Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (
More info?)
"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news
7L4e.2488$qD2.2305@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com...
>
>
> Stick Stickus wrote:
>
>>"Arthur Entlich" <artistic@telus.net> wrote in message
>>news:UYt4e.526$VF5.505@edtnps89...
>>
>>>A few weeks back, I spent several hours reading up on ink bronzing. This
>>>is when typically dye inks on glossy papers reflect what is often a
>>>dichroic color off the surface of the ink after it dries. It can occur
>>>with any color ink, but is often most noticeable on black ink, which
>>>often is made up of several color dyes mixed together. It is more
>>>noticeable on darker colors due to the contract between the dark
>>>background and the brighter reflective color.
>>>
>>>Anyway, HP has several research papers and patents on methods of reducing
>>>or removing this problem. The science is somewhat complex, and
>>>understanding the causes, measuring the phenomenon and developing methods
>>>for developing ink and paper surface formulations to control for it
>>>weren't simple.
>>>
>>>This says to me that indeed "all inks" aren't the same at all, and the
>>>processes involved are both time consuming and costly to develop.
>>>
>>>Sure, pretty much any company that makes colorants can make something
>>>approaching inkjet ink, but there are complexities to making good ink
>>>that works well in a specific printer, a specific climate, has good fade
>>>resistance to light, ozone, and other environmental factors, is accurate
>>>and repeatable in color, doesn't fall to a great deal of metamerism,
>>>bronzing, and so on.
>>>
>>>Art
>>>
>>>
>>>measekite wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Arthur Entlich wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>"Son" you really don't know what you are speaking of, about gasoline or
>>>>>about inks. In my neck of the woods, people like you are referred to
>>>>>(in polite circles) as "Sophomores" it's greek and it means "wise
>>>>>foolish" because you think you know a great deal more than you do.
>>>>>
>>>>>You are correct that gas is often refined at a centralized locale and
>>>>>that the companies use each others refineries and trucking, because it
>>>>>makes no sense at all to ship the gasoline hundreds of miles when their
>>>>>is a much closer refinery or distribution point. However, what makes
>>>>>gasoline unique and cost different amounts, other than some distilling
>>>>>properties, is additives. And additives are just that, they are added
>>>>>to the gasoline either in the tanker itself, at the refinery just as it
>>>>>is pumped, or sometimes even at the gas station.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Hooray! Perfectly said. >
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>And it is these additives that often do make a difference in
>>>>>performance. There are studies done by independent research facilities
>>>>>that prove all gasoline is not the same. Some additives improve
>>>>>combustion, or change flash point temperature, or reduce carbon build
>>>>>up.
>>>>>
>>>>>Yes, cars will run on pretty much any gasoline that comes close to the
>>>>>required octane rating for the compression ration of the cylinders, but
>>>>>that does not mean it will run efficiently and with the least wear.
>>>>>Just because you may be too oblivious to recognize when an engine runs
>>>>>well and when it doesn't, or if it gets superior gas mileage doesn't
>>>>>mean it doesn't do so.
>>>>>
>>>>>And, to a certain extent, the same holds for inks. If you, as I, had
>>>>>taken the time to read the patents surrounding inkjet ink formulations,
>>>>>and if you had any understanding of the complexities of the
>>>>>technologies involved, instead of b*tching about the $29 printer you
>>>>>got a year's use out of, you'd be absolutely fascinated by the marvel
>>>>>of a printer capable of such precision costing so little.
>>>>>
>>>>>I use 3rd party inks, and I voted against everything I could involving
>>>>>things Carly F. did at HP, but you are way off here.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>But I would like to give her a :-* .
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Art
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Mapanari wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>"Bob Headrick" <bobh@proaxis.com>
>>>>>>wrotenews:114pef3n8psai84@corp.supernews.com:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>"Mapanari" <whosthat@anonmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>news:Xns962AB5F2C2A0Amapi@216.168.3.64...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>The research I've done, and as a former purchasing manger/buyer,
>>>>>>>>leads
>>>>>>>>me to believe that almost all OEM ink comes from only a few places,
>>>>>>>>and
>>>>>>>>they sell the same bulk ink to online resellers; with the caveat
>>>>>>>>that
>>>>>>>>they can't say "Same as HP ink!" because that would screw their
>>>>>>>>sales
>>>>>>>>of bulk ink to HP and Canon et al.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>The formula and the ink is pretty basic.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Your research is faulty. Making an ink formulation that gives
>>>>>>>optimum lightfastness, black to color bleed, print quality, image
>>>>>>>quality,
>>>>>>>optical density, color balance and other parameters while still
>>>>>>>maintaining nozzle health is not something printer manufacturers just
>>>>>>>pick off the shelf. Printer companies invest heavily in ink
>>>>>>>chemistry
>>>>>>>and they typically own the intellectual property of given
>>>>>>>formulations. HP, Epson and Cannon have hundred of ink related
>>>>>>>patents.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>- Bob Headrick, not speaking for my employer HP
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>Right...and Exxon gas will put a tiger in your tank and BP gas will
>>>>>>help clean your valves and Texaco gas will give you better
>>>>>>milage....and yet....all the tanker trucks stop off at the same HESS
>>>>>>Refinary depot every morning from every station and refill their
>>>>>>tanker trucks with the same gas.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>And yet, millions of mooing morons will swear they get better gas
>>>>>>milage by using Exxon instead of that "no name gas on the corner,
>>>>>>which has water in it it and is cheap bad gas!", and pay an extra 30c
>>>>>>a gallon too!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Son, you really are a child of the 80's advertising mass media
>>>>>>consumption market.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Granted, there is a slight diference in some inks, but 90% of the
>>>>>>diference is in advertising, not physical properties.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>
>>As the Manager of Cartridge World (Oxford) UK. I can agree and accept what
>>is being said here. Cartridge World as a whole use one of the top research
>>and ink producers in the industry (OCP, Europe).
>>Like the oem producers, large amounts of money are spent in formulating
>>the ink we use for refilling and our own brand cartridges, to be as
>>identical as the oem product as possible. It is fair to say that due to
>>trading standards we are not allowed to say that our ink is the same as
>>the original, however, we can say that the technical make-up is no
>>different to the original.
>>At the same time we can also say and guarantee (unconditionally), that the
>>end user will find no difference between them. We also guarantee the end
>>users printer against any problems caused by using our inks, How many
>>other suppliers are that confident!
>>
>
> So if we get a clogged printhead you will just send us a brand new
> printer?
Please check the website for your reply, But basically, if proven to be
either the refilled cartridge or compatible at fault then, yes.
>
> Also, once is OK but if you repeatedly hawk your company on this NG that
> it is considered spamming.
>
It is not my intention to 'hawk' the company nor spam, but, rather show a
response from a producer and, also, an end user perspective.
>>Having used our ink both in refilling and prefills I have had no problems
>>with the various Canon printers I have owned. I can accept that some end
>>users have had problems that were caused by the ink they used, Generic ink
>>being the worse and certainly a no no!. It is also fair to say that
>>problems can be from other causes and should not be discounted.
>>At the end of the day end users will purchase what they feel comfortable
>>with, both in effect and cost.
>>
>>regards
>>Dave
>>
>>