Jim 100 Loc: Everett, Washington

I have an Epson photo printer. I have seen remanufactured ink cartridges at a great price at Clicklinks.com. Has anyone had any dealings with them or used remanufactured cartridges?

Designerfin Loc: Utah, USA

I tend to stick with manufacturer cartridges and have few problems, but some would say I'm a sucker. I would at least get recommendations on which 3rd party inks are best before using them - which you just asked for, didn't you? Never mind.

Festina Lente Loc: Florida & Missouri

Yes. They usually work OK, but every once in a while you get a dud that fails early.

The real issue is that the ink they use to reload the used cartridges is not the same quality archival high luminescence ink that the OEM uses. For most "disposable" color work there is money to be saved. But for anything important, photographic quality, or some archival life expectancy, stick with the OEM cartridges.

rebride

If you want your photos to last than stick with manufacturer inks.
Check out Wilhelm Imaging tests of some refill inks.
http://wilhelm-research.com/hp/NonGenuine-3rdPartyInkRefills.html

Festina Lente Loc: Florida & Missouri

That's an interesting reference. Thanks for posting it! :thumbup:

dpullum Loc: Tampa Florida

Not sure I believe the test results, we do not know who funds this serious sounding institute. Yeas ago, and with me every thing is years ago!, at Celanese Fibers R&D we did tests on UV life, many paint companies also do South Florida tests or use Xenon Lamp chambers for ozone and UV stability.

We have covered this topic at length before. There I pointed out that UV stabilizers are not expensive and are easily added to ink. There was also a China study testing their inks ... of course it demonstrated good UV life.

I have been using CIS inks with a Continuous Ink Supply and over the past three years have saved by calculation about $2000!! I do not have faded prints. Surly these inks will last a life time.... but consider the years Lente has left compared to me, OUCH!

Check the archives of UHH great wealth of information there....

morris cowley Loc: australia

Just to cloudy the water I have been using non major brands ink and believe (note I believe) I get good results. The ink I use is made in USA but packaged in China, so where do we go from here?

Cotondog Loc: Saskatchewan, Canada

Stick to your brand-name ink. Better quality, better results, fewer problems with your photos prints, and your print heads will last longer.

WNC Ralf Loc: Candler NC, in the mountains!

I use Cone Inks from Inkjetmall in refillable carts. Google John Cone. Have been using them in my 3880 for almost two years, excellent pigment inks used by a lot of professional printers. The Wilhelm site is an excellent site for info on longevity, they are the source, used them back in the 60's for research on papers when I had my B&W darkroom.

Rathyatra Loc: Southport, United Kingdom

I have used compatible inks for many years due to the exorbitant prices of using originals. And saved a great deal of money in the process.

I have only had a few problems and have then not used that particular supplier again.

Companies like Choice Stationery guarantee that if their inks cause your printer to malfunction then they will pay for a replacement.

The Magazine Computeractive has, over the years, tried out comparison tests of compatibles against originals and in many cases the compatibles printed out more pages/photos than the originals. Their tests also revealed no difference in colour quality.

I believe there is also little perceivable difference in permanence as I have pictures many years old and still good as new.
For most of us who do not plan to sell our pictures they will last long enough for all normal requirements - I will not be around in 100 years to see if the pictures are still of an acceptable quality and many photographers keep their photos on their computers or on external storage devices.

The difference in price can be quite large - sometimes as much as ten fold so I will continue, for my purposes, to use compatibles.

It is not an insignificant fact that the printer manufacturing companies spew out new models with machine gun regularity with some all-in-ones being sold for less than £30.00GBP. They obviously see themselves as making huge profits selling their own cartridges. I
f that was not true why then would they invest large sums of money to make it more and more difficult for alternative suppliers to duplicate their cartridges if the difference in quality was so large that the consumer would see the difference and go for heir higher priced products.
I do appreciate that those photographers who are professionals will have a different view and will be able to factor in the price difference of the original cartridges into the selling price of their finished photographs.

GHK Loc: The Vale of Eden

After lots of adventures I now stick with Epson. Some very cheap brands are not reliable in colour rendering; I suspect they change because the sellers swap suppliers as prices vary. From the mechanical point of view, random inks, even dearer ones, tend to block the jets far too easily.

GHK

jimmya Loc: Phoenix

Over a decade of printing digital photos I've had very bad luck with 3rd party ink so I stay with what works, Canon for my pixma printer. I don't recommend anyone's 3rd party ink mainly because of clogging.

rebride

Your prints don't fade because you live in the dark.
Have been told you only come out after the sun goes down.

Festina Lente Loc: Florida & Missouri

My experience mirrors yours.
I tend to favor Epson over Canon, but I have no real emperical reasons for that --
. . . . . . . . . except that Epson initially focused more on archival quality inks so I purchased Epson and have been happy with both their printers and inks.

Festina Lente Loc: Florida & Missouri

Only by living in the dark can you truly see the light. :roll: