Digital BW, The Print

I felt compelled to make this post after the firestorm that my posts 
seemed to directly cause. 

First and foremost I want to apologize to the group and our co 
founders. I made an erant statement about a group of users that came 
here because they weren't satisfied with a certain product, 
forgetting the fact that this group is not just about printing with 
inkjet printers.

Some of us can and do get a little passionate about our beliefs, 
theories and experiences. Then you have those that are diplomatic 
about it such as Martin that keep the "tone" on an even keel. Some 
will detect a "tone" where maybe one was not intended. Then there are 
those that definitely intend a "tone" - an example of this, to me 
anyhow, is the references made to not wanting a product shoved down 
your throat, then said individuals do the same with another product. 

I also personally have a hard time with the fact that some will view 
certain products (or individuals) as superior and that the new kid on 
the block can't possibly compete. What we fail to realize is that 
these superior products came from that new kid on the block not so 
long ago, and that now may lack the advances (or incentives) that 
others discover. Someone or something always comes along that is 
better and that is how the advances are made in the end. Defending 
any given product as being perfect provides zero incentive to that 
manufacturer to improve upon it. I have yet to find a product that 
could not be improved upon.

For the purposes of this post I am keeping all names and specific 
products intentionally out of the loop. I just want to look at what 
qualifies a good inkset for any given printer, but specifically the 
Epson line since that is what we all tend to use the most. I just 
want to look at inksets in general and leave specific brands out of 
it. I personally am biased towards any product that works as 
advertised. I hold no brand loyalties, nor do I sell or endorse any 
given inkset, if it works and I like the end results I will use it
(since this can be and is subjective with issues of tone etc... being 
a personal preference that is also being excluded).

What qualifies as a good inkset? To me, it must:

1 - Be fully compatible with ALL of the printer line (example - 3000, 
1200, 1270 etc...) it is advertised for. Some companies will only 
advertise that an ink is compatible with certain models since they 
have thoroughly tested and determined that a major reformulation 
would be required to gain compatibility with other models. If the 
printer worked perfectly fine with the stock ink, it should do so 
with the 3rd party inkset. Zero modifications should be required and 
you should not need to replace the printer.
2 - Work immediately upon being installed if in a cartridge, and a 
maximum of an overnight wait in a CIS.
3 - Not cause severe clogging or other ink related problems such as 
misting, sludge buildup, etc...
4 - Have a chemical composition that should not be harmful to ANY of 
the printers operating parts either in the short or long term.

I view the above as expected, since the stock inks meet all of those 
requirementsand were specifically developed for those printers. 

If an inkset does not meet these 4 simple requirements then chances 
are the ink was developed for another printer line. These 
requirements are very basic and simple, but meeting them from a 
formulation standpoint is not.

Many "boutique" inksets are derivatives of other inksets there were 
developed for another printer brand. Many of these specialty inks 
are "made" to work by adding tremendous amounts of alcohol and 
ammonia. Uncork a fresh bottle of bulk ink and take a whiff quickly, 
if you recognize the smells (after the headrush), then that company 
has most likely taken this approach. While this can and sometimes 
does allow the inks to work, it is not a good solution in the long 
run. There is one brand out there that I don't recall ever being 
mentioned here that claims Epson compatibility, yet you need to "cut" 
the ink with almost 50% alcohol almost immediately to get it to work 
with any acceptable results and you need to replenish the alcohol on 
a regular basis in a CIS or seldom used cartridges. Issues such as 
these are not the fault of a properly designed CIS or cartridge since 
they were developed to hold and deliver a compatible inkset. 

The alcohol is used to control surface tension, and the ammonia is 
used to help keep the nozzles free flowing. The problem with this 
approach is that these elements will evaporate once vented to air. 
This will lead to clogging, misting, etc... over time, which will 
also lead to sludge builups in the piezo head and nozzles. Keep in 
mind that these inks contain components that were not designed to 
work with the Epson printers which can lead to significant damage to 
the delicate piezo head. Once these deposits begin to harden you can 
pretty much kiss that head goodbye. Some heavy users don't see the 
problems as quickly as a casual user would. This is neither an 
optimal or acceptable solution.

Truly developing a quality formulation is difficult, and is the 
reason why almost all lesser known ("boutique") inks are "rebranded 
and reworked" versions of those few companies that actually 
manufacture inkjet inks. Properly formulated inks take into account 
how the entire system was developed to work for a given printer line 
from delivery to the head to how the head applies the inks in 
conjunction with how the head movement is controlled. There is a 
great deal of chemical engineering that takes place to develop this.

You may notice some strong smells when you uncork a fresh bottle in 
bulk of a properly formulated inkset, but chances are you won't 
readily recognize those smells as being familiar, since they are 
components that were engineered to accomplish the goals required to 
make the ink function as it should in the printer. As I said, this is 
no easy task and is one of the main reasons that so few companies 
exist that actually produce the ink in its base form. 

My "day" job is to develop PVC formulations for compounds to be used 
in extrusion, as well as consulting in a variety of other technical 
operations. This allows me to play with some very neat analytical 
toys that simply don't exist in less than multi milion dollar 
operations due to the cost of these toys. Every now and then some of 
these toys get put to "other" uses due to my curious nature. As you 
have probably guessed this results in a lot information being made 
available to me that I should not know, and once I do, cannot share 
for obvious reasons. But in the end, those inks that I "scrutinize" 
tell me a lot about what is and isn't a quality formulation, at least 
as far as the Epson printers go. Those properly formulated inks all 
share some basic chemistry that the other more troublesome inks 
don't. 

If I seem to bash a certain ink, I apologize! My statements are based 
on the chemical composition as well as testing in printers and noting 
what others are saying and doing as further confirmation. If I get 
out of line in this area again, let me know. I intentionally backed 
out of the string that was in this area before as I realized it was 
going a little too far and was not going to serve any meaningful 
purpose in the end. I believe that even if we disagree, deep down we 
are all searching for the same thing. I tend to stay in lurk mode and 
will return there after this post. I will answer whatever questions I 
can that will not compromise any proprietary information. 

Once again, I am not trying force anything down your throat, but 
there is always plenty of room for improvement and if we can't point 
out the shortcomings of a product, how can we expect to see 
improvements and competition that will benefit us all?  

Terry