Why "switch" between PK and MK?

[designpartners]

Hi,

I've been wondering why you have to "Switch" between MK and PK.. why can't there just be an extra nozzle? it can't be a cost thing, I'm sure we'd pay a few hundred quid extra for an 11 ink print head instead of 10?

what am I missing here?

James

[Ernst Dinkla]

Reading your other message indicates you are a happy user of an Epson. In that case you should be happy too with a MK>PK>MK switches, few Epson wide formats that have both channels ready all time, the 11880 and the old 4000 have it. In the past you had to swap cartridges and that normally triggered an initial fill on all channels wasting approx the content of one cartridge in total if I recall it correctly. As there was no other choice then but Epsons, people accepted that and the really Epson aficionados told the complainers (I had another word there) that they should be happy that one could change black inks or advised to buy a second printer to split glossy and matte print jobs to different printers. Talking about extra heads added. It is not that long ago, the 9880 just before the 9900 was in that category. Well you will waste about 6ML of ink on a PK>MK>PK black swap cycle and some time. The real issue is that Epson piëzo nozzles are expensive and complicated holes compared to Canon and HP nozzles, you get less nozzles for a lot more money. Epson is very happy it can make 10 channel heads that more or less function (you have seen the other thread). When competition appeared on the photo printer wide formats market 5 years ago many users jumped ship and bought 12 channel printers that had both blacks available and more ink hues and printed faster.  Cheaper user replaceable heads too. That last longer than many Epson aficionados expected. With hardly any HP, Canon threads in forums on banding issues, clogged nozzles, expensive cleaning methods etc etc.  I wonder whether you did not have that knowledge before you got your Epson.


met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst
Try: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/

[neile]

You're missing a Canon printer We don't have to switch.

Neil

[designpartners]

You're missing a Canon printer We don't have to switch.

  Ha.. did not know that!

[designpartners]

Reading your other message indicates you are a happy user of an Epson. ....

.... I wonder whether you did not have that knowledge before you got your Epson.

yeah I've a very happy Epson customer. the ink change doesn't really bother me, because the 9900 doesn't use that much ink on a swap.. and I print mainly matte anyway.

I was really just wonderign why it's necessary to swap.. and because epson have a printer that doesn't need to swap, and Canon and HP also.. well it seems it's simply down to print head cost.. which is interesting.. I think a print head is roughly $1700 , so 10 channels, $170 a channel - no technical reason why we can't have a 11 channel head so add $200 to a $6000 printer and just pay $6200 instead for pure simplicity.

anyway, thanks for clarifying!

James


 

[Farmer]

When the 4000 was released, many more users complained about wasting either MK or PK because they never used it.  Really, photographers are the main ones who like to switch (and even then, not all of them).  For the majority of users (proofing, CAD, GIS, etc) they're not interested in switching and so the cost of additional inks, heads, design, etc doesn't interest them either.

Whichever way you go, someone will complain :-)

[Ernst Dinkla]

Whichever way you go, someone will complain :-)

With a Z3200 or Z3100 why should I complain when both black channels are aboard and ready in a second? I print anything if it pays enough; gloss, matte, B&W, color, art, photography, package proofs, book dummies, uncoated papers. If I check the proofing papers available I see matte and gloss papers, no wonder when the offset presses run both. CAD printers like the Canon iPF510, iPF615 have a matte pigment black and a gloss black dye + CMY. Most CAD printers run dye ink anyway and the black dye will do well on matte and gloss.

This is a photographer's forum, they buy 9900s, they bought 9880s, they had to compromise or pay for ink waste on most models since Epson switched from dye to pigment inks. Epson introduced the black ink switch after the competition brought two instant ready black pigment channels in this market segment. There simply is demand for that feature.


met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst

Shareware too:
330+ paper white spectral plots:
http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm

[Farmer]

Yes, Ernst, as I said - there is demand from photographers.  Photographers are the smaller portion of the users of these products by number of printers and volume of ink.  There were a *lot* of complaints about the 4000 "wasting" an unused ink (be it MK or PK).  So they came up with switching and then they improved it.

Some people prefer both (and don't want an 11880).  Most users either don't mind the switching or don't switch.  It's just a fact.  Other vendors have taken a different solution and it's working for them.  Neither is right nor wrong, just different.  But when someone asks "why", instead of complaining or boasting etc, I'm just explaining why.

[designpartners]

This is a photographer's forum,

yeah I suppose I was only thinking of if for me, but Farmer makes a good point.. it's not just us who use it... I for one however would pay for for an 11 ink system with Epson's quality and all of the 9900's features.

Thanks for the answers

James 

[Farmer]

There's absolutely nothing wrong with wanting that :-)  I'd suggest you give some feedback direct to Epson, that's the best way to ensure that they know what their user base is looking for.