Digital BW, The Print

Thanks Michael, good logic. 

Cone claims better gamut but doesn't/didn't claim equally good
gloss...still, the gloss is perfect in these samples so maybe he's
made progress.

I hadn't thought to use K3 in a CIS because of the many bad reports on
CIS reliability/damage and bad quality control on 3rd party carts ...
those date back years...have there been CIS improvements ?  Cone makes
a convincing case for his color, but apparently hasn't explored QTR
with it.

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Michael T.
Murphy" <uriel_bear@...> wrote:
>
> > 
> > I wonder if ConeColor might do better QTR B&W than 
> > Epson's 2200 pigments do...Epson's have gloss differential and
> > bronzing problems with glossy and semigloss papers .
> > 
> 
> The Cone inks are supposed to be clones of the Epson K3 inks that 
> were used in the 2400.  If they are good quality clones (I have not 
> tested them), one would expect that they would perform better than 
> the Epson K2 inks used in the 2200.
> 
> I have not had a chance to test the Cone inks. I have been able to 
> find genuine Epson K3 inks for the same price or less than the Cone 
> Color inks. The Epson inks performance is quite well known, with 
> documented longevity testing on a wide vaeiety of papers, etc.  
> 
> You can load the Epson K3 inks in an older K2 machine - 2200, 7600, 
> etc.  - just as easily as you can load the Cone inks.
> 
> Best,
> Michael
>