Epson 3880 for Piezography? Should I?

[joncone@cone-editions.com]

Tyler, I can give a long reply based on facts...It's my ink so it should be my responsibility to respond.

The use of 3rd party inks does not void the warranty in the USA. First the Sherman Anti-Trust Act, and later the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act strengthened consumer rights to the point that Manufacturers can only threaten to but not actually withhold warranty repair.

The Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act (Public Law 93-637) is a U.S. Federal law that states that warrantors can not require that only brand name parts be used with any product, as some printer manufacturers imply. Legally, the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act is a consumer protection law that states that: "No warrantor of a consumer product may condition his written or implied warranty of such product on the consumer's using, in connection with such product, any article or service (other than article or service provided without charge under the terms of the warranty) which is identified by brand, trade or corporate name” (15 U.S.C.A. 2302)

The Magnusson-Moss Warranty Act is very strong and the Manufacturer has to encounter a problem that their own consumable does not cause. The factor is that the consumable has to cause a problem that the use of the Manufacturer's brand does not. For example, printing pigmented Windex as an ink would eventually damage the copper inside the print head and that would not be warrantied because the consumable behaves in a way that the Manufacturer's does not. And this is why the Manufacturer uses the word "MAY VOID". But, if a print head malfunctions early and prints with banding, it would be covered under Epson inks or my inks. Epson has the right to install a set of Epson inks into the printer to perform a final test after head replacement. But, in the cases of most of my customers they have reported that the Epson techs reinstall the Cone inks. Our customers routinely receive warranty repair from Epson, even when the obviousness of having an all black Piezography ink set installed. I have witnessed repairs to Epson 9900s in our vicinity and the repair technician complimented our inks and did final testing with our inks.


Having said that, back in 2000 we did not make our own ink. Our supplier made an ink that did cause problems in foam filled carts for Epson 1280s. We replaced a lot of monies in those days, learned a lesson the hard way, and more importantly we learned not to depend upon others to make our inks. We began formulating our own inks for Epson later in 2002. I had formulated archival inks for IRIS Graphics printers from 1994 -1997. So we have a great deal of inkjet expertise. Our formulations are exclusive and are only sold by InkjetMall in USA. I resell my inks to others elsewhere in the world under by own brands and allow private label.

In 2005, when we developed a proprietary method to encapsulate pigment we were able to finally produce an ink that performs like the original. InkjetMall was able to get an insurance policy that would cover it's customer's equipment in the case that our products were found to damage the printer and the printer's warranty was voided as a result. We have never had to use this for reasons of ink. But, in 2007 we sold cartridges that did damage 12 large format printers. We repaired those printers without deductibles and made those customers whole. We also recalled or repaired the entire batch of LF cartridges we had sold. InkjetMall insurance is very comprehensive in regards to printer damage. Since the cartridge episode we have gained control over our cartridges. We still have the insurance policy in place but have not had an incident since 2007. We definitely stand behind our customers in ways no other 3rd party ink company can.

And of course I'm my own customer...Cone Editions has been using my inks in its Epson printers for a decade. I also produced all of the inks for the monumental Ashes and Snow exhibition prints. These 110" 12 ink Roland printers took 18 hours to produce each of the humongous photographs, and because of the hand made paper they were not able to utilize automatic head cleanings during the print run which is a testament in itself to the quality of my inks. Try that with Epson inks.... I was also the printmaker for the Ashes and Snow exhibitions. Our expertise is not just in making inks but in using them. I'm a printmaker first and foremost, and I believe that this is why I make such high-standard inks.


regards,

Jon Cone

InkjetMall
Piezography
Cone Editions Press
Vermont PhotoInkjet

[Brian K]

Tyler, I can give a long reply based on facts...It's my ink so it should be my responsibility to respond.

The use of 3rd party inks does not void the warranty in the USA. First the Sherman Anti-Trust Act, and later the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act strengthened consumer rights to the point that Manufacturers can only threaten to but not actually withhold warranty repair.

The Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act (Public Law 93-637) is a U.S. Federal law that states that warrantors can not require that only brand name parts be used with any product, as some printer manufacturers imply. Legally, the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act is a consumer protection law that states that: "No warrantor of a consumer product may condition his written or implied warranty of such product on the consumer's using, in connection with such product, any article or service (other than article or service provided without charge under the terms of the warranty) which is identified by brand, trade or corporate name” (15 U.S.C.A. 2302)

The Magnusson-Moss Warranty Act is very strong and the Manufacturer has to encounter a problem that their own consumable does not cause. The factor is that the consumable has to cause a problem that the use of the Manufacturer's brand does not. For example, printing pigmented Windex as an ink would eventually damage the copper inside the print head and that would not be warrantied because the consumable behaves in a way that the Manufacturer's does not. And this is why the Manufacturer uses the word "MAY VOID". But, if a print head malfunctions early and prints with banding, it would be covered under Epson inks or my inks. Epson has the right to install a set of Epson inks into the printer to perform a final test after head replacement. But, in the cases of most of my customers they have reported that the Epson techs reinstall the Cone inks. Our customers routinely receive warranty repair from Epson, even when the obviousness of having an all black Piezography ink set installed. I have witnessed repairs to Epson 9900s in our vicinity and the repair technician complimented our inks and did final testing with our inks.


Having said that, back in 2000 we did not make our own ink. Our supplier made an ink that did cause problems in foam filled carts for Epson 1280s. We replaced a lot of monies in those days, learned a lesson the hard way, and more importantly we learned not to depend upon others to make our inks. We began formulating our own inks for Epson later in 2002. I had formulated archival inks for IRIS Graphics printers from 1994 -1997. So we have a great deal of inkjet expertise. Our formulations are exclusive and are only sold by InkjetMall in USA. I resell my inks to others elsewhere in the world under by own brands and allow private label.

In 2005, when we developed a proprietary method to encapsulate pigment we were able to finally produce an ink that performs like the original. InkjetMall was able to get an insurance policy that would cover it's customer's equipment in the case that our products were found to damage the printer and the printer's warranty was voided as a result. We have never had to use this for reasons of ink. But, in 2007 we sold cartridges that did damage 12 large format printers. We repaired those printers without deductibles and made those customers whole. We also recalled or repaired the entire batch of LF cartridges we had sold. InkjetMall insurance is very comprehensive in regards to printer damage. Since the cartridge episode we have gained control over our cartridges. We still have the insurance policy in place but have not had an incident since 2007. We definitely stand behind our customers in ways no other 3rd party ink company can.

And of course I'm my own customer...Cone Editions has been using my inks in its Epson printers for a decade. I also produced all of the inks for the monumental Ashes and Snow exhibition prints. These 110" 12 ink Roland printers took 18 hours to produce each of the humongous photographs, and because of the hand made paper they were not able to utilize automatic head cleanings during the print run which is a testament in itself to the quality of my inks. Try that with Epson inks.... I was also the printmaker for the Ashes and Snow exhibitions. Our expertise is not just in making inks but in using them. I'm a printmaker first and foremost, and I believe that this is why I make such high-standard inks.


regards,

Jon Cone

InkjetMall
Piezography
Cone Editions Press
Vermont PhotoInkjet

John, thanks for explaining in detail. I think you could understand my perspective based on Epson's own stated warranty and specific reference to third party inks. But if your products come with their own warranty or insurance against printer damage then I guess you it got it covered.

[welly]

Just bringing this thread up from the dead as I was going to post a message about the Cone inks. I don't shoot colour (and have no plans/desire to do either) so just using my Epson 3880 as a black and white printer is fine. And if later down the track I really want to shoot some colour, I'll outsource colour printing.

I've been really pleased with the quality of my prints that have been coming out with just the standard Epson inks and the standard drivers. I wonder if I can possibly improve my prints using QTR and then possibly the Cone inks? QTR seems like it might be a cheap "upgrade" for better b+w printing and then possibly the Cone inks later.

[mdm]

Welly, I have the Piezography carbon inkset in my 2880, I also have a 1430 with eboni 6. I did that because for some prints the Piezography carbon inkset is just not right and because I wanted to make my own profiles or linearise others profiles (not that you cant make your own with the piezography, but its hard to better the supplied profiles). I like both very much but I have to admit the Piezography inkset is much less trouble. I have printed wedges on a few different papers and read them, and find that the profiles just work, they are as linear as any I could make. They print beautiful highlights. If I were doing it again, I would put the Piezography digital negative sytem in my 2880 and use the 1430/eboni 6 for matte inkjets, but only because the negative profiles I make myself are always a work in progress and never quite make it to a perfect enough final version, just cant leave them alone. I find I print a lot of small digitals and scans on K7 carbon just because its easy and not too expensive to print on epson matte HW, and a few prints on Hahnmule Photo Rag or the canson papers. A carefully printed K7 carbon on HPR is a very hard print to better. To the extent that any other printing you do has to suddenly justify its use. My carbon transfer and salt prints now have to offer something that an inkjet cant, they have to be better.

[Peter Gomena]

Well, QTR is $50 shareware and you can use the inks you have now. No muss, no fuss.

I've been using QTR with Epson inks in my Epson 2200 for about 6 months now, using the supplied QTR profiles. My prints are leaps ahead of what they were before, and I'm satisfied for now. I know three other photographers who produce fine work on 3800s or 3880s with QTR and Epson inks.

Stepping up to a dedicated B&W printer is beyond my means. I've seen prints using Cone inks, and they're stunning. When my wallet is thicker, I might try a dedicated B&W setup, calibrate a RIP and go deluxe. One person I know is going to test a Cone system before long. I'll see how his images turn out before I consider moving to a more involved system.

Peter Gomena