Followup on Canon dye vs pigment and IP3000 vs IP4000
in [Printers]
|
Prev: ims ink
Next: HP Deskjet 932C Makes Noise
From: _R on 22 Apr 2005 00:28 (Subject line changed from Epson thread) Art, I just spoke with another knowledgeable guy at Canon (that's about 2 out of 8 <g>) who had additional input about the 3e inks. He said that the 3e black is pigment but that the 3e colors were dye. I believe he had access to some to some inhouse docs re the i850 (not sure if the 860 uses the same carts). So...there's a difference of opinion betw the two Canon guys about the colors. However, they both agreed that the 3E black is pigment- based. I'd say that there's a good chance of this, given that the IP4000 uses two black carts--one 3E and one 6E. That may indicate that they are trying to get deeper blacks in color pics by using a dye-based black (the 6E cart) that is more consistent with the dye colors, while using the 3E primarily for dark text output. Both color dye/pigment arguments make sense, except that you'd think they could have stayed with an improved 3E color cart if indeed it was dye-based. (I hope all that made some degree of sense) This could also be points in favor of the ip4000 vs the ip3000, even if the user is printing lots of text. If/when the normal black pigment nozzle gets clogged, there's the dye-based black 6E cart to fall back on. Not sure if that warrants the price difference. It's possible to print B&W using just the color inks, but it's not as dark, of course. I've used the i850 with clogged black printhead to do this by setting the driver to high quality, gloss pro photo paper (even if printing on regular copy paper). Setting it for Norm quality/plain paper just outputs blank pages for some reason. Again, I'm not making any assumptions about what's really in the carts (or why they changed from 3E to 6E for that matter...I should have asked the last guy about that). Just speculation based on what the better techs have said. Also musing out loud about whether to get an IP3000 or 4000. I'm still pissed about the premature black head-clog on the i850, but I may have even more problems with Epson if they are pigment-based. I should remember to do a printout once in a while just to keep the heads in shape. On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 10:03:50 GMT, Arthur Entlich <artistic(a)telus.net> wrote: >The e inks may well be pigment ink, as the person suggested. > >In trying to get through the flood of messages I skimmed yours and >missed the reference to the i860 with the BCI-3e inks being the one he >claimed to be pigment colorants. They probably were, and it would >explain why Canon has tried to stay away from pigment color inks since, >to avoid inkhead clogs. I understand Canon has new inks with much >superior longevity in the works in Japan (I believe they have been >released there). I do not know if they are pigment or dye colorant >based. I suppose they are testing the functionality on a smaller market > before considering a wider distribution. > >Art > >_R wrote: > >>>>_R wrote: >>> >>>>On Fri, 08 Apr 2005 05:47:45 GMT, measekite <measekite(a)yahoo.com> >>>>wrote: >>>> >>>>>If that 860 is a Canon i860 then the replacement IP4000 is even better. >>>>> >>>> >>>>Here's something interesting: I spoke to Canon about my i850 (clogged >>>>printhead, of course) and their tech said that all 4 colors ( BCI-3e >>>>series) are pigment-based. In the new printers, just the black is >>>>pigment; the rest are dye. (see Epson vs Canon arguments). Not sure >>>>if the above is correct, but the tech sounded knowledgeable. >> >> >> On Sun, 10 Apr 2005 13:57:32 GMT, Arthur Entlich <artistic(a)telus.net> >> wrote: >> >> >>>I would question this statement until verification from a known credible >>>source. >>> >>>Art >> >> >> Understood, Art. I'm keeping an open mind both ways. I was surprised >> in that I had heard here that 'Canons use pigment, Epsons use dye' and >> assumed that truism held across the board. Maybe not. >> >> The tech was very knowledgable in other respects. In fact, he advised >> on a method for doing emergency printouts of b&w pages using only the >> colored ink (black nozzle is clogged). I had attempting several >> combinations of settings and failed to get reliable pseudo-black. His >> settings worked well. He also said he owns an IP4000. >> >> So given that the IP-series uses a BCI-3eBk black cartridge while >> using color carts from the BCI-6 series, then this would make sense. >> The reasoning was that the black *pigment* would cover better than >> dye, while the dye-based colors are less likely to clog printheads. >> >> Unfortunately, this would still not prevent clogged black printheads. >> >> Nor can I just pick up an IP4000 and use my existing cartridges >> (all new BCI-3e series---the reason I asked about this to begin with). >> My i860 never got much use before the black clogged, so I was hoping >> to recover something from it. A new head is $40+ (non-returnable), >> and it could end up being driver electronics or something else . >> >> >>
From: Ron Cohen on 22 Apr 2005 01:25 The BCI-3ebk is the only pigmented cartridge used in a Canon iP3000 or iP4000 and it is not a substitute or auxiliary to the photo black BCI-6bk. All of the color cartridges are dye based. With the iP4000 (and I would assume the iP3000) the pigmented black is used only for plain paper mode. A simple way to demonstrate this is to print on a scrap piece of glossy photo paper. Specify different paper modes and you will see the difference in black ink used. With glossy photo paper, the pigmented black produces an unacceptable bronzing effect and this will only be evident if plain paper mode is selected. As to which printer to purchase - iP3000 or iP4000 - the choice comes down to the intended usage and how much you want to spend. The additional BCI-6bk with the iP4000 provides for deeper black in photos whereas the iP3000 uses a composite black from the c,m,y cartridges. I saw the iP4000 on Amazon today for $113.99 after rebate and newegg.com has them for about the same price. How good is the iP4000? On a scale of 1 to 10 I'd give mine a 10+ Of the several Canon printers I own, including s820 and i950 photo printers, this one is my favorite. -- Ron Cohen "_R" <_R(a)nomail.org> wrote in message news:0ltg615kuo8ftllh7qv17ipbdc8589phoi(a)4ax.com... > (Subject line changed from Epson thread) > > Art, > > I just spoke with another knowledgeable guy at Canon (that's about > 2 out of 8 <g>) who had additional input about the 3e inks. He said > that the 3e black is pigment but that the 3e colors were dye. I > believe he had access to some to some inhouse docs re the i850 > (not sure if the 860 uses the same carts). > > So...there's a difference of opinion betw the two Canon guys about > the colors. However, they both agreed that the 3E black is pigment- > based. I'd say that there's a good chance of this, given that the > IP4000 uses two black carts--one 3E and one 6E. That may indicate > that they are trying to get deeper blacks in color pics by using a > dye-based black (the 6E cart) that is more consistent with the dye > colors, while using the 3E primarily for dark text output. > > Both color dye/pigment arguments make sense, except that you'd > think they could have stayed with an improved 3E color cart if indeed > it was dye-based. (I hope all that made some degree of sense) > > This could also be points in favor of the ip4000 vs the ip3000, even > if the user is printing lots of text. If/when the normal black > pigment nozzle gets clogged, there's the dye-based black 6E cart to > fall back on. Not sure if that warrants the price difference. > > It's possible to print B&W using just the color inks, but it's not as > dark, of course. I've used the i850 with clogged black printhead to > do this by setting the driver to high quality, gloss pro photo paper > (even if printing on regular copy paper). Setting it for Norm > quality/plain paper just outputs blank pages for some reason. > > Again, I'm not making any assumptions about what's really in the carts > (or why they changed from 3E to 6E for that matter...I should have > asked the last guy about that). Just speculation based on what the > better techs have said. > > Also musing out loud about whether to get an IP3000 or 4000. I'm > still pissed about the premature black head-clog on the i850, but I > may have even more problems with Epson if they are pigment-based. > I should remember to do a printout once in a while just to keep the > heads in shape. > > > On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 10:03:50 GMT, Arthur Entlich <artistic(a)telus.net> > wrote: > >>The e inks may well be pigment ink, as the person suggested. >> >>In trying to get through the flood of messages I skimmed yours and >>missed the reference to the i860 with the BCI-3e inks being the one he >>claimed to be pigment colorants. They probably were, and it would >>explain why Canon has tried to stay away from pigment color inks since, >>to avoid inkhead clogs. I understand Canon has new inks with much >>superior longevity in the works in Japan (I believe they have been >>released there). I do not know if they are pigment or dye colorant >>based. I suppose they are testing the functionality on a smaller market >> before considering a wider distribution. >> >>Art >> >>_R wrote: >> >>>>>_R wrote: >>>> >>>>>On Fri, 08 Apr 2005 05:47:45 GMT, measekite <measekite(a)yahoo.com> >>>>>wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>If that 860 is a Canon i860 then the replacement IP4000 is even >>>>>>better. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>Here's something interesting: I spoke to Canon about my i850 (clogged >>>>>printhead, of course) and their tech said that all 4 colors ( BCI-3e >>>>>series) are pigment-based. In the new printers, just the black is >>>>>pigment; the rest are dye. (see Epson vs Canon arguments). Not sure >>>>>if the above is correct, but the tech sounded knowledgeable. >>> >>> >>> On Sun, 10 Apr 2005 13:57:32 GMT, Arthur Entlich <artistic(a)telus.net> >>> wrote: >>> >>> >>>>I would question this statement until verification from a known credible >>>>source. >>>> >>>>Art >>> >>> >>> Understood, Art. I'm keeping an open mind both ways. I was surprised >>> in that I had heard here that 'Canons use pigment, Epsons use dye' and >>> assumed that truism held across the board. Maybe not. >>> >>> The tech was very knowledgable in other respects. In fact, he advised >>> on a method for doing emergency printouts of b&w pages using only the >>> colored ink (black nozzle is clogged). I had attempting several >>> combinations of settings and failed to get reliable pseudo-black. His >>> settings worked well. He also said he owns an IP4000. >>> >>> So given that the IP-series uses a BCI-3eBk black cartridge while >>> using color carts from the BCI-6 series, then this would make sense. >>> The reasoning was that the black *pigment* would cover better than >>> dye, while the dye-based colors are less likely to clog printheads. >>> >>> Unfortunately, this would still not prevent clogged black printheads. >>> >>> Nor can I just pick up an IP4000 and use my existing cartridges >>> (all new BCI-3e series---the reason I asked about this to begin with). >>> My i860 never got much use before the black clogged, so I was hoping >>> to recover something from it. A new head is $40+ (non-returnable), >>> and it could end up being driver electronics or something else . >>> >>> >>> >
From: measekite on 22 Apr 2005 01:33 Ron Cohen wrote: >The BCI-3ebk is the only pigmented cartridge used in a Canon iP3000 or >iP4000 and it is not a substitute or auxiliary to the photo black BCI-6bk. >All of the color cartridges are dye based. With the iP4000 (and I would >assume the iP3000) the pigmented black is used only for plain paper mode. A >simple way to demonstrate this is to print on a scrap piece of glossy photo >paper. Specify different paper modes and you will see the difference in >black ink used. With glossy photo paper, the pigmented black produces an >unacceptable bronzing effect and this will only be evident if plain paper >mode is selected. As to which printer to purchase - iP3000 or iP4000 - the >choice comes down to the intended usage and how much you want to spend. The >additional BCI-6bk with the iP4000 provides for deeper black in photos >whereas the iP3000 uses a composite black from the c,m,y cartridges. I saw >the iP4000 on Amazon today for $113.99 after rebate and newegg.com has them >for about the same price. How good is the iP4000? On a scale of 1 to 10 I'd >give mine a 10+ Of the several Canon printers I own, including s820 and i950 >photo printers, this one is my favorite. > > After an instant in store $30.00 rebate at Frys plus an additional $20.00 rebate from Canon, the IP4000 had a net price of $100.00. This is the lowest that I have seen it. The small amount over the the IP3000 is well worth it. Having a photo black dye also saves the 3 primary color carts.
From: Ron Cohen on 22 Apr 2005 03:28 I started to mention Fry's as a friend of mine in Texas purchased an iP4000 there for a net of $69.95 after rebate. Unfortunately for me, the only choices I have are Sam's, (not the)Best Buy and CompUSA. I wish that Fry's and Costco had locations here. -- Ron Cohen "measekite" <measekite(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message news:K00ae.3943$J12.2389(a)newssvr14.news.prodigy.com... > > > Ron Cohen wrote: > >>The BCI-3ebk is the only pigmented cartridge used in a Canon iP3000 or >>iP4000 and it is not a substitute or auxiliary to the photo black BCI-6bk. >>All of the color cartridges are dye based. With the iP4000 (and I would >>assume the iP3000) the pigmented black is used only for plain paper mode. >>A simple way to demonstrate this is to print on a scrap piece of glossy >>photo paper. Specify different paper modes and you will see the difference >>in black ink used. With glossy photo paper, the pigmented black produces >>an unacceptable bronzing effect and this will only be evident if plain >>paper mode is selected. As to which printer to purchase - iP3000 or >>iP4000 - the choice comes down to the intended usage and how much you want >>to spend. The additional BCI-6bk with the iP4000 provides for deeper black >>in photos whereas the iP3000 uses a composite black from the c,m,y >>cartridges. I saw the iP4000 on Amazon today for $113.99 after rebate and >>newegg.com has them for about the same price. How good is the iP4000? On a >>scale of 1 to 10 I'd give mine a 10+ Of the several Canon printers I own, >>including s820 and i950 photo printers, this one is my favorite. >> > > After an instant in store $30.00 rebate at Frys plus an additional $20.00 > rebate from Canon, the IP4000 had a net price of $100.00. This is the > lowest that I have seen it. The small amount over the the IP3000 is well > worth it. Having a photo black dye also saves the 3 primary color carts.
From: measekite on 22 Apr 2005 10:31
Ron Cohen wrote: >I started to mention Fry's as a friend of mine in Texas purchased an iP4000 >there for a net of $69.95 after rebate. Unfortunately for me, the only >choices I have are Sam's, (not the)Best Buy and CompUSA. I wish that Fry's >and Costco had locations here. > > How far is your computer? www.costco.com I amnot sure if the prices are the same but Frys webstore is www.outpost.com |