Although the vast majority of my work is printed on the 9900 using "photo papers"(usually Luster), I do have a percentage that requires the MK approach. I also have a 7600MK that I've kept in working order for many years with which I print smaller sizes on matte papers and canvas. That way I don't have to do the "K" switch on the 9900 and the accompanying cost of wasted ink. Some of the work I do is wholesale printing for another lab here in town and obviously the margins are rather tight. Therefore, I have to make sure my costs are kept to a minimum. Recently the 7600 has shown signs of a severe problem with the MK that are reminiscent of a situation that involved a head replacement about 5 years ago. I am loathe to put a new head in such old technology, as I'm sure you will all understand. The last two times I've done the "K" switch on the 9900 I have measured the amount of ink dumped during the process and it works out to 3ml(PK>MK) and 5ml(MK>PK). A total of 8ml dumped for the two way switch. At $.34 per ml that amounts to $2.72 for the two way trip. Of course that does not take into account the ink dumped during the obligatory cleaning cycle after the switch and before a nozzle check or print run. I'm wondering if any of you folks have done these calculations and how they might measure up to mine. I have been giving some serious thought to purchasing a 7890 and leaving it in MK mode for smaller print sizes, but that does seem to be a rather costly approach as well. Of course the other, and perhaps more obvious approach would be to bite the bullet and count my loses on a one print job when forced to do the "K" switch, and do all of the work on the 9900. And then the 7890 would also act a as backup printer if needed. Somewhat of a dilemma to be sure, but perhaps you folks can add to the mix with some creative suggestions.
Gary
