Digital BW, The Print

André Vallejo wrote:

>Someone says this canon printer or it's predecesor can print as good prints
>as the 1280,which is good,and having separate inks can be even better. But
>does anyone knows what are the droplet size based on this information (Canon
>web-site)? Guess we could use our MIS inks with it,right?
>
> 
>
Not the pigment inks you can't...

The Canon nozzles and printhead require a much lower viscosity ink..

MIS doesn't make a stable pig with that low a viscosity..
Keith

 

"Just some guy," and caretaker of the Multiverse's largest EPSON printer 
User Community (highly recommended by Vogon Poets and MegaDodo 
Publications), at:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EPSONx7x_Printers/
 
"For the rest of you out there, the secret is to bang the rocks together 
guys"

 




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

Martin, you wrote:

>There is a general problem of inkjet printing - to put enough
ink on
paper as fast as possible - the IRIS printer are able to put on
one
place as much as 96 pl (in 3 pl steps!!!) - not the eject the
smallest drop. It is a problem of max. density you may print out.

Epson heads use variable size drops - the largest drops are about
22
pl. If you use ONLY 4 pl drops you need 5.5 times faster printing
(resolution, nozzles, ...) to put the same amount of ink on
paper.
And rich the same density.

So 512 nozzles per ink with fix drop size 4 pl are comparable
with 96
nozzles with variable size dot technology.<


And Canon hasn't variable droplet sizes yet ?  Seems unlikely.


Ernst

I can tell you that my S9000 is so fast I hate using my 1280 and 1270 
anymore..

If anything the i9100 is a tad faster..

They both make the 2200 look like it's standing still, especially when 
printing borderless @ 13x19..

But I still can't use pigment inks in the S9000,  The new Conehead inks 
may change that... But I'll believe it when I see it.. The viscosity 
needed for the Canons is waaaay lower.. That makes keeping particles in 
suspension MUCH tougher..
Keith

 

"Just some guy," and caretaker of the Multiverse's largest EPSON printer 
User Community (highly recommended by Vogon Poets and MegaDodo 
Publications), at:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EPSONx7x_Printers/
 
"For the rest of you out there, the secret is to bang the rocks together 
guys"

 




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

At 09:07 +0100 3.3.2003, Ernst Dinkla wrote:
*******************************************

>
>And Canon hasn't variable droplet sizes yet ?  Seems unlikely.
>

It is quite easy imagine how to produce two size of drop mechanically 
- add two different electric potentials on the same piezocrystal and 
you receive for example - 4 and 9 pl. Add more different drops and 
you receive three possible sizes of drop in one step: 4, 9 and 22 
(9+9+4) pl. And 13 (4+9), 26 (4+9+4+9), 36 (4+9+4+9+4+9) pl for 360 
dpi.

But how to make the same with thermal head? With two different 
thermal elements for one nozzle? Is it mechanically possible?

Anytime you are limited with cooling of print head. So you may not 
increase the frequency of firing of drops ad lib.  (IRIS has solved 
it very effectively - there is a continual production of drops which 
cool the head - with only ONE nozzle per color.)

Very high number of nozzles has one positive effect though - it 
covers the irregularities of firing of drops better. Drops fired by 
piezo are about 100 times faster and the precision is much higher, 
but one may see any irregularity.

Martin


--

----- Original Message -----

From: "Martin Sluka" <martinsluka@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, March 03, 2003 9:49 AM
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Canon i9100


> At 09:07 +0100 3.3.2003, Ernst Dinkla wrote:
> *******************************************
>
> >
> >And Canon hasn't variable droplet sizes yet ?  Seems unlikely.
> >
>
> It is quite easy imagine how to produce two size of drop
mechanically
> - add two different electric potentials on the same
piezocrystal and
> you receive for example - 4 and 9 pl. Add more different drops
and
> you receive three possible sizes of drop in one step: 4, 9 and
22
> (9+9+4) pl. And 13 (4+9), 26 (4+9+4+9), 36 (4+9+4+9+4+9) pl for
360
> dpi.
>
> But how to make the same with thermal head? With two different
> thermal elements for one nozzle? Is it mechanically possible?
>
> Anytime you are limited with cooling of print head. So you may
not
> increase the frequency of firing of drops ad lib.  (IRIS has
solved
> it very effectively - there is a continual production of drops
which
> cool the head - with only ONE nozzle per color.)
>
> Very high number of nozzles has one positive effect though - it
> covers the irregularities of firing of drops better. Drops
fired by
> piezo are about 100 times faster and the precision is much
higher,
> but one may see any irregularity.

HP was one of the first to introduce variable droplets in desktop
inkjet printing. Voltage changes combined with a slightly faster
pulse will work as well I guess to get more ink pumped out.
Higher frequency pulses after another that will produce small
droplets that cling to one another to form one big droplet before
the ink hits the paper works as well. In the print there is no
distinction between a dot that is build by one larger varible
droplet created in the head, by a larger droplet that is created
in mid air or by a lot of smal droplets that hit the paper at the
same time at the same spot.

http://h20015.www2.hp.com/en/document.jhtml?lc=en&docName=bpu0218
2

Encads had pigment ink (GO) before the Rolands and the Epson
7500/9500 got pigment ink so there's no rule that thermoheads
can't print pigment ink. AFAIK the HP desktop printers had a
black ink a long time ago that didn't fade. Most likely that was
a pigment ink as well. All the modern wide format thermohead
inkjet printers can use pigment inks.

The Iris uses a piezo system where ink is squirted continuously
and the droplets that shouldn't hit the paper are deflected to a
waste bottle. Easy on ink cost calculation but it is expensive on
ink costs ;-) That was what most inkjet systems used in the
beginning, address label printing in postal offices etc. Later on
the "drop on demand" system was developed, harder to get the same
high frequency in interrupted ink streams as the Iris has in a
continuous stream. Epson managed to get frequency and added
droplet variation as well.

Piezoheads have some specs that will be difficult to achieve in
thermoheads. True solvent inks are not a nice match with heads
that work at high temperatures. The pumping capacity of
piezoheads is better suited for 'thicker" inks like textile
sublimation inks, UV curable and possibly the high load pigment
inks (Ultrachrome). Thermoheads are probably easier to
manufacture and it could be that for a given head surface more
nozzles can be applied. Spreading of nozzles over a larger area
can solve overheating problems and increase speed or resolution.

The death of thermoheads has been predicted a long time ago
..........I'm guilty too.

Ernst

Piezography have just announced an inkset for the earlier Canon printers, 
but I don't know whether they'll be suitable for the i950 and i9100.

In article <3E62A73E.9030604@...>, editor@... 
(Editor P.O.V. Image Service) wrote:

> Andr\ufffd Vallejo wrote:
> 
> >Someone says this canon printer or it's predecesor can print as good 
> prints
> >as the 1280,which is good,and having separate inks can be even better. 
> But
> >does anyone knows what are the droplet size based on this information 
> (Canon
> >web-site)? Guess we could use our MIS inks with it,right?
> >
> > 
> >
> Not the pigment inks you can't...
> 
> The Canon nozzles and printhead require a much lower viscosity ink..
> 
> MIS doesn't make a stable pig with that low a viscosity..
> Keith
>

Well, I bought the i950 to do color snapshots, since everything else was
dedicated b&w.  For that, at least, it is excellent.  At the highest
resolution settings, an 8x10 color print in a minute or so, and the Canon
Pro glossy paper looks pretty good, if you like glossy paper.  Excellent
detail, no banding at all.  I did have to make a correction curve to get the
colors and contrast right.  The little b&w I tried is as expected, a color
cast that you may or may not be able to get rid of, like a wet print way
overdone in selenium toner, i.e., running to purple.

Regards,

  --Ken Carney
    www.kencarney.com



----- Original Message -----
From: "Andr\ufffd Vallejo" <avs@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, June 13, 2003 1:26 PM
Subject: [Digital BW] Canon i9100


> Any news from the Canon beauty with the swapping head? Already on the
road?
> Any tests?
>
>
>
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and
other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to
unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same
page.
>
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - Include your full name with your message.
> - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep
them short.
> - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames
> - Complete your Yahoo profile.
> - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various
resources on the homepage.

>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>