Yahoo Groups archive

QTR-Quadtone RIP

Index last updated: 2026-04-28 23:12 UTC

Thread

Roark's 7800-CVGT inkset in Epson R1800?

Roark's 7800-CVGT inkset in Epson R1800?

2019-07-15 by rmacint@...

Will Roark's latest iteration of the universal inkset for an 8-channel printer work with the R1800?

[Carbon pigment inks:
Y = 100% MK6 LM = 9% PK (aka Photo Carbon, as this is not a blended color-carbon ink) M = 30% PK LC = 15% PK C = 50% PK LK = 100% PK K = 100% MK (Eb6-K)
Toner:
LLK = (13.75% Blue, 11.25% Cyan Canon Lucia pigments,7 75% generic base c6b.)8
(The toner color pigment mix is 55% Canon Blue, 45% Canon Cyan. This is then mixed 25% color pigments, 75% MIS c6b base.)]

I was thinking of substituting the toner in the GL spot because the 1800 does not have LLK and the gloss optimizer is not required for the Roark inkset.

I was also wondering how well the diluted inks works with the 1800 and are there curves for this setup?


Re: [QuadtoneRIP] Roark's 7800-CVGT inkset in Epson R1800?

2019-07-15 by Paul Roark

My current ink approach should work fine in any Epson printer, but you would have to adapt the profiles to that printer. With QTR it should not matter where the various dilutions are, but you'd have to take the existing profiles and make sure the channels were coordinated. I would expect that re-linearization would probably be required.

I have used this same family of inks in 1.5 ml dot size printers before will good results. That said, the old 1800 was not my favorite printer.

See http://www.paulroark.com/BW-Info/R1800.htm for more information. It's been too long ago for me to remember all the details.

The current http://www.paulroark.com/BW-Info/7800-Glossy-Carbon-Variable-Tone-2016.pdf uses the current generation of pigments from the company that took over from the supplier of these earlier inksets. (The owner of Image Specialists, the former supplier of MIS, died. STS Inks ended up buying the business, or parts of it, and continues to supply those inks to MIS, also under new ownership, and will sell to me and others directly if my contact is notified. I continue to use the same or updated inks, but mix my own dilutions. I have no connections to any of these businesses.)

I would guess the current pigments are, in fact, ground to a finer and more consistent size than the older ones. That would particularly be the case with the "Eboni" MK. The old/original one was more neutral probably because it was not well dispersed compared to the more modern version.

I recall once being told that our pigment sizes compared to the various inkjet nozzles are like bee-bees going through a basketball hoop. The physical size of the particles in suspension is not the issue.

So, bottom line, I cannot vouch for the 1800 or any printers. I do not believe, however, that this family of inks has been the cause of any problems with any Epson printers I've used.

To be totally honest, I think the quality of Epson printers may have declined. My old 7800 and 9800 are called by some the "Ford pickup trucks" of inkjet printing -- rather simple, reliable machines. My luck with my latest Epson printer (a 1430) is about the worst I've ever had -- 3 years old and two channels appear dead. Being just a sample of one, my experience cannot be relied on as representative of total customer experiences. That said, when combined with Epson's apparent determination to wipe out third party inks, I may well abandon the newer Epsons.

(I'm obviously not feeling the love for Epson's tactics, which, when I worked as an attorney at the Federal Trade Commission, I would have seriously considered suing them to stop. But I don't expect any law enforcement from the current administration. That said, I am considering drafting a complaint to the FTC. Some of what I'm reading about Epson's tactics sound like they are so far over the line that, if true, it could be an easy case. I used to love it when someone handed me a good case; I totally enjoyed suing bad actors. So much so that one year I racked up more orders than all of the other FTC offices combined. After that I found going after entire industries was fun. See, for example, https://www.upi.com/Archives/1984/05/16/A-member-of-the-Federal-Trade-Commission-says-the/5260453528000/ . If some of what I've read is true, Epson may be potentially looking at serious liability issues; not just an injunction. Hello Epson, have you looked at treble damages award risks?? Maybe some private class action attorney would be interested.)

Good luck.

Paul





Show quoted textHide quoted text
On Mon, Jul 15, 2019 at 10:40 AM rmacint@... [QuadtoneRIP] <QuadtoneRIP@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

Will Roark's latest iteration of the universal inkset for an 8-channel printer work with the R1800?

[Carbon pigment inks:
Y = 100% MK6 LM = 9% PK (aka Photo Carbon, as this is not a blended color-carbon ink) M = 30% PK LC = 15% PK C = 50% PK LK = 100% PK K = 100% MK (Eb6-K)
Toner:
LLK = (13.75% Blue, 11.25% Cyan Canon Lucia pigments,7 75% generic base c6b.)8
(The toner color pigment mix is 55% Canon Blue, 45% Canon Cyan. This is then mixed 25% color pigments, 75% MIS c6b base.)]

I was thinking of substituting the toner in the GL spot because the 1800 does not have LLK and the gloss optimizer is not required for the Roark inkset.

I was also wondering how well the diluted inks works with the 1800 and are there curves for this setup?


Move to quarantaine

This moves the raw source file on disk only. The archive index is not changed automatically, so you still need to run a manual refresh afterward.