My New Epson Stylus Photo 1500w (artisan 1430) !!!

martin0reg said:

After buying a set of ink bottles for canon CLI-8 from coralgraph I have to say: the ink do not match canon colors any good..and the PGB is worse than others too, over saturating black areas in images and producing puddles on the paper. So the good results of coralgraph seems not to apply on canon sets...regarding color matching (I have not tested UV)

Click to expand...

If you are getting "puddles" of ink on the page thats unlikely due to the ink but more likely due to a cart in your canon printer. Normally caused if you top fill and do not seal the top fill hole properly. Though there are numerous other reasons.
Colour matching will vary brand to brand, NO ink will be an exact match to OEM ink in Canon carts. Using colour profiles can help, even different paper will give varying results.

Is this the ink @pharmacist used
http://www.coralgraph.com/bulk-refi...or-refill-ink-for-epson-printers-ciss-systems

pharmacist said:

Scan 1: Epson Claria Photographic ink (OEM)

View attachment 1466

scan 5: Coralgraph dye ink

View attachment 1470

Click to expand...

i testet it now because of your good results... and...i wanted to wait 6 month but after 2 weeks i geht this...


(coralgraph on the left)

Let me conclude my findings after weeks and months of ink fade testing of refill dye inks.
I tested a variety of dye inks for Epson, on a R265 and some with an L300, Coralgraph for Epson, OCP for Epson, various China inks via Aliexpress claimed to be 'UV resistant', a similar one from US via Amazon, and as well original inks for the L300, all together about 10 types including dye inks for the Fujifilm Drylab printers available in cartridges with 200 or 500 ml depending on their printer models. Epson has a similar product line of Surelab printers and inks which I did not test.

All inks faded visibly within weeks (except Fujifilm) , and with all those inks the black ink performs worst, the black does not just lighten up and turns into gray , it turns into brown up to a dirty yellow. The different brands of ink faded with a somewhat similar speed without any remarkable exception - except Fujifilm. One scan of such fade target is attached, the upper half was exposed to the light, the result after 8 weeks during spring time under varying weather conditions - sun, cold, humidity so that I cannot separate the influence of UV radiation or the ozone impact depending on temperature and humidity. The CMY colors lightened up significantly, the black turned into a dirty yellow, and the Fujifilm Drylab inks only show a rather slight variation during the same time. I tested as well the orignal Epson inks for the L300, the CMY colors perform somewhat better than Coralgraph inks, the Epson L300 black as well is not very stable, the L300 inks are not Claria inks.
I'm not showing any of the other plenty fade targets of the other ink brands, they don't carry any more significant information, they all look similar, the black segment turns into chocolade brown - dark to light.
These findings are pure by comparison, and there is no 'quality' or 'fade factor' I could assign to the ink brands, I cannot state that the Fujifilm inks are 5 or 10 times better whatever, I only can confirm they are a class better than any of the other inks tested.
These findings concur with the results of ink tests by the Aardenburg facility, they tested as well the Fujifilm inks on some papers, Epson Claria inks and a Lyson dye ink claimed to have a high permanence compatible with Claria inks, those Lyson inks failed the Aardenburg testing whereas the Fujilfilm inks come close to the performance of the Epson Claria inks.
Fujilfim Drylab dye inks are available via their high volume cartridges, much cheaper than Epson Claria inks in small cartridges. You can find rather affordable/discounted offers for such Fujifilm cartridges on Ebay/US with an international shipping option. These are probably surplus items.
So for me the testing has come to an end, I'll use the Fujifilm inks for any critical prints where longevity and permanence are expected, and other cheaper inks for prints where longevity and permancence do not count.
The testing has shown that the color tones of C and M vary visibly and significantly between ink brands, profiling the printer/ink combination in use is a must for color correct printouts.

Exactly the same here...
I tested UV resistance of several dye inks with a special UV lamp..
http://www.printerknowledge.com/thr...uting-magenta-and-cyan.7545/page-5#post-80941
..and got very similar results. All 3rd party dyes which I used in canon and epson printers (coralgraph, IS, two brands from german suppliers arici and sudhaus,...) faded clearly visible after just one week under the "desert lamp".
Only the fuji DL ink was much less affected, so it seems to be a true rumor, this ink is "claria" quality. Just one of many threads on this topic:
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3775861

Beside this I also tested the epson bottle ink for "ITS" printers (epson L xxx, the models with an in built "OEM ciss") and it comes out quite good, not as good as claria, but still better than the 3rd party dyes.
Here I also agree with Ink stained fingers, having the same L300 ...
http://www.druckerchannel.de/forum.php?seite=beitrag&ID=276290&s=9

I am curious to try a similar way for canon inks, looking for big carts with canon dye ink..

Not really knowing anything about the subject, I am surprised that modern analysers cannot be used to determine the exact constituents in any commercial ink and allow duplication of the best. Why am I wrong?

oh well, ink formulas are no real secret, you can start at the material safety data sheets to get a first indication, you can do lots of chemical and physical tests, you can talk to the suppliers of the raw materials, specifically for the dyes, you can read patent and trade mark information, you can read chemical magazines. Claria inks and comparable inks are on the market since quite a long time, those are no new inventions anymore, but at the end it comes to cost for the third party mixer, and he will make trade-offs here and there, specifically with the dyes. And at the end you may make your ink different to the original to avoid trade mark litigations. Just look how big the claims got in court for using the (almost) same curved corners on a smartphone which would not require any physical or chemical background.

The art of avoiding patent infringements is to substitute some constituents with similar based chemicals, for example isobutanol with isopropanol, glycerol with propylene glycol, methyl-parabene with propyl-parabene, taking into account the difference in water solubility, changes in surface tension by substituting, preservative action of biocides etc. By this way the ink will behave the same, but because it is another formula no patent will be infringed.

Ink stained Fingers said:

oh well, ink formulas are no real secret, you can start at the material safety data sheets to get a first indication, you can do lots of chemical and physical tests, ....................................

Click to expand...

So are you saying the cost of the best non-fade dyes or pigments would be prohibitive for the third party mixer?
If pharmacist was given the materials could he produce PKs own brand non-fade inks?

It doesn’t matter who is mixing up the dye ink, whether it’s an individual or big Corp. it will still fade because that’s the nature of the beast, now pigment ink is a totally different animal.

Come on @Emulator dive in and test the waters, ops or should I say pigment inks, you know you want too and yes you’ll be in the dog house for a while but she’ll get over it..