Compatible or genuine inks when budget is extremely limited

[Vallantho]

Hello there,

So i've been a large format photographer for some time now. Posted here a few times. I would appreciate any opinions on this topic that is giving me cause for thought.

A little background, because i believe context matters to this decision. A little over a year ago i had to give up work to care for my mother, who has mid to late stage dementia, when my father died unexpectedly. It was rather a dramatic change to my life and since then i've had little time for myself. Things have changed a little recently as i've found my mum a daycare suitable to her needs and now i have a couple of days a week to myself. I'd really like to use that time to resume my photography.

Here's the problem. I dragged out my trusty Epson R3000 the other day. Its been sitting unused in a box for over a year now. It's obviously blocked to all hell, but i believe thats a problem that can be sorted. But i need to replace the inks, and costing around £180 for a full set i would say it's definitely way over my budget.

Now i've seen a fair amount of compatible inks out there. Under normal circumstances i wouldn't dream of using them. But costing around £60 for a full set its really tempting.

i understand that they would be dye based inks and things like print permanence would suffer, but at the same time if i cant print then whats the point.

When i tell you that im existing on Carers Allowance which gives me about £70 a week income then hopefully you can understand the dilemma i'm in.

Film i have. Chemicals are cheap. But ink......?

What do you guys think? What are the dangers? What are the alternatives?

Thanks.

[rdeloe]

Are you printing colour? There are some extremely high quality 3rd party replacements, e.g., Cone Color inks are highly regarded. It may not be a lot cheaper than the OEM Epson inks though.

In my Epson 3880 I use a monochrome inkset that I mix myself -- which is to say that the printer isn't nearly as fussy about inks as Epson would like you to believe.

Do you have enough ink left in your cartridges to test the printer if you get it working again? If it really is "blocked to all hell" there's no guarantee you can get it back in shape. By far the best advice I have found on the Internet for cleaning and fixing Epson printers is on Jon Cone's site. Start with this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QLeExpFVVFo I'd try to clean it and get it working before buying new inks.

[Vallantho]

I believe the blockage can be cleared, will probably take a few more attempts at head cleaning. Unfortunately one of the cartridges ran out before I was able to fully clear it.

Looking around Jon Cone's site it does seem that refillable cartridges and inksets might be worth investigating more. Most of what I do is black and white but I would like the option to be able to print colour. Fotospeed in the uk do a set of inks that seem reasonably priced and if I can pick up the cartridges individually and replace as necessary I may be able to spread the cost over time instead of the initial outlay for a full set, which would be difficult to justify at the moment. And they seem like a better option than buying cheap compatible sets from less reputable websites.

Im interested in what you mention about mixing your own inks. Is this a complicated business? I certainly have the time on my hands to learn at the moment. any information you could point me to would be appreciated.

[rdeloe]

On cartridges, I just purchased a full set of Cone's re-fillables for my printer. Previously I purchased some from a local supplier here in Canada. One of them failed and dumped a full load of ink into my printer. You can believe that was a mess. Fortunately the printer was not destroyed. I was very skeptical that Cone's could be any better -- as he claims -- because they're also from China and look the same as the generic ones from eBay and other sites. However, I now believe they really are better. They maintain pressure (which my other ones didn't), they haven't leaked, and the chips seat properly whereas the other ones had to be taped down to fit into the printer. There may be equally good carts in the UK -- I truly don't know. But if you go that route, definitely pay attention to the quality.

For black and white, Cone sells the Piezography system, which is a turnkey approach to monochrome printing. It's very expensive, but he has many happy customers. I like the do-it-yourself approach of a guy named Paul Roark. I'm using his "Eboni Variable Tone" ink formulation. It's simple to make and he provides all the recipes and instructions for free on his site. http://www.paulroark.com/BW-Info/ In a nutshell, you create the various tones that go into the carts starting with pure carbon ink, which is often called Eboni. To make the "clear base", you mix distilled water, glycerin, Kodak PhotoFlo, and a bit of Edwal LFN. The MK position in your printer takes undiluted Eboni. The remaining positions take dilutions, e.g., the Cyan position is 30% Eboni. The "Variable Tone" part is optional. If you just use Eboni and dilutions, you get a warm toned print. I like cooler tones and split toning, so I use the blue toner (which you mix up using some base and a couple Canon inks).

For this to be worthwhile you have to do a lot of printing because the quantities you'll make are quite large, and because you're dedicating your printer to this inkset. You also need to have some tools for profiling the ink and paper and creating the drivers used by the Quadtone RIP software. You have one more option, which I mention last because it's not problem free... There's a company called Inksupply (or MIS) in the US that sells Roark's ink formulations pre-mixed, including the toner. It would be the ideal solution if they were reliable. But they're not very reliable, unfortunately. Messages go unanswered. Orders go unshipped. I had to shake the cage quite vigorously to get my last order fulfilled (pre-mixed blue toner).

[joem]

i just ordered a set of carts from them (mis) this morning, since i got the run around a couple of months ago i called and was assured they had stock ready to ship. So we'll see.

Happy to hear that they're using Roark's formula.

[Alan9940]

My experience with "compatible" inks isn't so good. I won't mention the company by name, but their ink nearly killed my Epson R2880 printer. I replaced all with OEM cartridges and no issues since. Personally, I'd think hard before going that route! How fussy are u about your prints? U can get a Canon PRO-100 really cheap if you watch for a deal. I'd bet cheaper than the replacement inks for your current printer. Since u shoot LF, have you ever thought of doing analog contact prints? Pretty minimal investment going that way.

[Vallantho]

I think there's a lot of options on the table here, which is good. Yesterday when I dragged my printer out again I was starting to wonder if I might be better off giving up. I kind of took it for granted that I could just buy what I needed when I needed it. Paper, ink, film, I didn't think about it. Now I have very real restrictions and that's going to change the way I approached photography.

I don't think I want to commit my printer to purely black and white. I've still got a bit of Provia and Velvia, probably enough for a couple of years at the rate I'll be shooting. So having the option to print colour is something I'd like to maintain.

Contact printing? Its also an option. Unfortunately I sold most of my dark room gear when I had to move. Although it wouldn't be too much effort to set myself up and I could do that very cheaply. I did keep hold of a nova print processor and nova print washer. Not sure why. I don't know if they're worth anything but maybe selling them could help fund a more sustainable solution, so that might be an idea.

[Steven Ruttenberg]

I tried it once with an Epson 2200 and the prints went bonkers a short while later. So I only use manufacturer inks now.

[Jim Jones]

For prints that will be sold, or given to someone that needs long print life, assuring them of print quality by using OEM ink and paper should be routine. Labeling the print with a link to the appropriate review from http://wilhelm-research.com/ is one way of doing this.

[rdeloe]

So on the question of longevity, Paul Roark has tested his inks extensively and works with Aardenburg Imaging (https://www.aardenburg-imaging.com/). Below is some info on that. The bottom-line is that prints made using high quality carbon inks on high quality, non-OBA cotton paper, are much more stable and light fast than those made with even the best OEM colour inks. They're even more stable and lightfast than silver gelatin prints on fiber-based paper. (And before you silver gelatin printers start yelling at me, please read Paul's testing data!)

Based on Paul's testing, I am confident that a print I make today using the Eboni-based inkset I formulate according to Paul's system, printed on the 325 gsm Premier Art 100% cotton rag, non-OBA paper I like to use, will keep well beyond the lifetime of anyone I could give it to today. That's assuming it's stored and displayed properly of course.

Mind you, I'm also confident that the chance of a print I am making today being valued by anyone 100 years from now is pretty slim. I think that a lot of people who are currently spending time and money making "archival" prints that will last for centuries are being a bit optimistic... but that's another story.

Anyway, if you sell prints and your customers are demanding they be on Epson papers using Epson inks (or whatever OEM brand you and your customers prefer), and that helps you sell your prints, then by all means that's what you should use.



-----------------------

This is a quotation from Paul's site that speaks to the question of testing and longevity; you can read the full text at Paul's site (http://www.paulroark.com/BW-Info/), where you'll also find lots more information on testing longevity.

"Today, the best carbon pigment prints we are making from dedicated B&W printing systems have exceeded the silver print in a number of ways, including image stability. Just to get your attention, here is a lightfastness comparison of an inkjet 100% carbon pigment print versus a selenium-toned silver print (fiber base, not RC). The testing was done by Aardenburg-Imaging.com. The midtone, Lab L = 50 test patch delta-e values (total change in density and color -- lower is better) after 100 Mlux-hours of light exposure (about 50 years of display) were as follows:

100% carbon pigment print: Delta-e = 0.1
Selenium toned silver print: Delta-e = 1.2

That is, the carbon print was, by this measure, 12 times more stable than the silver print. Most of this difference is in the paper tone stability of the substrates. A good inkjet paper that has no optical brighteners can be very stable. The silver and carbon are both very stable; it's the paper that is the weak link for the old silver prints.

The point is really to stress that with the right materials -- carbon pigments and good, non-OBA paper -- inkjet prints can be significantly more stable than the classic silver prints. However, the materials and processes are critical when it comes to making the best black and white prints. The higher the carbon pigment content, the better the likely stability. Of course the desired print tone may necessitate some added color, but for stability, that color needs to be held to a minimum and the quality of the color pigments used must be very high. "

[Larry Gebhardt]

For color you might consider refillable cartridges with OEM ink. If you know someone with a larger printer you could probably get free ink if they donate their used cartridges to you. The Epson 3880 leaves about 15ml in each when it considers it fully empty. The pro sized printers leave even more. It's easy to suck the ink out. Of course you could also buy ink for larger printers if you plan to print a lot which is cheaper per ml, but not to get started.

[rdeloe]

For color you might consider refillable cartridges with OEM ink. If you know someone with a larger printer you could probably get free ink if they donate their used cartridges to you. The Epson 3880 leaves about 15ml in each when it considers it fully empty. The pro sized printers leave even more. It's easy to suck the ink out. Of course you could also buy ink for larger printers if you plan to print a lot which is cheaper per ml, but not to get started.

There's a guy named Jose Rodriguez who hangs out on the printer forums. Refilling carts by draining the unused ink from OEM carts -- especially the big carts -- is his thing. In fact, he's figured out how to refill OEM carts and explains his tricks on YouTube. I ran my 3880 for a couple years using OEM Epson carts that I modified for refilling. I had to give it up and switch to Cone's carts because the printer started getting extremely fussy about the chips and the resetter stopped working. With the Cone carts you don't have to use a chip resetter, and in fact the chip controllers are unusual in that they can work with absolute empty 3880 OEM chips.

[invisibleflash]

OP... photography cost $$. Any chance you can draw? If so, go into drawing or poetry. If I could draw I'd give up photography. I'm also budget limited and have a hard time getting by.

With inkjet you have to print every few weeks or every month or so to keep the heads clean. Just depends. If you use dye ink the prints will fade bad. Pigment ink is pretty archival. But no way around photography being a $$ sucking activity. Do you want to print with dye and have your prints fade away? Sometimes you have to face the facts.

It is not like the old days...

188358

[Larry Gebhardt]

It is not like the old days...

188358

Just going from the add and an inflation calculator 4x5 film cost roughly $0.75 per sheet (bought in the 100 count) in 1962 using todays dollars (7.3x multiplier). FP4+ bought at B&H is $150 also per 100 sheet box. So today's film is roughly twice as expensive as it was in 1962. That's actually much better than I though it would be considering film, and especially large format film, isn't mainstream anymore.