Real-world ink longevity test

[Richard Steinfeld]

DK wrote:
"...every single test I am aware

of has been pretty unequivocal: aftermarket inks fade faster,
sometimes a lot faster, than OEM from reputable vendors (Epson,
Canon). "

Amazingly, Kalvins, who made the Universal ink brand, made an
interesting claim. Of all ink sellers, this was one of those "one size
fits all" lines, whose black was dye based.

They offer their own paper. When their ink is used with their own paper,
they claim that the result is water-fast. On the phone, their support
person told me that they have a contract with the US Navy, supplying ink
and paper for use aboard ships due to the permanence of their images.
Now, how their stuff resists light exposure, I can't say.

I tried their black in an HP 940c. I only bought it because it was handy
and cheap, just to see if I could refill my own. Three sheets of their
special paper were included in the ink package as a promotion. I think
that if their claim weren't true, they would not give away the samples
this way (day-am -- I'm gonna have to try this before I run out of the
ink). Of note is that their paper is quite expensive -- another
surprise. I can't say that I'm crazy about the ink -- it's a bit runny,
and I would not buy their stuff again. The company has been purchased by
another outfit -- I forgot the name.

I thought I'd share this anecdote with y'all.

Richard

 

[TJ]

TJ, would you be kind enough to tell us what brand of ink you used
and/or who the seller was.

I'd really appreciate this. Thanks.

Richard

You'll be surprised. Well, maybe not if you've read my other posts over
the last few years. Unfortunately, I don't think it will help you much.
This particular ink came from a refill kit labeled with the name
"Filljet," describing itself as a "pigment-based ink kit" and "for
Hewlett-Packard, Lexmark, and Compaq" printers. That, of course, makes
it a semi-universal ink kit, and therefore not recommended for most
folks. I purchased the kit at a garage sale about five years ago for $5
US. The original kit contained three 25 ml bottles of black, one each of
the three colors, and some syringes and other accessories for refilling.
Even though it was labeled as pigment-based, only the black was
pigmented. The colors were dye-based. There also was another package
bundled with the original kit with three more 25 ml bottles of each
color ink. There was a website listed on the canister, but apparently
the company has since gone out of business.

I bought the kit on a whim when I saw it. It had a $10 price tag on it,
but when I offered $5 the owner took it. That was before I started
coming here, before I learned that not all refill ink was the same.
Still, the ink has performed well for me over the years. I just put the
last of it in with my last refill just last week. I have been more than
satisfied with the results of using this ink. I do not make my living
with my printer - I am a farmer. I print as a hobbyist, and for
farm-related office needs. Most of my prints are not meant to be
displayed for long periods. Much of what I print winds up in a file
folder somewhere.

I'll be needing some other ink the next time I refill. I have another $5
garage sale purchase on hand, an Inkube labeled for HP 600-series
printers. I purchased it years ago, when I was using an Deskjet 612C.
This kit has four 75 ml (or is it 100ml?) bottles of ink and I never did
use it with the 612C. I hate to just throw it away, so I'll probably
give it a try next time I need a refill. My printer is years out of
warranty, and I've already refilled the present set of carts about 10
times. If it messes up, I'll just pop in some new carts.

What do I have to lose?

TJ

 

[NotMe]

<[email protected]>
| >
| > | >I printed a copy of a one-page magazine article about my father for
his
| > | >funeral 13 months ago. The article included both text and a color
photo.
| > | >I used an HP PSC 2110 printer, Kodak Premium Picture Paper, and HP
ink
| > | >cartridges that I had refilled numerous times with aftermarket ink.
| > | >Since the funeral, the print has been hanging on our living room
wall,
| > | >framed in a dollar store frame and behind glass. While it is a bright
| > | >room, the spot where the print hangs does not receive direct sunlight
at
| > | >any time.
| > | >
| > | >So far, there has been no discernible fading whatsoever. The print
looks
| > | >as good to me today as it did the day I printed it. I fully expect it
to
| > | >look good for years to come.
| > | >
| > | >Accelerated tests of the type done by many labs and/or magazines
would
| > | >have you believe that aftermarket ink starts fading practically
before
| > | >it finishes drying. Nothing could be further from the truth. With
just a
| > | >moderate amount of care, aftermarket ink can last a good, long, time.
| > | >With poor care, even OEM ink will fade quickly.
| > |
| > | Of course it is OK after a year - it is under glass! Not that there is
| > | anything wrong with refilling but thus far every single test I am
aware
| > | of has been pretty unequivocal: aftermarket inks fade faster,
| > | sometimes a lot faster, than OEM from reputable vendors (Epson,
| > | Canon).
| >
| > I would question the test. Recall that the tobacco companies published
| > studies out the kazoo that smoking was not harmful.
| > They even had physicians offering personal endorsements.
| >
| > FWIW even hand painted oils deteriorate, the rate depends on the more on
the
| > environment and care than on the materials used.
|
| If its your livelihood, and you are selling your work- buy original
| ink cartridges (unless you are sure you are doing the right thing
| with reliable ink, of course)
|
| Otherwise for those of us who print as a hobby- Screw the printer
| companies- ask some of us who feel the ink is reliable for a
| recommendation on where to buy.

My point was that the selection of materials is not as critical to the
longevity of the work product as the care and feeding of the work itself
after it is rendered into hard copy.

Even newsprint, if properly mounted will last far beyond archival paper
where the newsprint is properly protected and the archival prints are not.

We have clients with archival quality prints that have not employed proper
mounting techniques and we have clients with 'proof' quality prints that
have employed proper mounting techniques.

Our unscientific observations have shown that those with the proof quality
and proper techniques have out lasted the archival quality prints without
the proper techniques.

We maintain offsite storage of all our digital files. If something happens
(think Katrina) to our clients or our studio we have the full capacity to
replace the work product.

 

[NotMe]

|
|
| Michael Johnson wrote:
| > TJ wrote:
| >> I printed a copy of a one-page magazine article about my father for
| >> his funeral 13 months ago. The article included both text and a color
| >> photo. I used an HP PSC 2110 printer, Kodak Premium Picture Paper,
| >> and HP ink cartridges that I had refilled numerous times with
| >> aftermarket ink. Since the funeral, the print has been hanging on our
| >> living room wall, framed in a dollar store frame and behind glass.
| >> While it is a bright room, the spot where the print hangs does not
| >> receive direct sunlight at any time.
| >>
| >> So far, there has been no discernible fading whatsoever. The print
| >> looks as good to me today as it did the day I printed it. I fully
| >> expect it to look good for years to come.
| >>
| >> Accelerated tests of the type done by many labs and/or magazines
| >> would have you believe that aftermarket ink starts fading practically
| >> before it finishes drying. Nothing could be further from the truth.
| >> With just a moderate amount of care, aftermarket ink can last a good,
| >> long, time. With poor care, even OEM ink will fade quickly.
| >
| > We have hundreds upon hundreds of photos printed with after market ink
| > and they ALL look as good as the day they were printed. Based on my
| > personal experience, any difference that exists between OEM and after
| > market ink used in Canon printers is inconsequential to the average
user.
|
| That is not true.

And you know this how?

 

[Michael Johnson]

|
|
| Michael Johnson wrote:
| > TJ wrote:
| >> I printed a copy of a one-page magazine article about my father for
| >> his funeral 13 months ago. The article included both text and a color
| >> photo. I used an HP PSC 2110 printer, Kodak Premium Picture Paper,
| >> and HP ink cartridges that I had refilled numerous times with
| >> aftermarket ink. Since the funeral, the print has been hanging on our
| >> living room wall, framed in a dollar store frame and behind glass.
| >> While it is a bright room, the spot where the print hangs does not
| >> receive direct sunlight at any time.
| >>
| >> So far, there has been no discernible fading whatsoever. The print
| >> looks as good to me today as it did the day I printed it. I fully
| >> expect it to look good for years to come.
| >>
| >> Accelerated tests of the type done by many labs and/or magazines
| >> would have you believe that aftermarket ink starts fading practically
| >> before it finishes drying. Nothing could be further from the truth.
| >> With just a moderate amount of care, aftermarket ink can last a good,
| >> long, time. With poor care, even OEM ink will fade quickly.
| >
| > We have hundreds upon hundreds of photos printed with after market ink
| > and they ALL look as good as the day they were printed. Based on my
| > personal experience, any difference that exists between OEM and after
| > market ink used in Canon printers is inconsequential to the average
user.
|
| That is not true.

And you know this how?

He knows I speak the truth but is too stubborn to admit it. People that
buy OEM ink insure that I will pay a very low price for my next printer.
He does serve a useful purpose because I like inexpensive inkjet
printers.

 

[Michael Johnson]

I just responded on a different post the price difference-

$2.17 in ink for a borderless 8.5x11 vs .17¢.

How is that for saving? (using a continuous ink system)

Refillers save even more than I do.

 

[Michael Johnson]

Not true when it comes to nifty-stuff.com user tests.
http://www.nifty-stuff.com/docs/inkjet-fading.php
http://www.nifty-stuff.com/docs/inkjet-fading1.php

I didn't say all tests were bad just most of them. Any test of anything
printed in a magazine is subject to scrutiny, IMO.

Totally agree. That's why I refill, too. But the fact remains - for some
reason imitators thus far can never get it right.

I can only go on what my own personal experience is with after market
ink that I actually use. I have never had a print that faded. Maybe I
would if I kept them in a different environment. Also, any prints I
make have a digital copy on hard drive and DVD backups which never
degrade. Fading just isn't an issue for me and I am probably no
different than 95% of the population. The touting of longevity is more
for marketing bragging rights than real world usefulness for the at home
inkjet printer user, IMO.

 

[measekite]

| >I printed a copy of a one-page magazine article about my father for his
| >funeral 13 months ago. The article included both text and a color photo.
| >I used an HP PSC 2110 printer, Kodak Premium Picture Paper, and HP ink
| >cartridges that I had refilled numerous times with aftermarket ink.
| >Since the funeral, the print has been hanging on our living room wall,
| >framed in a dollar store frame and behind glass. While it is a bright
| >room, the spot where the print hangs does not receive direct sunlight at
| >any time.
| >
| >So far, there has been no discernible fading whatsoever. The print looks
| >as good to me today as it did the day I printed it. I fully expect it to
| >look good for years to come.
| >
| >Accelerated tests of the type done by many labs and/or magazines would
| >have you believe that aftermarket ink starts fading practically before
| >it finishes drying. Nothing could be further from the truth. With just a
| >moderate amount of care, aftermarket ink can last a good, long, time.
| >With poor care, even OEM ink will fade quickly.
|
| Of course it is OK after a year - it is under glass! Not that there is
| anything wrong with refilling but thus far every single test I am aware
| of has been pretty unequivocal: aftermarket inks fade faster,
| sometimes a lot faster, than OEM from reputable vendors (Epson,
| Canon).

I would question the test. Recall that the tobacco companies published
studies out the kazoo that smoking was not harmful.
They even had physicians offering personal endorsements.

FWIW even hand painted oils deteriorate, the rate depends on the more on the
environment and care than on the materials used.

Sounds like you are concerned that aftermarket ink will give you cancer
if you smoke it.

 

[measekite]

[email protected] wrote:

On Aug 19, 11:18 pm, "NotMe" &lt;[email protected]&gt; wrote:






If its your livelyhood, and you are selling your work- buy original ink cartridges (unless you are sure you are doing the right thing with reliable ink, of course)

There is no reliable ink other than OEM.&nbsp; You never know because they do not tell you and when they change suppliers you do not know.


Otherwise for those of us who print as a hobby- Screw the printer companies- ask some of us who feel the ink is reliable for a recommendation on where to buy. And if someone tells you you will loose your warranty on your brand new $69 printer-


And what about those who print real photographs that are 11x14 and up where the printer costs between $500 and $2500.


ask him to buy the next set of cartridges at $80 or ask him if he doesnt mind if you throw the printer in his back yard, (as the land fill sites are too full of cartridges and printers) when it is out of ink so you can buy a new one at $69 and save $20. Printers are not like cell phones- you have a choice!


I chose my phone and chose my carrier.


Please vote for a choice!

 

[measekite]

DK wrote:

snip

The basic result in all tests
has been very consistent: third party inks, even the better ones like
Image Specialists (e.g., apparently = MIS and Fromulabs),
suck in comparison to OEM when it comes to fade resistance.

That is correct. Those who say otherwise either cannot see or their
photos are so bad to begin with they cannot tell the difference.

Mind you, I refill. If anything, I am *very* surprised why big OEM
companies so consistently come ahead of less known. Obviously,
Canon does not make its inks...

But they do. They design, engineer, formulate and monitor quality of
all ink that bears their name and they make sure it is produced to their
specifications. They have QA people making sure of this.

 

[measekite]

I didn't say all tests were bad just most of them. Any test of
anything printed in a magazine is subject to scrutiny, IMO.


I can only go on what my own personal experience is with after market
ink that I actually use. I have never had a print that faded. Maybe
I would if I kept them in a different environment. Also, any prints I
make have a digital copy on hard drive and DVD backups which never
degrade.

It is very obvious that you are totally misinformed. DVD, CD, and any
other electronic media degrades over time. The dye on this media does
degrade and every 5 to 10 years it is pudent to recopy and thing that
has worth. Maybe you say this because nothing you have has any worth.
I do not know. But do not post this misinformation. Do some research
on Google and you will find these facts out.

 

[Barry Watzman]

One of the problems with "aftermarket inks" is that you can't make any
statements about them. There are so many of them, and they are so
different (from as good as (perhaps in a few cases even better than) OEM
to pure junk) that no meaningful statement applies to all of them. So
you can't really say something like "tests ... would have you believe
that aftermarket ink starts fading practically before it finishes
drying. Nothing could be further from the truth." That may be a true
statement for the particular aftermarket ink that you used, but it's
definitely not true of all aftermarket inks. And therein likes one of
the problems: You don't know what you are getting or what it's
characteristics are.

 

[Frank]

We have hundreds upon hundreds of photos printed with after market ink
and they ALL look as good as the day they were printed. Based on my
personal experience, any difference that exists between OEM and after
market ink used in Canon printers is inconsequential to the average user.

This is all true.
Frank

 

[Frank]

measekite wrote:

That is not true.

 

[Frank]

|
|
| Michael Johnson wrote:
| > TJ wrote:
| >> I printed a copy of a one-page magazine article about my father for
| >> his funeral 13 months ago. The article included both text and a color
| >> photo. I used an HP PSC 2110 printer, Kodak Premium Picture Paper,
| >> and HP ink cartridges that I had refilled numerous times with
| >> aftermarket ink. Since the funeral, the print has been hanging on our
| >> living room wall, framed in a dollar store frame and behind glass.
| >> While it is a bright room, the spot where the print hangs does not
| >> receive direct sunlight at any time.
| >>
| >> So far, there has been no discernible fading whatsoever. The print
| >> looks as good to me today as it did the day I printed it. I fully
| >> expect it to look good for years to come.
| >>
| >> Accelerated tests of the type done by many labs and/or magazines
| >> would have you believe that aftermarket ink starts fading practically
| >> before it finishes drying. Nothing could be further from the truth.
| >> With just a moderate amount of care, aftermarket ink can last a good,
| >> long, time. With poor care, even OEM ink will fade quickly.
| >
| > We have hundreds upon hundreds of photos printed with after market ink
| > and they ALL look as good as the day they were printed. Based on my
| > personal experience, any difference that exists between OEM and after
| > market ink used in Canon printers is inconsequential to the average
user.
|
| That is not true.

And you know this how?

hehehe...his mummy told him...lol.
Frank

 

[Frank]

measekite wrote:

You do not understand.

No, it's you who don't understand.
Get help now. You're one sick moron.
You are the only idiot in the world who thinks it takes a genius to
formulate printer ink...lol.
Frank

 

[Frank]

measekite wrote:

---beyond stupid remarks deleted--------

Frank

 

[Frank]

It is very obvious that you are totally misinformed.

 

[Frank]

Would you use that junk if you were a professional photographer and sold
your prints?

 

[Burt]

One of the problems with "aftermarket inks" is that you can't make any
statements about them. There are so many of them, and they are so
different (from as good as (perhaps in a few cases even better than) OEM
to pure junk) that no meaningful statement applies to all of them. So you
can't really say something like "tests ... would have you believe that
aftermarket ink starts fading practically before it finishes drying.
Nothing could be further from the truth." That may be a true statement
for the particular aftermarket ink that you used, but it's definitely not
true of all aftermarket inks. And therein likes one of the problems: You
don't know what you are getting or what it's characteristics are.

(snip)

Barry - There are some vendors who identify the manufacturer of at lease one
of the inks they sell. Two that I know of are Alotofthings
(Sensient-Formulabs ink) and Precision Color (Image Specialist ink). On one
occasion Formulabs did change the formulation of their magenta inks for
Canon printers. When customers noticed a color shift and contacted
Alotofthings they immediately and proactively replaced the magenta ink for
all their customers who had unknowingly bought the changed formula.

I have used MIS inks for Canon printers (reputed to be Image Specialist
inks) for four years and through several orders have had no discernable
difference in color response. The same is true with friends who use
Formulabs inks from Alotofthings. Their formulations are very stable and
dependable.