Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Printing: Printers, Papers and Inks => Topic started by: pperreault on December 30, 2016, 01:45:42 pm
-
Hi guys!
It's my first post on this great forum! I'll be buying my first photo printer ever in the next few days and I lean toward the Canon Pro-1000 (compared to the Epson P-800). Because of my work, the printer will be left off for 2 weeks a couple of times during the year and from what I read the Canon seems to be better regarding clogging issues when left unused for some time?
The only thing that bugs me with the Pro-1000 is that a read a couple of times, including on this forum, that it consumes something like 0.3ml of ink after each print for "maintenance" duty?
If it's true? It seems like a lot of ink going to the maintenance tank when printing 4 x 6 and 5 x 7 proofs? So if I print four "4 x 6" in a row, it's sending 1,2 ml to the maintenance tank?
Any Pro-1000 users with a first hand opinion on that matter?
Thanks in advance and have a some nice holidays!
Pierre
-
Maintenance operations don't depend on the size of paper you run through the printer. It depends on how many sq.ft. have been printed, how long the printer has been left idle, environmental conditions, etc. In any case 0.3 ml of ink is trivial. Don't worry about it.
-
Thanks for the quick reply Mark!
I've read and re-read both your reviews of the Pro-1000 and P-800 and it helped formed an opinion because compared to a camera or a lense, you cannot really try a printer in a store...
Am I right saying that you seem to have a "small" preference for the Pro-1000?
Regards,
Pierre
-
Pierre,
It isn't the purpose of the reviews I do to express personal preferences between products. Each review is a stand-alone set of observations from my testing and usage experience. Readers can take away from those reviews the items that are of most interest or importance to them in making their own decisions about which product would best suit their needs. Different people have different preferences or requirements, so mine don't really matter in this and shouldn't influence a decision. Two objective distinguishing features I would draw to your attention are that the SCP800 allows the option of a roll holder and does not have the stringent length limitation of the Pro-1000. As well there are certain very thick media that can be flat-fed through the SCP800 which the Canon printer cannot accommodate. So if these factors are critical to you, that points to a decision. If not, you still have two options to consider. I also think it objectively fair to say that sheet loading is faster, easier and less likely to skew with the Pro-1000. The quality of output from this whole crop of current professional printers from both manufacturers meets a very high bar. There are subtle differences of output characteristics between them which only the user can appreciate and decide on the importance by going to a dealer that carries them and looking at actual prints.
-
Not the first hand experience - but users' opinion from other forum (my translation - forgive my English).
User was experiencing huge ink consumption during regular printing, what was bothering him was that the split between on-paper/into maintenance tank was like 2:1. He ended having his PRo-1000 serviced and then repeated his observations. Ink consumption dropped but below is translation of what may interest you in regards to small prints:
"For one A2 print printer uses maximum 4 ml on Lustre/Glossy paper in Standard quality with Gloss Optimizer on Auto.
Between A2 prints 0,18 ml of ink ends in maintenance tank.
It turns out, that despite sending to printer whole series of 47 prints 4x6 (account manager reports it as one print job of 47 prints and reports summary ink consumption for all 47 prints), after every of the 4x6 prints, printerdoes some maintenance, as if it has just printed A2.
To make things worse - for printing whole series of 47 prints, PRO-1000 used 16.6 ml of ink (incl 6.5 ml of CO) for prints and additionally 8 ml of ink ended in Maintenance tank (incl 3 ml of CO).
It is sick!
It turns out, that no matter which size it prints, it always "spits" 0.18 ml to Maintenance tank between prints.
Due to maintenance process between prints, printing 47 pieces of 4x6 took very long - maintenance between prints took more time than printing of each print itself.
As it is - this printer is not suitable for printing 4x6, 5x7 - total ink usage to print 47 4x6 prints was 16.6ml+8ml = 24.6 ml of ink. (in Poland it would equal to 18.5 USD)
One could place 16 4x6 prints on one A2 paper - so 47 4x6 prints would take 3 x A2. Ink usage in this scenario would be 3 x 12 ml + 3x0.18 ml into maintenance tank = total of 12.6 ml."
If you use Windows or Parallels - go for QImage.... ;)
Below is the link to original post (I Polish) - should you like to use google translator:
http://www.mva.pl/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=2925&start=60#p36792PRO-1000 small prints (http://www.mva.pl/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=2925&start=60)
-
Not the first hand experience - but users' opinion from other forum (my translation - forgive my English).
User was experiencing huge ink consumption during regular printing, what was bothering him was that the split between on-paper/into maintenance tank was like 2:1. He ended having his PRo-1000 serviced and then repeated his observations. Ink consumption dropped but below is translation of what may interest you in regards to small prints:
"For one A2 print printer uses maximum 4 ml on Lustre/Glossy paper in Standard quality with Gloss Optimizer on Auto.
Between A2 prints 0,18 ml of ink ends in maintenance tank.
It turns out, that despite sending to printer whole series of 47 prints 4x6 (account manager reports it as one print job of 47 prints and reports summary ink consumption for all 47 prints), after every of the 4x6 prints, printerdoes some maintenance, as if it has just printed A2.
To make things worse - for printing whole series of 47 prints, PRO-1000 used 16.6 ml of ink (incl 6.5 ml of CO) for prints and additionally 8 ml of ink ended in Maintenance tank (incl 3 ml of CO).
It is sick!
It turns out, that no matter which size it prints, it always "spits" 0.18 ml to Maintenance tank between prints.
Due to maintenance process between prints, printing 47 pieces of 4x6 took very long - maintenance between prints took more time than printing of each print itself.
As it is - this printer is not suitable for printing 4x6, 5x7 - total ink usage to print 47 4x6 prints was 16.6ml+8ml = 24.6 ml of ink. (in Poland it would equal to 18.5 USD)
One could place 16 4x6 prints on one A2 paper - so 47 4x6 prints would take 3 x A2. Ink usage in this scenario would be 3 x 12 ml + 3x0.18 ml into maintenance tank = total of 12.6 ml."
If you use Windows or Parallels - go for QImage.... ;)
Below is the link to original post (I Polish) - should you like to use google translator:
http://www.mva.pl/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=2925&start=60#p36792PRO-1000 small prints (http://www.mva.pl/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=2925&start=60)
What does QImage have to do with this? QImage is a printing interface - you still need a printer. I don't know QImage but I doubt it controls how much ink the printer uses for maintenance, so I doubt it is relevant to this topic - unless it is shown to me otherwise.
Where did he get his information about how much ink was going into the maintenance tank between prints? Canon does not make this information available, and as far as I know they are not planning to change the software to do so. No printer manufacturer I am aware of makes this information available.
The print job (47*4*6) in this post amounts to 7.8 sq.ft. of coverage. If the account manager says this is using 16.6 ml laid on paper, this is 2.1 ml per sq.ft. of coverage. My Epson 4900 uses 2.24 ml/sq.ft. of coverage on luster-type papers, so the ink laydown reported here is within the range of expectations. Ink laydown also varies A LOT depending on the density of the photos being printed. But there is no information here about that.
I'm far from convinced that there is anything "sick" in all of this until more is learned about really how much ink goes into the maintenance tank for a job like this and how that information was determined.
-
I mentioned QImage - as this software makes stacking 16 4x6 pics on one A2 easier.
Regarding the consumption - the person I quoted/translated has been experiencing huge consumption (or should I say huge amount going to maintenance tank) and started checking weight of the Maintenance Tank regularly. He stated that after having PRO-1000 serviced by Canon amount of ink going to Maintenance tank has significantly reduced. To verify his measurement he was also checking weight of cartridges - in quoted forum there is another thread about his problems. Anyway - it is not the amount that goes on paper that is considered high.
By quote I wanted just indicate that PRO-1000 might not be the best choice if one plans to print mainly 4x6 or 5x7.
Regarding info of the amount used between prints - I fully agree than none of the manufacturers provides this data (and it is not included in Canon's accounting software), but at least one review of PRO-1000 indicate that that it uses ink (Australian review (http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjByIiJlJ3RAhXs6YMKHfiSCoMQFgggMAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.photoreview.com.au%2Freviews%2Fprinters%2Fcanon-imageprograf-pro-1000-printer&usg=AFQjCNENdwCh6kSrvzTq5OwAwGPAfrpcsg&bvm=bv.142059868,d.amc))
-
Ok, useful clarifications. On QImage it is perhaps worth mentioning that one can also fit the 4*6 photos onto an A2 size sheet pretty easily in the Lightroom Print Module, but that is a whole different topic. The main issue being raised in his posts is about ink going into the maintenance tank between each small scale print. I think the factual basis for this being correct default behaviour should be raised with Canon because it strikes me as kind of peculiar.
-
Hi,
I also find it weird that a Pro-1000 would consume that much ink for maintenance between each small prints (4 x 6), the same as after an A2 print it seems... But since I have seen this mentioned a couple of times in different forums I think that there's "maybe" actually something going on with the ink consumption during maintenance between each print...
As you said Mark, it should be raised with Canon but I'm not sure the sales staff or tech support staff will have any solid information on that... The answer I anticipate is "some ink is use for maintenance..."
I don't know if you have a contact at Canon to raise that potential issue with them?
Regards,
Pierre
-
I don't know if you have a contact at Canon to raise that potential issue with them?
Regards,
Pierre
Possibly after New Year.
-
Thanks for your time Mark, I really appreciate it!
I'm almost decided on the Canon, even with this potential issue regarding ink, so I'll probably be Pro-1000 owner in the next few days... :)
And if I don't like Canon answers regarding ink usage for maintenance, I'll simply sue them for 1 million $$$ LOL!
Enjoy the holidays!
Pierre
-
Thanks Pierre - best of the New Year to you too.
The last laugh may be of there is no answer at all to either like or dislike - and this is not a far-fetched outcome, but we'll see! :-)
Mark
-
Hi Mark!
I hoped you had great holidays!
I'm still not completely decided between the Pro-1000 and P-800!!! But let's say the Pro-1000 is the leader!
BTW, I've been to a photo exhibition today and it really confirmed that I need to print my work at home!
I'm taking a chance to ask if you could ask your contact at Canon if they have an opinion or facts about the ink usage we talk earlier in this thread... For small prints and maintenance...
Thanks in advance and have a nice day/evening!
Pierre
-
Not yet.
-
I wonder how the ml usage was measured. How accurate was that? Meaning that the 'measured' volume may be rather inaccurate, and maybe that mechanism was even faulty, nothing like the actual volume? IMHO, only a recording of the weight of tanks will tell the true story.
Cheers,
Bart
-
Hello,
I don't think this printer is consuming to much ink. As I already wrote here in this post (http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=114940.msg948275#msg948275) the ink is not the cost driver.
I am wondering how 0.18 ml have been measured. Assuming that one ml weights 1g like water, the person was able to weight at an accuracy of 1/100 of a gram. That is pretty good. This printer is made for 17" wide prints with expensive fine art paper. If an A2 or A3+ print is spoiled because of printhead failure, you lost a lot more than 0.18 ml of ink. This is an expensive printer I expect it to work properly for a few thousand prints or some 1000 thousand square feet.
-
I have participated, somehow, in the discussion on another forum mentioned in one of the initial posts about Pro-1000 ink usage for maintenace.
The procedure of measureing it seems to be correct (we analysed it carefully): two Canon software sources for accounting - general (1 ml accuracy) and detailled (very datailled) per channel + weighting both, carts and maintenace tank. All for several series of printouts.
All that sources correlated with each other very well.
As for cart removal, offcialy it is forbiden until it gets empty. They did it, but because of internal buffering tanks (~30 ml) inside the printer their weigth influence can be seen after a longer period of operation.
All in all, the conclusion was that the printer is probably faulty, since 2 printers from another user did not behave like the tested one - on the other hand thare is quite a lot of similar information on the web from other users of this printer of have ink use for maintenance after each printout, so maybe quality control at Canon has some problems.
Hope it helps.
-
QImage Ultimate is mentioned in the thread above.
Mark, a review of this product would be appreciated. Would be interested in hearing your perspective on its features.
Thanks
F.
-
QImage Ultimate is mentioned in the thread above.
Mark, a review of this product would be appreciated. Would be interested in hearing your perspective on its features.
Thanks
F.
Hi Frank,
Thanks for the interest, but I don't do either Windows or QImage, so I won't be reviewing it. But as you know, QImage has a wide following with a lot of material written about it elsewhere on the Internet. My workflow is very simple and it produces fine results: it's Lightroom from Camera to Print, with periodic recourse to Photoshop when I need to do certain things LR can't.
-
two Canon software sources for accounting - general (1 ml accuracy) and detailled (very datailled) per channel + weighting both, carts and maintenace tank.
So the accounting software does in take into account the ink lost to the maintenance tank?
I was suprised to see that after the initial set up, the printer utility showed only 40% remaining ink and substantial use of the maintenance tank... but my plan is to stop thinking about it and enjoy the prints :)
-
There is a huge amount of pigment in the ducts and there is also a sub-tank. Which I think system considers as lost, but this in the system.
-
So the accounting software does in take into account the ink lost to the maintenance tank?
I was suprised to see that after the initial set up, the printer utility showed only 40% remaining ink and substantial use of the maintenance tank... but my plan is to stop thinking about it and enjoy the prints :)
Good plan. Canon printers are generally very efficient with ink use, and small print sizes are less efficient anyway. The initial setup also uses a certain amount of ink for filling the various channels, after which things get better. Maybe the initial tanks were starter tanks with less content than regular ones, don't know what they exactly deliver with the printer.
Cheers,
Bart
-
In theory the Canon is delivered with full size 80ml carts, so pumping 30mls into the sub-tanks etc should have left 60% rather than 40%. Then again, I have little faith in the linearity of the display, so... whatever :)
The prints are splendid. I can see bronzing with colour on gloss RC only by holding the paper at absurd angles, but not with lustre. With BW on gloss, there was some gloss variation around patches of a print blown out to pure white using CO on auto, again only if I held the paper at some finely tuned extreme angle to both the light source and my eyes.
It'll do :)
-
So the accounting software does in take into account the ink lost to the maintenance tank?
No it does not - at least not in the version of Accounting Manager I have, nor in its accompanying instruction manual. One can always make off-line before and after weight measurements to get an idea of the rate at which the maintenance tank gets consumed as a function of various job characteristics, but as far as I know, this is not built in to any application. When I raised this very question with Canon many months ago they informed me it is not provided information. If any one can point us to very specific factual information to the contrary I'd be interested in seeing it.
-
Maybe the initial tanks were starter tanks with less content than regular ones, don't know what they exactly deliver with the printer.
Cheers,
Bart
The printer is delivered with filled 80ml ink tanks.
-
Entering service mode and printing the full report, does not this information Mark?
-
Entering service mode and printing the full report, does not this information Mark?
I did not see anything called "Service Mode" on the Canon Pro-1000. There is a Maintenance function reached from the printer LCD panel, within which there is a Maintenance Cartridge Information function, but all that shows is a diagram of usage level with no scaling whatsoever - not useful for the purposes discussed here. Ink level information reached from the Utility tab of the driver also shows a non-scaled general pane for maintenance cartridge consumption, again not useful for present purposes. If you have another route to more precise information grateful if you would explain exactly how to access it.
-
Mark,
I do not have the Pro 1000, I have a 4000. And I have her service manual. But I have not yet looked to see if line 4000 has this function. Thank you.
-
Mark,
I do not have the Pro 1000, I have a 4000. And I have her service manual. But I have not yet looked to see if line 4000 has this function. Thank you.
OK, once you've had a chance to find out from the printer and/or the manual whether the question you asked me is actually answerable please let us know; it could be instructive.
-
What I can do, is to provide a complete report for your analysis.
I confess I do not understand much that is in it.
Would you like to see ?
Thanks
-
What I can do, is to provide a complete report for your analysis.
I confess I do not understand much that is in it.
Would you like to see ?
Thanks
Sure, I'd like to have a look. I assume you can attach it as a Private Mail message through this Forum's Message module.
-
Abdo has kindly sent me manuals on the Pro-2000/4000 which indicate that for those models there is a service mode in which one can read data on the percentage of the maintenance tank filled. However, there is nothing that indicates the volumetric fill capacity of the tank, therefore the percentage information would not be helpful for knowing how much ink goes there at any particular time. Nor is the granularity of the measurement indicated. Much as it would have been nice otherwise, this aspect of ink usage remains rather obscure.
-
So the accounting software does in take into account the ink lost to the maintenance tank?
I was suprised to see that after the initial set up, the printer utility showed only 40% remaining ink and substantial use of the maintenance tank... but my plan is to stop thinking about it and enjoy the prints :)
no, it does not. uso of ink for maintenance was computed by weighting maintenance tank after each print job
-
Just a remark:
I saw some of you mentioning sub-tanks regarding the Pro-1000.
I do not believe this printer actually has sub-tanks like the Pro-2000 and Pro-4000 models. Sure there is a lot of ink on the lines, but that is not the same of the sub-tank system.
Printers with sub-tanks can run for some time with empty carts and allow cart replacement during printing. That is not the case of the Pro-1000.
On the models with sub-tank the "!" warning actually means the cart is empty and can be replaced, while the "X" warning means the sub-tank is empty and the printer stops.
On the Pro-1000 the "!" warning is displayed while you still have something like 15ml of ink on the cart and the "x" warning means the cart is as empty as it gets and you cannot keep printing without replacing it.
Regards.
-
Just a remark:
.........I saw some of you mentioning sub-tanks regarding the Pro-1000.
I do not believe this printer actually has sub-tanks like the Pro-2000 and Pro-4000 models. .........
Correct, as far as I know too.
-
Just a remark:
I saw some of you mentioning sub-tanks regarding the Pro-1000.
I do not believe this printer actually has sub-tanks like the Pro-2000 and Pro-4000 models. Sure there is a lot of ink on the lines, but that is not the same of the sub-tank system.
Supposing the lines have a 3mm id, then 4.2m of line would be required to hold the 30ml of each ink unesco mentions.
So whether they are technically called sub-tanks or not, there is some substantial storage volume somewhere in the printer.
-
no, it does not. uso of ink for maintenance was computed by weighting maintenance tank after each print job
Thank you for the clarification. I had misunderstood your comment that all of the different measures of ink consumption were well correlated.
-
From my experience using both the P800 and Pro 1000 it felt like the Canon went through ink faster. I'd imagine Canon could reduce this amount by not requiring a maintenance check after every print but maybe this is partly the reason why Canon printers tend to clog less. I'm not sure why that maintenance check couldn't occur 30 mins or an hour after the printer sits idle. Can't see how a nozzle / line that's actively in use during a line of print jobs would need to be checked after each job.
In terms of print quality Canon felt bolder and more intense and vivid. Epson may have had the edge in tone. The Pro 1000 was prone to far less skew errors most likely due to Canons superior paper movement technology / vacuum through the machine.
Part of the slight increase in perception of quality that I experienced may have had more to do with Canons Print studio pro which is not perfect but provides many tools for finalizing and image before hitting the launch button.
-
From my experience using both the P800 and Pro 1000 it felt like the Canon went through ink faster. I'd imagine Canon could reduce this amount by not requiring a maintenance check after every print but maybe this is partly the reason why Canon printers tend to clog less
There is still no reliable evidence available on the specifics of the variables determining internal maintenance checks and self-initiating cleaning cycles. As well, there is no reliable information that a maintenance check consumes ink or even the specifics of how the internal maintenance checks are implemented. If required from the results of a maintenance check, cleaning would of course consume ink. Very carefully weighing the maintenance tank before and after a known cleaning cycle and applying an estimate of the specific gravity of the ink could provide some insight.
-
Supposing the lines have a 3mm id, then 4.2m of line would be required to hold the 30ml of each ink unesco mentions.
So whether they are technically called sub-tanks or not, there is some substantial storage volume somewhere in the printer.
Opening the lid to the printer head, you can see the head has 2 x 6 bundled flexible tube lines, and near the front is long and more fixed kinds of tubing from the tank, easily around a meter worth of bundled tubing (6 in each). So if we call that 6 meter of tube (very roughly though), it's exceeding your length calculation. It doesn't seem unreasonable to me.