder side of da uneverse

As one who has dealt with a cow or two in my time, I can tell you that
the "udder side" is the side where you want to go. That's where all the
milk comes from. Most folks don't want any part of the discharges from
other areas of the cow.

TJ
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Top