Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Refillable ink ipf 8300?  (Read 8890 times)

Jozef Zajaz

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 260
Refillable ink ipf 8300?
« on: June 06, 2011, 05:04:22 pm »

Hi guys!

I found this on the net and i've heard a couple of big copy/printing house uses it as the ink is 1/10th of the original price.

Anyone here have experience in this?

http://www.alibaba.com/showroom/pigment-ink-ipf-8300%252f6300.html

http://wel-try.en.alibaba.com/product/327023036-200097364/PFI_304_704_PFI304_PFI704_700ml_for_Canon_imagePROGRAF_iPF8300_iPF_8300_.html
Logged

Shark_II

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 54
Re: Refillable ink ipf 8300?
« Reply #1 on: June 07, 2011, 09:26:34 am »

No need to go to some unknown Chinese supplier, just go here:  http://www.inkjetcarts.us/

I have been using their ink in ipf6100's for over a year now, no problem.

Tom

PS:  Stand by for all the nay-sayers spreading FUD about third party ink... they will start chiming in right about now even though 99% of them have ZERO experience with them.  But regurgitating "Internet Wisdom" is a very popular thing to do with that bunch.
Logged

enduser

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 610
Re: Refillable ink ipf 8300?
« Reply #2 on: June 07, 2011, 09:48:41 am »

Look at minimum supply amounts first before getting too expectant.
Logged

dgberg

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2753
    • http://bergsprintstudio.com http://bergscustomfurniture.com
Re: Refillable ink ipf 8300?
« Reply #3 on: June 07, 2011, 09:56:31 am »

I'll be the first naysayer. Cost for oem ink,sure its high,but certainly not a reason to go to third party inks.
Ink for my canvas prints averages just under .50 a square foot when printing with my 7900/9900.
With canvas prints selling from $10.00 to $12.00 a square foot, 4% to 5% for ink is just a function of overhead.

Jozef Zajaz

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 260
Re: Refillable ink ipf 8300?
« Reply #4 on: June 07, 2011, 11:42:30 am »

Look at minimum supply amounts first before getting too expectant.

This was just an example page i found. Minimum supply amounts wont be a problem.
Logged

Jozef Zajaz

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 260
Re: Refillable ink ipf 8300?
« Reply #5 on: June 07, 2011, 11:43:12 am »

No need to go to some unknown Chinese supplier, just go here:  http://www.inkjetcarts.us/

I have been using their ink in ipf6100's for over a year now, no problem.

Tom

PS:  Stand by for all the nay-sayers spreading FUD about third party ink... they will start chiming in right about now even though 99% of them have ZERO experience with them.  But regurgitating "Internet Wisdom" is a very popular thing to do with that bunch.

Great. did you do any test and compare to originals?
Logged

Jozef Zajaz

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 260
Re: Refillable ink ipf 8300?
« Reply #6 on: June 07, 2011, 11:44:04 am »

I'll be the first naysayer. Cost for oem ink,sure its high,but certainly not a reason to go to third party inks.
Ink for my canvas prints averages just under .50 a square foot when printing with my 7900/9900.
With canvas prints selling from $10.00 to $12.00 a square foot, 4% to 5% for ink is just a function of overhead.



Filling the ipf 8300 is about 3000 for 700ml. Sure they last but if i do third party ink i'll save the cost of the printer after 2 fill ups. So then maybe the in is 0.10 per square foot
Logged

Tony B.

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 78
Re: Refillable ink ipf 8300?
« Reply #7 on: June 08, 2011, 12:23:39 pm »

I have used the Hongsam ink before ink was available in the U.S., I now use image specialist ink as its a little cheaper after shipping.

This place sells the Hongsam ink in the U.S.

http://gpmink.com/

If you print on semigloss/gloss the 3rd party inks have bad bronzing, see this post

http://canonipf.wikispaces.com/message/view/FAQ/2643885

I print mostly on matte paper so it does not bother me much.  Not sure how it would print on canvas.


If you are in the U.S. you can buy direct from image specialists if you have a business license, other than that inkjetcarts sells image specialists ink.

I do not believe there was much of a difference between the two ink brands.  I think Hongsam stated to replace all inks at the same time (do not mix hongsam refills and OEM carts) and image specialists said that you could intermix the cartridges.

For the best option I would think use OEM blacks/greys and 3rd party colors to have less bronzing.

Tony
Logged

shewhorn

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 537
    • http://
Re: Refillable ink ipf 8300?
« Reply #8 on: June 08, 2011, 12:38:51 pm »

PS:  Stand by for all the nay-sayers spreading FUD about third party ink... they will start chiming in right about now even though 99% of them have ZERO experience with them.  But regurgitating "Internet Wisdom" is a very popular thing to do with that bunch.

http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com

They have some data for the Cone inks there which are quite popular. The print permanence of those inks seems to be about half that relative to the OEM inks (specifically for Epson, they don't have much data on the Canon x300 series yet although if you compare the data that is out there from Aardenburg and Wilhelm it does look like the Canon x300 Lucia ink set will still considerably outlast the Cone inks) for black and white prints. It also looks like they don't stand up quite as well in terms of dMax for the newer ink sets. For my particular needs the cost savings aren't worth sacrificing print permanence and dMax. With regards to experience I highly doubt anyone on this forum (aside from Mark McCormick-Goodhart from Aardenburg) has the experience that Aardenburg has in testing the print permanence of 3rd party ink sets. With that said, something like the Cone inks may be worth considering if price is a big concern.

Cheers, Joe
« Last Edit: June 08, 2011, 12:43:08 pm by shewhorn »
Logged

Czornyj

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1948
    • zarzadzaniebarwa.pl
Re: Refillable ink ipf 8300?
« Reply #9 on: June 08, 2011, 12:52:43 pm »

I'd be not only worried about print permanence and print quality, but also print head longevity - it's not the cheapest part to replace.
« Last Edit: June 08, 2011, 12:54:24 pm by Czornyj »
Logged
Marcin Kałuża | [URL=http://zarzadzaniebarwa

Light Seeker

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 255
Re: Refillable ink ipf 8300?
« Reply #10 on: June 08, 2011, 04:53:21 pm »

http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com

They have some data for the Cone inks there which are quite popular. The print permanence of those inks seems to be about half that relative to the OEM inks (specifically for Epson, they don't have much data on the Canon x300 series yet although if you compare the data that is out there from Aardenburg and Wilhelm it does look like the Canon x300 Lucia ink set will still considerably outlast the Cone inks) for black and white prints. It also looks like they don't stand up quite as well in terms of dMax for the newer ink sets. For my particular needs the cost savings aren't worth sacrificing print permanence and dMax. With regards to experience I highly doubt anyone on this forum (aside from Mark McCormick-Goodhart from Aardenburg) has the experience that Aardenburg has in testing the print permanence of 3rd party ink sets. With that said, something like the Cone inks may be worth considering if price is a big concern.

Cheers, Joe

For the sake of clarity, it's only the Cone monochrome inks that Mark / Aardenburg have tested. The Cone Color inks are a different product.

Terry.
Logged

shewhorn

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 537
    • http://
Re: Refillable ink ipf 8300?
« Reply #11 on: June 08, 2011, 06:01:21 pm »

For the sake of clarity, it's only the Cone monochrome inks that Mark / Aardenburg have tested. The Cone Color inks are a different product.

Terry.

Thanks for the clarification Terry! :)

Speculation mode on... given that black and white inksets from Canon, Epson, and HP tend to have much higher print permanence when used in their respective "black and white" modes (some of the color inks are still used to a certain extent but it's limited)... if the same were to hold true with the Cone ink sets that would mean that the Cone ink sets have an even lower print permanence rating when printing full color. Pure speculation though. Hopefully someone who uses the Cone inks will be able to submit some test prints in color for Aardenburg to add to their list.

Cheers, Joe
« Last Edit: June 08, 2011, 06:05:33 pm by shewhorn »
Logged

MHMG

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1285
Re: Refillable ink ipf 8300?
« Reply #12 on: June 08, 2011, 06:05:40 pm »

For the sake of clarity, it's only the Cone monochrome inks that Mark / Aardenburg have tested. The Cone Color inks are a different product.

Terry.

Right, and to be clear, the Piezography Sepia sets are extremely lightfast, exceeding OEM performance because they are almost certainly full carbon pigment. That said, choice of media becomes crucial to achieve this coveted print stability because all monochrome inkjet prints will shift hue noticeably all the way from highlights well into the mid tones if the media whitepoint is not stable.

The other Piezography tones like "Special Edition", "Neutral", and  "Selenium" exhibit some hue shifting at low to moderate lightfastness exposures depending on media choice. That said, collectors (especially museums and archives) should be able to take appropriate cautions with the storage and print display conditions if they have an informed understanding of the printer/ink/media combinations and thus enable the majority of these prints to retain their delicate hues and tones for generations.

As for Conecolor inks, more than one person has requested testing of them but never followed through with sample submissions. Ditto for some other popular third party color ink sets including some intended for use on the Canon iPF machines.


cheers,
Mark
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com
« Last Edit: June 08, 2011, 06:23:23 pm by MHMG »
Logged

shewhorn

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 537
    • http://
Re: Refillable ink ipf 8300?
« Reply #13 on: June 08, 2011, 06:43:53 pm »

Right, and to be clear, the Piezography Sepia sets are extremely lightfast, exceeding OEM performance because they are almost certainly full carbon pigment.

Thank you for the additional clarification there as well. I'd missed that specific one... indeed ID 105, 136, and 138 have racked up quite a few hours. I'd missed those in the specific search I'd done. It looks like you really have to pay specific attention (my apologies for the generalization).

Revisiting the results and doing a search where test type contains B&W and then sorting by megalux hours it seems that most of the Cone inks fail around 35ish megalux hours. All of the Epson x800 and x900 and 9600 which have tests open at 40, 60 and 90 MLHrs are still passing and then there are the top two performers at 120 Megalux Hours which are Cone inks, both still listed as passing so... I do find that quite compelling.

Cheers, Joe

(3:06 AM, June 9th ... made an edit to clarify that the two top performers were Cone inks)
« Last Edit: June 09, 2011, 03:07:27 am by shewhorn »
Logged

MHMG

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1285
Re: Refillable ink ipf 8300?
« Reply #14 on: June 08, 2011, 07:46:53 pm »



Revisiting the results and doing a search where test type contains B&W and then sorting by megalux hours it seems that most of the Cone inks fail around 35ish megalux hours. All of the Epson x800 and x900 and 9600 which have tests open at 40, 60 and 90 MLHrs are still passing and then there are the top two performers at 120 Megalux Hours which are both still listed as passing so... I do find that quite compelling.

Cheers, Joe

I'm very pleased to hear about people starting to navigate their way around the AaI&A test results database using the more sophisticated search capability.  It takes a little time to master some of the features of the database and some of the concepts in the testing, but hopefully the intellectual reward is worth the effort.

On that note, and probably with a perfect amount of coincidence, I just uploaded the 120 megalux hour updates to Batch F this morning. ID #104  is Epson K3 OEM ink printed with a Sepia tint in ABW mode  onto Hahnemuhle Photo Rag 308 gsm paper. This sample came from a member who was trying to mimic the sepia appearance of the Cone Sepia set on HN photo rag paper using an Epson ABW workflow.  It has just reached its limits for a full AaI&A Conservation display rating. The 115-115 megalux hour rating means that the worst 10% of the fading was so close to the average fading of the target overall that there is little difference in performance between when one might begin to notice subtle changes in the worst performing patches versus the average tones in the image overall.  Because this sepia tint requires a significant amount of yellow in ABW mode (and yellow is generally the weakest link in the K3 ink set) we can anticipate that more neutral ABW mixes will do at least as well. There are several more ABW mode monochrome samples in test, and searching on [test type] contains "B&W" as Joe has explained will get you to the monochrome samples. Adding [ink/colorant] contains ABW is a good way to narrow it further to the ABW mode samples.

« Last Edit: June 08, 2011, 08:02:51 pm by MHMG »
Logged

John Nollendorfs

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 623
Re: Refillable ink ipf 8300?
« Reply #15 on: June 09, 2011, 10:54:10 am »

There are many things to consider when contemplating a shift from OEM ink to 3rd party inks other than price which seemed to be the OP main concern.

If you are in the business of making prints for others, think about the following--
1) Is there any data available about the life of the third part inks, vs the OEM.

2) Since different pigments are used, even though the 3rd party inks advertise "matching", there will most likely be a difference in metemerism of the prints. (same image printed by the OEM & 3rd party, will appear different under different lighting conditions) This is a concern when trying to match prints for a client of previously printed work.

3) Already mentioned, "bronzing" or differential surface appearance and gloss or semi-gloss photo papers.

4) For HP printers, the grays used have been specifically matched to produce a neutral color. Do the 3rd party inks do likewise? This is a major concern if you print B&W mode on HP printers. (no metemerism)

If you consider all these things, plus the hassle of filling your cartridges, the 3rd party inks had better be significantly less in price than OEM. The biggest advantage of OEM inks is consistency of results.

John Nollendorfs
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up