Observations on Chroma Optimizer (“CO”) Usage Canon Pro-1000 Printer

[henrikolsen]

The CO treatment in a Canon Pro-1000 depends on three things: (1) the kind of paper the user specifies as the Media Type, (2) whether the user specifies that the coverage should be Full Sheet or "Auto", and (3) CO required for maintenance of the platen (see my article). CO does not coat matte paper. If the CO setting is Full Sheet, the whole page is covered; if CO setting is "Auto", CO covers those areas where there is ink laydown.

Be aware that CO set to full (not auto), unfortunately does not necessarily cover the whole page, even though that might be intended by Canon and what many else think(?). Testing with Canon OEM SG-201 satin paper, I noticed that "CO set to full" didn't cover all (highlights not covered). So full, isn't always really full.

Normally CO control includes: Change CO curve in High/Highest quality with CO Auto by choosing Lustre Pro/Platinum Pro (CO is applied from lights to blacks) or Semi-glossy/glossy paper (CO is applied from darks to blacks).

So on my tests, choosing media type as the semi-gloss/satin Canon paper, even setting CO to full won't cover all. Using a lustre pro/platinum or custom media profile will cover highlights though. This specific paper, and others, IMHO benefit a lot by having highlights covered by CO - so just a heads up to anyone else feeling CO isn't quite cutting it.

Also note if using custom media types, that the named quality scale is shifted compared to OEM media types. 'Highest' maps to quality level 2 for OEM, but to 3 for custom media. Does confuse testing until you realise it. Weird, looks like a bug. Anyone at Canon listening in?

[Mark D Segal]

And finally some of us has suffered the system clean of about 58grams that happens at least once per ink set.

Hi Sabin,

I also had one episode of the printer evacuating 58gms in a long cleaning operation as Mark McCormack-Goodhart I believe also described. This happened after about three weeks of non-usage. I called Canon tech support for a discussion and the advice I received was that if I leave the printer turned ON, this will not happen, and leaving the printer on consumes very, very little electricity. That was quite some weeks ago. I have used the printer at various intervals since then and so far there has been no repeat of this massive maintenance evacuation.

[henrikolsen]

I also had one episode of the printer evacuating 58gms in a long cleaning operation as Mark McCormack-Goodhart I believe also described. This happened after about three weeks of non-usage. I called Canon tech support for a discussion and the advice I received was that if I leave the printer turned ON, this will not happen, and leaving the printer on consumes very, very little electricity. That was quite some weeks ago. I have used the printer at various intervals since then and so far there has been no repeat of this massive maintenance evacuation.

I had this big maintenance dump reported as well. Mark S, was your 50+g dump also at or around a full maintenance cartridge? Trying to establish if it goes together with that happening, as I think Sabin and I, perhaps also Mark M, saw this happen somewhat close or at maintenance cartridge replacement.

Regarding the advice on leaving the printer turned on. Does that include turning off the automatic sleep/off mode (think it's often like 4 hours or so)? I had previously understood this auto turn-off actually turned it off to a state similar to manually hitting the off-switch (though possibly not the same as actually pulling or turning off the actually supply to it, timers/counters and so on).

@Sabin. Did you experiment having it always on while observing the 50+g dump? If so, Canons advice doesn't seem to apply, at least as only change. Are you currently, with the latest observations, keeping it on all the time (forced by inactivating auto-off)?

[Mark D Segal]

I had this big maintenance dump reported as well. Mark S, was your 50+g dump also at or around a full maintenance cartridge? Trying to establish if it goes together with that happening, as I think Sabin and I, perhaps also Mark M, saw this happen somewhat close or at maintenance cartridge replacement.

Regarding the advice on leaving the printer turned on. Does that include turning off the automatic sleep/off mode (think it's often like 4 hours or so)? I had previously understood this auto turn-off actually turned it off to a state similar to manually hitting the off-switch (though possibly not the same as actually pulling or turning off the actually supply to it, timers/counters and so on).

@Sabin. Did you experiment having it always on while observing the 50+g dump? If so, Canons advice doesn't seem to apply, at least as only change. Are you currently, with the latest observations, keeping it on all the time (forced by inactivating auto-off)?

As I said, it happened after several weeks of non-usage. To be clear - nothing to do with the maintenance tank. And yes, keeping it on means turning off automated shut-down. I have no idea what is alive or sleeping under the hood in this state. I hear no noise from the printer and the LCD is not illuminated unless I open the tray to start a print job. That's all I know about it.

[MHMG]

And the plot thickens. A couple of weeks ago I decided to rearrange my office and to refinish the sturdy old work table my Pro-1000 sits on. It took me about 10 days to complete the refinishing project and then get the Pro-1000 up and running again. I had to pull the plug on the printer to remove the table from underneath it, so the printer was literally unplugged and I just left it that way for about 10 days.  I figured this would be a good opportunity to see how much ink would go to the waste tank after complet and relatively long full power off interval.  I weighed the cart before startup, then again right after the printer did its thing and was ready to print. Much to my surprise the waste tank only registered 6.3 grams more weight!. I was expecting the mother of all ink dumps, but it didn't happen.  Prior to shutting the printer down, I had also not printed for a couple of weeks, and my last nozzle check occurred about a week before I shut it down with full power/unplugged off condition. So, about three weeks of total non use and totally unplugged for about 10 days, but no huge ink consumption occurred.

The next thing that happened is also worth mentioning.  After the printer was ready, I tried to run a plain paper nozzle check. The sheet was 20 bond paper and relatively flat. Never had any trouble with it feeding before, but in this instance, the print head must have caught the lead corner and started to jam yet the printer was still soldiering on trying to print on an increasingly crumbled piece of paper. So, I did the only thing I could think of in the heat of the moment which was to immediately press the power off switch to force an immediate shutdown. I then carefully retrieved the crumpled sheet of paper, then powered the printer back up. I next decided to forego the nozzle check and just print a real image on a sheet of RC photo paper. What happened next was totally confusing. I was getting severe banding in the vertical direction of the print feed but in just one location on the print. This made no sense because a damaged or clogged head should show banding in the direction of the head pass, not vertical to it.

So, I then called Canon Support. The Canon guy knew his stuff. He told me to inspect the encoder strip for dirt or junk and to wipe it clean with a soft tissue. I saw a spot on the encoder strip that looked like clear grease rather than paper debris and right in the location where the banding was occurring on the print.  I suspect it was probably some CO that had managed to gunk up at that location when the paper crumpled. The encoder strip is a about a 1/4 inch wide strip of mylar sitting just in front of the drive belt. I had never really noticed this very delicate part that runs the full width of the carriage path.  Anyway, gently wiping the mylar strip did the trick. The printer is now printing perfectly. Moral of the story. If you see banding running perpendicular to the print head direction, the Pro-1000 encoder is probably dirty

kind regards
Mark
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com

[Mark D Segal]

Helpful insights Mark, thanks.

[sabin]

I had this big maintenance dump reported as well. Mark S, was your 50+g dump also at or around a full maintenance cartridge? Trying to establish if it goes together with that happening, as I think Sabin and I, perhaps also Mark M, saw this happen somewhat close or at maintenance cartridge replacement.

Regarding the advice on leaving the printer turned on. Does that include turning off the automatic sleep/off mode (think it's often like 4 hours or so)? I had previously understood this auto turn-off actually turned it off to a state similar to manually hitting the off-switch (though possibly not the same as actually pulling or turning off the actually supply to it, timers/counters and so on).

@Sabin. Did you experiment having it always on while observing the 50+g dump? If so, Canons advice doesn't seem to apply, at least as only change. Are you currently, with the latest observations, keeping it on all the time (forced by inactivating auto-off)?

No. At that time I powered off the printer when not in use.

[henrikolsen]

No. At that time I powered off the printer when not in use.

And now you keep it on all the time, disabling the auto-power-off? Any downsides to this (except minimal power usage)? I recall you early on attempted keeping it on, but got some clogs... I might recall that wrong.

[Mark D Segal]

I've had the Pro-1000 on for the past several weeks with periodic usage and there has not been a repeat of this massive wastage of ink for maintenance.

[sabin]

And now you keep it on all the time, disabling the auto-power-off? Any downsides to this (except minimal power usage)? I recall you early on attempted keeping it on, but got some clogs... I might recall that wrong.

Yes, you recall correctly. However after that I have left the printer for weeks without clogs.

It's been two weeks now and soon I will find time to print something and see how it goes. I will report back.

[Landscapes]

Man I feel bad for you guys going through a 58ml ink dump.  I have a 6400, and I wonder if you would find this helpful, although I'm not even sure if its applicable.

Is there way to enter the service mode on the Pro-1000?  I imagine that since its based on the 2000 and 4000, there should be a way.  What I do on my 6400 when I haven't printed in a few days is enter the service mode, and do a nozzle check from the service menu that shows me all the nozzles.  This way, I'm seeing the actual status of every nozzle, but I'm also having the printer print something.  I have seen that this must now reset the clock for how long its been since a print has been made.  Then, when I reboot in regular mode, it will no longer do a clean cycle.

I noticed that on the 6400, after 3 days or non use, it would do a clean cycle which used 14ml of ink.  What a waste this is because this prints roughly 14 square feet which is quite a bit when you consider an 8x10 isn't even one square foot.  But if I do the nozzle check in the service mode, it no longer will do a clean cycle.  Even if I saw a few clogged nozzles, I would still just do regular prints because I feel that one or two clogged nozzles will not affect the print, and after its been printing a bit, those nozzles might in fact come back to life.  You can certainly test this if you then do a nozzle 1 pattern from the service menu again.

Now this is a lot of trouble to go through, so I usually just make sure to print every 2 days, even if its just a pattern I have which prints roughly every color channel on a plain piece of copy paper.  It uses 0.3ml of ink, which is nothing in the whole grand scheme of things, but keeps the ink flowing.

I have left my printer off for 7 days, come back, booted up in service mode, did a nozzle 1 check from the service mode, looked fine, turned off and back on in regular mode, and then did a normal print with no trouble, and more importantly, no clean cycle.

[Mark D Segal]

When this happens with the Pro-1000, my experience was that it occurs on start-up and is involuntary. You don't get to control anything until it completes.

[MHMG]

When this happens with the Pro-1000, my experience was that it occurs on start-up and is involuntary. You don't get to control anything until it completes.

Yet no one yet seems to know precisely the precursors that cause it. As noted in my earlier post, a full unplugged power off situation for over one week was not enough to cause it on my Pro-1000 running on latest firmware, but I have had it happen on two separate occasions prior without fully being able to retrace the steps that caused it to happen.  So, what exactly does cause it? It would be nice to figure out what possible steps can be taken to avoid it. How about the Canon support guys giving us a real answer not just misinformation which later turns out to be incorrect?

Don't get me wrong. If this maintenance step is truly vital and not just conservative CYA tactics on Canon's part for the well-being of the printer, then it's necessary. No hard feelings about the Pro-1000, but owners of this printer could certainly benefit from Canon being a bit more forthcoming about these behind-the-scenes ink consumption-for-maintenance cycles when the printer doesn't appear to have any immediate clogging issues needing to be addressed either manually or automatically.

I'm admittedly a low print volume user of this printer as are many other photographers and amateur printmakers who purchase it, but it's exacting an approximately $30 per month "service-fee" for the privilege of ongoing ownership. How many reviews of this printer picked up on that issue? How does this service fee compare to costs of ownership for other printers in its class like the Epson P800?

best,
Mark
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com

[Mark D Segal]

Yet no one yet seems to know precisely the precursors that cause it. As noted in my earlier post, a full unplugged power off situation for over one week was not enough to cause it on my Pro-1000 running on latest firmware, but I have had it happen on two separate occasions prior without fully being able to retrace the steps that caused it to happen.  So, what exactly does cause it? It would be nice to figure out what possible steps can be taken to avoid it. How about the Canon support guys giving us a real answer not just misinformation which later turns out to be incorrect?

Don't get me wrong. If this maintenance step is truly vital and not just conservative CYA tactics on Canon's part for the well-being of the printer, then it's necessary. No hard feelings about the Pro-1000, but owners of this printer could certainly benefit from Canon being a bit more forthcoming about these behind-the-scenes ink consumption-for-maintenance cycles when the printer doesn't appear to have any immediate clogging issues needing to be addressed either manually or automatically.

best,
Mark
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com

Mark, this is in good measure a chicken-egg business. The printer doesn't look as if it needs to be cleaned because it is being cleaned under the hood. I've never had a clogged nozzle pattern out of that printer, and I know it is consuming a fair bit of ink to maintain that status. So just because it doesn't LOOK as if the cleanings aren't needed, it doesn't mean they aren't needed, but the devil is in the detail of course. Does that make generic sense? Somehow I think it does, but there's lots of details missing. Now is a 50ml cleaning cycle needed? Only its hairdresser knows.......seriously, don't expect Canon to provide further clarity about this stuff. When I approached them about the 50ml cleaning dump, they told me to leave the printer turned on and it won't happen. I did that several weeks ago, and so far so good - it hasn't happened. Will it happen regardless one of these days? I have no idea. Stay tuned - if it does I'll report it. Yes, I am one for transparency and I think both Canon and Epson should be a lot more forthcoming on the specific conditions in which various kinds of cleaning cycles are triggered and how much ink they consume, but I can tell you for fact - it's a commercially and technically sensitive subject. Don't expect much.

[MHMG]

...The printer doesn't look as if it needs to be cleaned because it is being cleaned under the hood. I've never had a clogged nozzle pattern out of that printer, and I know it is consuming a fair bit of ink to maintain that status. So just because it doesn't LOOK as if the cleanings aren't needed, it doesn't mean they aren't needed, but the devil is in the detail of course.

Being cleaned because the head actually needs it and being cleaned preemptively whether the head needs it or not are two different things. Yet in either case, $30 per month (what I'm seeing in my ongoing records tracking all costs) for head maintenance is not an insignificant amount. My 44 inch HPZ3200 doesn't consume anywhere near that amount to keep itself printing reliably, and I suspect a more comparably compared Epson SureColor P800 wouldn't either unless one is doing excessive swapping between MK and PK on the P800.  Just sayin... $30 per month is worth taking a closer look at the situation. It's even enough to justify owning a second Epson P800 over an approximately three year time frame to completely eliminate the Epson PK/MK ink switching dilemma.

[Mark D Segal]

Being cleaned because the head actually needs it and being cleaned preemptively whether the head needs it or not are two different things. Yet in either case, $30 per month (what I'm seeing in my ongoing records tracking all costs) for head maintenance is not an insignificant amount. My 44 inch HPZ3200 doesn't consume anywhere near that amount to keep itself printing reliably, and I suspect a more comparably compared Epson SureColor P800 wouldn't either unless one is doing excessive swapping between MK and PK on the P800.  Just sayin... $30 per month is worth taking a closer look at the situation. It's even enough to justify owning a second Epson P800 over an approximately three year time frame to completely eliminate the Epson PK/MK ink switching dilemma.

It's possible that preemptive cleaning is being done to prevent the need for what you call "actually needs cleaning". We don't know. The approach with the P800 is completely different. You do a nozzle check. If it's clean, no cleaning, if it isn't, then cleaning, all user=decided, manual. I think it will end-up using less ink for maintenance, but I haven't been able to assess that yet. I can only start measuring it with the next maintenance tank.

[GrahamBy]

A data point: I finally emptied my CO cartridge this morning. It was the third to go, after GY and PBK. I print 90% BW, 100% on RC paper. All the other cartridges have been at their lowest displayable level for some time.

[sabin]

When this happens with the Pro-1000, my experience was that it occurs on start-up and is involuntary. You don't get to control anything until it completes.

My case was different. I changed the maintenance cartage as requested by the printer, printed one nozzle check, then I sent a print job to the printer and it then started system cleaning.

If you turn off "Auto nozzle check" and "Ink maintenance" you will reduce the ongoing ink waste. System cleaning cannot be disabled but at least can be set to standard (not short).

Update on testing with "Auto nozzle check" and "Ink maintenance" turned off:
For 16 days and 15 hours the maintenance cartage has lost weight from 397.12 grams to 392.88. This is 4.23 grams evaporated on 25C temp. If some cleaning is happening when printer is on, it is so small that it definitely is not reaching the maintenance cartridge.

1.with the printer ON, I turned it off to see what will happen when I turn it on again: 0.03g. after off, 3.24g after on again and also we got ink agitation.

2. 2nd off/on to check if it will perform that again: yes it did but without the agitating ink routine.

3. Print Nozzle check: Perfect test page (after two off/on cleanings), but the printer performed cleaning of 3.28g before printing. If I have not been testing on/off, that was going to be the only waste.

4. After nz. check print I was asked to change the CO cartridge. Agitating inks after change and no waste was measured after the printer was ready.

So it seams that even with the "Ink maintenance" turned off, the printer is performing some mandatory ink maintenance on long pauses without printing. Now I have to find out how long is the pause, so that I can print something before the timer kicks in and I think this will be the end of my tests for least maintenance waste owning this printer.

[Mark D Segal]

Very interesting Sabin.

My question on reading this is whether there is a bigger price to pay down the road for turning off as much of this maintenance stuff as possible. I suppose we won't get to know that unless or till something unwanted happens. Or put another way, there has to be some logic behind the default settings and some logic behind the options to tune them way down, but none of that logic is anywhere explained, so we are a bit in the dark on all this, taking the long-term perspective on it.

[Doug Gray]

Update on testing with "Auto nozzle check" and "Ink maintenance" turned off:
For 16 days and 15 hours the maintenance cartage has lost weight from 397.12 grams to 392.88. This is 4.23 grams evaporated on 25C temp. If some cleaning is happening when printer is on, it is so small that it definitely is not reaching the maintenance cartridge.

Very cool!

Further, by logging the weight right before/after cleaning one should be able to make an estimate of ink used cleaning. There are two processes, an aqueous component, and a less volatile glycol like component with a much longer evaporation rate. I'm going to use this idea on my 9800. Especially on new ink cartridge loads and MK/PK swaps.

Thanks for a great idea.