Manual Focus: Why ink-jet printer ink isn't a rip-off

[lumix]

Re: Manual Focus: Why ink-jet printer ink isn't a rip-off

Hi Patrick, This whole discussion started out re the high price of OEM ink, so I thought why not bring the OEM high priced paper in to the same discussion. I strongly believe there are many paper manufacturers making equally good, if not better, paper for far less. I also believe that the choice of paper ink combination is very important to get the best from both. What that equates to is a matter of personal preference. How one person likes their image to look may not be the same for another. I worked for 17 years in the printing trade and do know the importance of good paper. But having said that, each type has its place or suitability for a particular job. A good example of that is news print. With out it we would be carrying our fish & chips home in a plastic container. No seriously I agree as paper gets better so will the finished print. I think paper plays a bigger part to that end than ink. Still don't like paying through the nose for it.

[Ian]

Re: Manual Focus: Why ink-jet printer ink isn't a rip-off

Hi Patrick, This whole discussion started out re the high price of OEM ink, so I thought why not bring the OEM high priced paper in to the same discussion. I strongly believe there are many paper manufacturers making equally good, if not better, paper for far less. I also believe that the choice of paper ink combination is very important to get the best from both. What that equates to is a matter of personal preference. How one person likes their image to look may not be the same for another. I worked for 17 years in the printing trade and do know the importance of good paper. But having said that, each type has its place or suitability for a particular job. A good example of that is news print. With out it we would be carrying our fish & chips home in a plastic container. No seriously I agree as paper gets better so will the finished print. I think paper plays a bigger part to that end than ink. Still don't like paying through the nose for it.

Hi Ron - I'm glad we sorted one thing out; wasn't sure if you realised it was me behind the article. I also initially thought you were referring to consumer papers rather than fine art. Epson doesn't pretend to be a big player in the fine art paper business, but I guess it feels it needs some presence and that there is a market. Also, list prices may not translate 100% into end-user prices. The one disappointing paper in the bunch I tested was the Somerset. It wasn't awful by any means, but it was't capable of deep dark coverage like the others. It's an old formulation and so it's showing its age.

What exactly is a 'cheap' fine art paper? PermaJet, da Vinci and FotoSpeed all aim to undercut the Hahnemuhles and Cuthbert Mills established lines, but I wouldn't call them cheap in terms of quality.

There is a great deal more variability in consumer papers - although interestingly enough, I noticed that the truly dreadful Tesco Premium Glossy was absent from the shelves this evening when I did the weekly shop . DSG (Dixons/Currys/PC World) own brand PC Line photo paper used to be terrible too, but my information is that it has resourced its paper and it's now much-improved.

Ian

[Ian]

Re: Manual Focus: Why ink-jet printer ink isn't a rip-off

One or two of my favourite papers incidentally are Fuji Hunt satin, Permajet Fibre Base (same or very very similar paper to Da Vinci fibre) I was mail shot today from a company selling yet another version of this paper "Innova" and they mention in the bumf, Danny Chau who is responsible for Da Vinci paper.
Do they have permission or are they out of line I ask myself? Comment Ian, as he is a friend.

Patrick

Interesting - I will pass on your observation to Danny. He's now back in Hong Kong, his birthplace. He has spent more than half his life in the UK but he's now permanently based in HK, though his brother, Ted, is running things in the UK.

Ian

[lumix]

Re: Manual Focus: Why ink-jet printer ink isn't a rip-off

DSG (Dixons/Currys/PC World) own brand PC Line photo paper used to be terrible too, but my information is that it has resourced its paper and it's now much-improved.


Now there you go, if I'd been asked what PC worlds paper was like I would have said save your money buy something else. Having tried it I would never have thought it worth trying again. First impressions are the ones that last the longest.

[JSR]

Re: Manual Focus: Why ink-jet printer ink isn't a rip-off

How was PC Pro HP-biased?

I noticed it first when they did a printer review a few months back and got entirely different results for the Epson R1800 than they'd had on the review published a year earlier. Stated cost-per-print and nozzle clogging problems were bizarrely astronomical in the extreme.

I discussed this on another forum and someone noticed that PC Pro had "compared notes" with Spencer Labs, and that the tests done were purposefully biased against Epson. Their testing involved the frequent removal, weighing, and replacement of cartridges. Anyone knows that this isn't a real world test and that, for example, each replacement of a cartridge will see Epson printers purge all ink lines and frequent replacement over a short period is likely to cause air in the lines and nozzle blocking. These are things that the normal real world user would not experience to this degree.

It turns out, when you check out the Spencer Lab website, that they are practically HP shills. Almost every test they've done is "HP vs the world" and almost every one has HP out on top of the pile. Some "tests" are so ridiculous that they're laughable - a test comparing an HP business inkjet with the Epson C84 (the cheapest of the cheap), for example. That's not even a real test because of course HP are going to win on that test. And you have HP vs Dell - with Dell being Lexmark in all but name, anything would work out cheaper to run so, again, of course HP will be cheaper. It's not a test worth doing.

If PC Pro really got the same results as such obvious shills, then the tests were certainly biased against non-HP printers. I would hope that PC Pro were just naive, but such a respected magazine should not be duped so easily.

Real world running costs, and experiences of printing, when using the R1800 is more akin to their original review published some months earlier - not the new biased comparison review that only served to give the awards to HP.

A similar review recently on colour laser printers looked equally suspicious, although I have no real world experience upon which to base those suspicions - just statistics.

PC Pro were once a very respected magazine and I had a regular subscription with them. Not any more. I don't buy any regular computer magazine now, because I don't know if any of them can be trusted to be impartial any more.

[JSR]

Re: Manual Focus: Why ink-jet printer ink isn't a rip-off

Just in case it isn't really obvious, I wrote that article

None of these papers were 'poor' - and in any case they were 'fine art' papers and not your usual consumer papers.

The month before I reviewed consumer papers and Tesco's own brand 'premium quality' glosst paper was singled out for some very serious criticism. I didn't review Epson Premium Glossy paper as the brief was to review third party papers only, but it would have been rated very high. It's a superb paper, though it's not particularly cheap (though not the most expensive, either).

Ian

[Ian]

Re: Manual Focus: Why ink-jet printer ink isn't a rip-off

One of the biggest problems with the better third party photo papers is inadequate advice on printer driver se. Kodak is probably the best as they have an online database of most printers on the market and they have recommended settings for most of these.

It's no good having a good quality paper if the customer can't configure the printer to get the right quality out of it. Consumers aren't going to profile their printers and most won't have the patience to install an off the shelf customer profile, even if they could. At least with manufacturer brand paper, you can rely on decent support in the printer driver.

Ian

[JSR]

Re: Manual Focus: Why ink-jet printer ink isn't a rip-off

One of the biggest problems with the better third party photo papers is inadequate advice on printer driver settings. Kodak is probably the best as they have an online database of most printers on the market and they have recommended settings for most of these.

It's no good having a good quality paper if the customer can't configure the printer to get the right quality out of it. Consumers aren't going to profile their printers and most won't have the patience to install an off the shelf customer profile, even if they could. At least with manufacturer brand paper, you can rely on decent support in the printer driver.

Ian

[Paul]