dpullum Loc: Tampa Florida

I have been using a Epson NX-305 AND A Continuous Ink system from Super to Buy via E-Bay for 10 months. The printing results are great. Still on the original load of ink and I print a lot of 8x10 photos. Best Buy this week has the NX420on sale for $60 and the CIS costs $62 so for less than $150 you get a system. There are other systems for other printers. (No, not employed or rewarded by either company)

I have had no real problems, my system works great.

THE ADVANTAGE: YOU DO NOT HAVE TO BUY THE COSTLY CARTS THAT DO NOT LAST LONG!!!

What have you experienced? Your thoughts welcome. Don

notnoBuddha

Actually - I can't see paying for either the ink nor the equipment. I understand that others may need or want to do this, but I see very little advantage to myself. I do have a Canon printer that I use rarely for color prints. I have a couple of commercial printers that I use, they have excellent turn around time and have been very helpful as to any special requests.

photocat Loc: Atlanta, Ga

For someone who rarely prints it is probably more cost effective to have them printed commerically.

If one enjoys the printing process, (which I do) then it is something to consider.

At one time I considered a CIS system, but I take printing in fits and starts. Right now I am using an Epson 3800 and an HP 9180, neither of which is on a CIS system. Basically not enough room.

notnoBuddha

photocat-"For someone who rarely prints it is probably more cost effective to have them printed commerically.

......... Right now I am using an Epson 3800 and an HP 9180, neither of which is on a CIS system. Basically not enough room."

Can you tell I diffference in your printers? A couple of my books by the pros highly recommends and wrote that most pros use Epson printers - anything to this? Thanks

photocat Loc: Atlanta, Ga

Yes, especially for black and white images.

Am fond of the HP and it does a vry nice job, but it is marginal for b&w. Color difficult to tell.

Epson needs some competition and many of us hoped that the 9180 was a beginning, but HP seems to have lost interest in printers.

When i first got the 9180 it was basically to make digital negatives for alternative process printing and at the time it was the best for that purpose, amd of course this was before the 3800 was placed on the market.

I have made ICC profiles for both and for all papers I am using which of course takes out the quess work.

dpullum Loc: Tampa Florida

The loss of HP's interest in home photo-printers may be based on commercial - drug-store printers for photos as suggested by Photocat above. Perhaps because the mystique of Epson and the Office Depot prevalence of HP I like Epson; purely or impurely subjective.

When you consider how very good a "good" printer is, regardless of brand name, further refinement may well not be a good investment for HP or others. Considering what a fine job my "all in one" NX-305 does and what a low cost printers sell for, it is not profitable to do much more development. ALSO the profit is in INK !

I have an Epson 825 that I have never used. At this time in life $ are tight so that is why I am using the 4 color CIS rather than the 6 color 825 for which Ink is costly. At my age 75, any ink is archival and will last a life time : >)

I tend to print, stick on the wall, live with it and digest flaws, modify, and strive for just-so photo for submission to the TBCC, Tampabay Camera Club.

I started the forum subject as a heads-up for those who need to go econo. Along those econo lines, print paper by HP is often sold at 1/2 price by Office Depot and others retailers.

For those who print now and then there is a small autoprint program to keep their printer heads clean. see: http://www.inksupply.com under support/downloads. They sell CIS also
http://inksupply.helpserve.com/index.php?_m=downloads&_a=view

photocat Loc: Atlanta, Ga

What your doing makes sense, as the money to be made is in the inks.

anyone want to take a stab at the retail value of 1 gallon of ink might be?

My work falls in the catalog of fine art and although I am 74, my prints need to stand up long after I am gone as they are sold to be as archival as these days will allow.

Of course tradition silver gelatin prints have a very long life span if made to archival standards. With color of any kind, it is going to fade. Pure and simple. It will.

What can increase the life of the color print , is to use pigment inks,100% rag paper and be sure they are place under a window made from archival board and protected from UV light sources.

This is not to say that everyone needs to adhere to my workflow, just adding information that may be helpful.

Just another note, different papers from the same printer may not look the same.
I have several prints I show my students using HP photo papers (not inkjet) printed on an EPson 88+ (which was a very nice printer) do not look alike.

However, this same issue occurs with one hour photo places, photos will/can have a whole different temperature shift. It all depends on the operator and the control they may or may not employ while maintainlng the chemical line.

dpullum Loc: Tampa Florida

Thank you for your well reasoned, clear informative reply. Between this and the topic on PSP vs PS my time spent writing and reading is a good investment. Indeed at your professional level, history, yours, will live on beyond you. Also SELF and ethic and pride enter in to the mix with one who sell their prints. Mine, as is said in the death of the last Android,,, my memory shall fade like tear drops in the rain. I am reminded of a painting I did in 1962, good oils, good base, on linen fabric life 100++ that will out last me, unless it ends up in the dumpster or over painted if I become senile and some one says , you think that is a cow? !!!

Yes, printing is not always easy, I have to kick up the brightness before I print. Different programs, different paper, different ink and if judged by a photo club,,,, different light and color and intensity than at my home mounted on the wall !!! By the way PhotoCat, is there a "standard" judging set up for photos?? Bulb standard, watts, distance and all those specifications??? I have looked on the net and not found one. There should be a universal one.

The comments on fading/archival inks tickles the process/product development chemist in me. I was one for many years before going int env consulting. There are many UV blocks used in paints and varnishes,,, humm is there one or a overcoat that can be formulated,,, humm

photocat Loc: Atlanta, Ga

Judging is a tricky thing, let alone with lighting :)

When I have been a judge this was the workflow. We viewed applicates view projected slides. (slide can mean,film, digital, etc. as the software used by the folks transfered the files into a presentation form. So lighting became a mote point.

However, I am not aware of a universal standard. Most that i am aware of like to view outside for a final peak. But this may not always be available.
Basically with prints, regardless of analog or digital we tend to print for daylight, i.e. 4700-5500 K. This is always a juggling act as we don't know what type of light the image will be shown under.

Sometimes, I will ask the buyer so i can print to that lighting situation.

There is a company who makes color corrected light sources (who's name slips my mind at this moment). ONe can purchase bulbs at various K temperature. THey also have light standards of various types one can purchases. I have one in my workarea of the darkroom at the lab, and I have one that is clamped to my work desk here at home. I can them place the print under that light source to check the print to be sure it matches the K. temperature.

There are various sprays that can be applied which help with protect the images. For examples when I print on canvas I aways spray the final print , as it also helps avoid scratches, etc. Inkjet prints are easy to scratch; much more so than silver gelation.

We also have some types of brush on varnishes for alternative prints, which provide some protection, but many are used to return the dried print to a look that is similar to what it looks like wet. The wet look is always terrific, the dry down, (not so much)lol

You are very correct in stating "printing is not always easy". There is a lot more involved than merely just clicking the ok buttom on the printer menu. However, for the masses, it tends to be the way of the world.

WHen I discuss printing with my classes and show them how to set up a printer, etc. eyes glaze over and some comment :do i have to do this, this way". Of course it is an indivial decision one makes. What works for one person may not work for another, and certainly for me, as you suggest, my rep. as well as my background and training brings me to a method of working that some would rather not venture.

When i am not sure about how i want the finish an image, I will print it out quickly on lower end paper and stick it up on a bulletin board for viewing until I make up my mind.

Then it is shredded. Many times I have had students and friends say :on no, i will take that" and of course I can't have that happen.

It is one thing to sell an artist proof, (which the above is not) but not a quick and dirty test. Along with the fact that the artist proof is always id.

Get those brain cells cranking on those overcoats.

djfkeefe

I use a HP 8250 Photosmart Printer. Each color "tank" costs about $10 @ Staples, and holds 8 ml of ink.

On a per gallon basis, I calculate that the cost of ink to be $4731.80*

The message is: divest your gold, invest in HP.

djfkeefe

*Here's how I got the number

1 ml = 0.033814 ounces; 128 ounces/gal; 8 ml = .27051 ounces; $10/0.27051 = $36.97/ounce;
@ 128 ounces/gal, 1 gal of ink costs $4731.80.

photocat Loc: Atlanta, Ga

Well, at least you took the time to figure things out :)

However, it is $30,00. Shocking, but the money is in the ink, that is why printers go so cheaply.

djfkeefe

How did you get your number?

dpullum Loc: Tampa Florida

Refill ink for my CIS, 4 bottles 3.5 oz each, = 14oz and cost was $15. Escentually, $1/oz or $128/gallon. Or 2.7% of the cost running carts. So a CIS is a very good investment, depending on UV stability. UV is somewhat moot if the photo is in the home and not exposed to UV or behind UV glass.

photocat Loc: Atlanta, Ga

an engineer student of mine sent me some links a few years ago about how much an olymic swimming pool of ink would be worth, that was over 6 billion dollars, and it was in that information.

I am trying to find that link.

Other folks have run the numbers on liguid products with ink being at the top of the list, including the most expensive perfume and champagne available these days.

dpullum Loc: Tampa Florida

The national debt crisis is solved. Mid-East sends us oil and we send $ equivalent of Ink.
I have mentioned CIS to people and they give me an odd look of the why would you do that when the cart is only $10 or $30.

I still have 1/2 the ink that came with my CIS and print without concern, always 8x10. I purchased my CIS perhaps in September of 2010. I have 3.5 oz bottles of each color held in reserve for next year I guess.

I mounted and painted an 4'x 8' sheet of Urethane insulation to the wall and use it as a display for my prints and minimizes holes in wall.

I am going to put half of one of my prints in the sun and check it in a Florida UV week. unfortunately, I do not have a control from commercial printer.