Digital BW, The Print

I'm thinking of getting the CFS from MIS for my 2200 (w/Ultratones).
Can anyone tell me 
what, if any, issues you have had with yours?

Installation seems pretty straight forward...

Thanks,

Jon

Don't buy one - think about swapping from MK to PK with a CFS... Just buy
the refillable cartridges.  Leaves you free to swap/try new inks etc.

> From: Jon Witsell <vze249jf@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Tue, 08 Mar 2005 21:20:09 -0000
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: [Digital BW] MIS CFS, any users?
> 
> 
> 
> I'm thinking of getting the CFS from MIS for my 2200 (w/Ultratones).
> Can anyone tell me
> what, if any, issues you have had with yours?
> 
> Installation seems pretty straight forward...
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Jon
> 
>

I'm not following you... I don't swap between the two now. Eboni is in the light black 
position and PK is in the Photo Black position. 

What I'm trying to get away from is dealing with cartridges.

Jon

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale <stevekale@b...> 
wrote:

> Don't buy one - think about swapping from MK to PK with a CFS... Just buy
> the refillable cartridges.  Leaves you free to swap/try new inks etc.
> 
> 
> > From: Jon Witsell <vze249jf@v...>
> > Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> > Date: Tue, 08 Mar 2005 21:20:09 -0000
> > To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> > Subject: [Digital BW] MIS CFS, any users?
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > I'm thinking of getting the CFS from MIS for my 2200 (w/Ultratones).
> > Can anyone tell me
> > what, if any, issues you have had with yours?
> > 
> > Installation seems pretty straight forward...
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > 
> > Jon
> > 
> >

When I did 800+ prints before Christmas last year, I was delighted with 
the MIS CFS with EZ inks on my C84.  It installed without a hitch 
(except that the tubes were cut to length in the reverse order indicated 
in the instructions, which just required lining the ink bottles up in 
the different order) and has worked virtually flawlessly ever since - I 
think I've had to run at most two cleaning cycles in the 8 months or so 
that I've had it installed.  I haven't done 20 prints since Christmas 
with that printer, but I do print occasional nozzle checks and all have 
come out perfectly, so no clogging from sitting (I do turn it off when 
it's not going to be in use for a while.)  Knock on wood.

But if MIS had had clear refillable cartridges available last summer I 
probably would have gone with them instead of the CFS.  I've been using 
refillable cartridges for several seasons on my Canon S9000 (with Lyson 
Quad Black inks) and it really isn't much of a hassle to keep a spare 
set of cartridges filled and swap a full for an empty when the status 
monitor says so.  I used MIS cartridges at the beginning with the C84 to 
establish the ink lineup I wanted  (settled on Eboni K, neutral C and Y, 
and warm M) and then set up the CFS with these inks.  Refilling the 
Canon cartridges had been a breeze as they were transparent (I can 
refill them without removing them from the printer if I want to, but 
almost never do,) and I never spilled a drop.  But I always overflowed a 
bit of ink when refilling the MIS opaque cartridges (couldn't see when I 
was getting near full) and that always made a mess - fairly easily 
cleaned, but a mess nonetheless.  But now that they have clear 
cartridges available I'd probably go with them - keep a full set on the 
shelf and one in the printer and swap as needed.  That would also let me 
swap in a PK cartridge if I wanted to print a few glossies, something I 
can't do with the CFS.

If you're going to be doing a lot of printing on a continuous basis, the 
CFS certainly is convenient.  But unless the 2200 cartridges are somehow 
more difficult to deal with than the C84 models, I'd be inclined to 
think pretty hard about refilling cartridges instead of using the CFS.

Cheers,
Kip

Jon Witsell wrote:

>I'm thinking of getting the CFS from MIS for my 2200 (w/Ultratones).
>Can anyone tell me what, if any, issues you have had with yours?
>  
>

I do some C8x BW printing also.  But, I think the answer to use carts
instead of CFS in a 2200 is the extra cartridges give more options than our
4-bangers.  I see these folks swapping warm and cool carts in to change the
overall tones with much more control.

I think if one got a "lock" on ink placement --whether it was a mix of color
tones or not-- and decided it was the SOLE way to print forever, CFS on the
2200 makes sense.

Seth 

==-----Original Message-----
==From: Kip Babington [mailto:cbabing3@...] 
==

==nonetheless.  But now that they have clear cartridges 
==available I'd probably go with them - keep a full set on the 
==shelf and one in the printer and swap as needed.  That would 
==also let me swap in a PK cartridge if I wanted to print a few 
==glossies, something I can't do with the CFS.
==
==If you're going to be doing a lot of printing on a continuous 
==basis, the CFS certainly is convenient.  But unless the 2200 
==cartridges are somehow more difficult to deal with than the 
==C84 models, I'd be inclined to think pretty hard about 
==refilling cartridges instead of using the CFS.
==
==Cheers,
==Kip
==
==Jon Witsell wrote:
==
==>I'm thinking of getting the CFS from MIS for my 2200 (w/Ultratones).
==>Can anyone tell me what, if any, issues you have had with yours?
==>

Hi Kip,

Thanks for the post. Hmmm, 800+ prints... yeeow. I have quite a lot of printing to do, but 
not that much. I have a couple of portfolios and a pile of prints... and I've gone through 
enough ink to make the 4oz bottles seem very attractive.

I've considered the refillables, but I'm generally just tired of dealing with carts of any sort. 
I'm using the UT's and the IJC/OPM, so I don't have to switch--and I find myself splitting 
my printing between matte and Ilford Smooth Pearl, so not having to swap is nice.

I like the original UTs, so mixing and matching at this point isn't a concern. I've done 
enough testing to kill a horse, and want to stop thinking about the tools and concentrate 
on the prints.

I'll think this over some more, but the CFS certainly seems like it would be optimal for my 
situation.

Thanks,

Jon

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Kip Babington <cbabing3@s...> 
wrote:

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Jon Witsell"
<vze249jf@v...> wrote:
> 
Hi John,

My MIS system is now 10 months old. Make sure you print a 7 colour
test sheet everyday when you are not using the printer to keep nozzles
flowing, there is a amall app that can be used with task manager (if
you are on PC) to print the test page automatically - useful if you go
away. The only problem I have had was a leaking cartridge. I was
getting gaps in prints and normally would have run a cleaning cycle,
but then I noticed that the print head cleaning sponge was drenched in
ink, something to keep an eye on, which turned out to be the leaking
cart (easily remedied by the way). The newer type of clear cart's are
not supposed to suffer with that problem and you can buy them without
ink from www.inkrepublic.com (but I would still get MIS ink).

But what if you do need to switch at a later point - say to move to a new
Utx set or you want to explore glop which is well worth it.  Reloading an
empty or near empty cartridge takes about 2 mins including washing the
syringe.  I load from 4oz bottles - if I had your volume I might buy bigger
bottles.  Flexibility is well worth it.

> From: Jon Witsell <vze249jf@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2005 01:01:14 -0000
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] MIS CFS, any users?
> 
> 
> 
> Hi Kip,
> 
> Thanks for the post. Hmmm, 800+ prints... yeeow. I have quite a lot of
> printing to do, but
> not that much. I have a couple of portfolios and a pile of prints... and I've
> gone through 
> enough ink to make the 4oz bottles seem very attractive.
> 
> I've considered the refillables, but I'm generally just tired of dealing with
> carts of any sort.
> I'm using the UT's and the IJC/OPM, so I don't have to switch--and I find
> myself splitting 
> my printing between matte and Ilford Smooth Pearl, so not having to swap is
> nice.
> 
> I like the original UTs, so mixing and matching at this point isn't a concern.
> I've done 
> enough testing to kill a horse, and want to stop thinking about the tools and
> concentrate 
> on the prints.
> 
> I'll think this over some more, but the CFS certainly seems like it would be
> optimal for my 
> situation.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Jon
>

Jon,
The system for the 2200 is a great system. Make sure you fire up the 2200 
every three days or so and it will go for years. I have two systems. One with 
their Ut7 Black & White inks and the other has there Ultrachome equivalent ink. 
Clogging is the only issue and it will happen to a machine that has not been 
used. I turn the units on every three days whether I'm printing or not. The 
machine has a cleaning cycle that will keep it from clogging. I have had other CIS 
inits but this is definately the best!
Steve


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

Hi Steve,

Thanks for the info. I haven't had much problem with the UTs clogging, except during the 
Winter when there is no humidity in my place. Accidentally left it on for two days when it 
was really dry--uggg, took quite a few cleaning/test print cycles to clean the nozzles. 
Won't let that happen again...  

:)

Jon


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, sburger104@a... wrote:

> Jon,
> The system for the 2200 is a great system. Make sure you fire up the 2200 
> every three days or so and it will go for years. I have two systems. One with 
> their Ut7 Black & White inks and the other has there Ultrachome equivalent ink. 
> Clogging is the only issue and it will happen to a machine that has not been 
> used. I turn the units on every three days whether I'm printing or not. The 
> machine has a cleaning cycle that will keep it from clogging. I have had other CIS 
> inits but this is definately the best!
> Steve
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hi Steve,

I'm not looking to move to any new inks anytime soon!

However, you make a great point about the glop. It doesn't seem like the smoke has 
cleared on the whole glop deal yet, but I might be inclined to buy a smaller printer as a 
glop machine. 

I might just try the refillables and move up to the CFS later. I'm undecided. 

You were right in another post--that Renaissance wax is a lot of work. But it really looks 
nice on Ilford Smooth Pearl. Look, no fingerprints!

Thanks,

Jon

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale <stevekale@b...> 
wrote:

> 
> But what if you do need to switch at a later point - say to move to a new
> Utx set or you want to explore glop which is well worth it.  Reloading an
> empty or near empty cartridge takes about 2 mins including washing the
> syringe.  I load from 4oz bottles - if I had your volume I might buy bigger
> bottles.  Flexibility is well worth it.
> 
> > From: Jon Witsell <vze249jf@v...>
> > Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> > Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2005 01:01:14 -0000
> > To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> > Subject: Re: [Digital BW] MIS CFS, any users?
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Hi Kip,
> > 
> > Thanks for the post. Hmmm, 800+ prints... yeeow. I have quite a lot of
> > printing to do, but
> > not that much. I have a couple of portfolios and a pile of prints... and I've
> > gone through 
> > enough ink to make the 4oz bottles seem very attractive.
> > 
> > I've considered the refillables, but I'm generally just tired of dealing with
> > carts of any sort.
> > I'm using the UT's and the IJC/OPM, so I don't have to switch--and I find
> > myself splitting 
> > my printing between matte and Ilford Smooth Pearl, so not having to swap is
> > nice.
> > 
> > I like the original UTs, so mixing and matching at this point isn't a concern.
> > I've done 
> > enough testing to kill a horse, and want to stop thinking about the tools and
> > concentrate 
> > on the prints.
> > 
> > I'll think this over some more, but the CFS certainly seems like it would be
> > optimal for my 
> > situation.
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > 
> > Jon
> >