Digital BW, The Print

With all due respect, just because one rogue company made reference to
the BWS test, isn't grounds for saying it isn't relevant or that it
isn't a more scientific basis than WIR test criteria.  That's like
throwing out the baby with the bath water!

Your missing the point.  The OEM's go to WIR precisely because he hands
out certificates saying that "X" ink will last one hundred and forty
years.  In the scientific community WIR is an object of a certain amount
of derision.

I am happy to publish the independent test data done on a number of
competitors inks by Leeds University's DCC - including the flawed
Fotonic inks that WIR are so enamored with.

Paul Banks
Image Alchemy Ltd
www.image-alchemy.com
www.image-alchemy.de
--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, CDTobie@... wrote:
>
>
> In a message dated 3/3/07 9:17:55 AM, failedthespian@... writes:
>
>
> > My contention is that many organisations use WIR to give them a
level of
> > credibility that they often don't deserve.
> >
>
> Unfortunately very shady companies have used that same claim and logic
for
> prefering Blue Wool over Wilhelm in the past, and the result has been
inksets
> that were claimed to be very long-lived via the Blue Wook standard,
which were
> extremely short-lived in reality. At least with the Wilhelm failures
we know
> exactly what went wrong. If you are looking for legitimacy in the
inkjet market,
> you will need to use the same types of testing the big players (Epson,
HP)
> use, not those that the fly-by-nights (I'll avoid inserting a list
here <G>)
> use, no matter what your personal opinions of the various test methods
may be;
> its not yourself you need to convince.
>
> C. David Tobie
> Product Technology Manager
> ColorVision Business Unit
> Datacolor Inc.
> CDTobie@...
> www.colorvision.com
>
>
>
> **************************************
>  AOL now offers free email to everyone.
>  Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com.
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]