Do you feel comfortable selling prints using non oem ink like Precision Colors?

[askfelix]

I am an amateur photographer just getting started with Canon Pixma Pro-100. I plan to refill my cartridges with PC ink and is wondering whether it is okay to sell prints using PC ink without knowing the longevity of the ink?

 

[Ink stained Fingers]

it all depends, and without knowing any detail of your planned business I only would advise to deliver quality to your customers, and if longevity is of your concern then you even may look to a printer with pigment inks which have better performance than dye inks, as well the original Canon dye inks. The longevity performance of 3rd party inks is unknown in most cases, and is typically below the performance of OEM inks

 

[The Hat]

I am an amateur photographer just getting started with Canon Pixma Pro-100. I plan to refill my cartridges with PC ink and is wondering whether it is okay to sell prints using PC ink without knowing the longevity of the ink?

@askfelix, If you wish to be known as a good quality print dealer then as @Ink stained Fingers has said switch to a pigment ink printer, but in the mean time you can continue to use 3rd party inks for everything else but not for your prints, get a second set of OEM cartridges and switch to them for your customers sake..

 

[Roy Sletcher]

I am an amateur photographer just getting started with Canon Pixma Pro-100. I plan to refill my cartridges with PC ink and is wondering whether it is okay to sell prints using PC ink without knowing the longevity of the ink?

Always first to jump in with my mouth wide open.

First off - Your post begs the question, "Unless you live in some centrally controlled economic region where free enterprise is restricted why wouldn't it be OK?"

Of course I am assuming you will be doing the honourable thing and selling with a full description and disclosure of what you are selling. This includes an honest description not only the inkset but also the substrate and any other materials you have selected if the picture is mounted, matted, framed etc.

My personal belief is that any "honourable" seller would fully disclose these relevant quality and archival issues. I also think the standard may be lower if selling in a flea market or outdoor ad hoc sale environment.

Given the price of most fine art prints you may be better advised to use the OEM inks. This way you can avoid convoluted disclaimers at a relatively small incremental cost. Even if you are selling at wholesale prices it makes economic sense, and for a clear conscience.

rs

 

[martin0reg]

Do you feel comfortable selling prints using dye inks like canon chromalife?

Some time ago I've read that Mark McCormick from Aardenburg-Imaging had asked pro-100 users with PC ink "...to submit some samples for testing..."
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3633678
So if you have refilled your pro-100 you should contact him and ask for a test project.

 

[mikling]

You know something. As much as I am honored by the widespread use of inks in professional circles. I prefer not to be compared to the OEM stuff. Let's compare pricing. It pretty much ends there. Canon ink is 20-25 times the cost of PC ink. Can you get a Kia to work like a Rolls Royce? They have four wheels and the start and stop. Yeah, they're the same right. Notwithstanding I have a large number of users using the ink in professional settings, but they test and determine what is appropriate for them and their applications. If you think it lasts long enough then fine but be realistic.

The first comparison is going to show that OEM, is better so I get thrown into the crapper bin. While untested inks can make claims and go unscathed because they are not tested.

I get so amused when professional magazine reviewers take photo centric AIO machines and pit them against Office oriented machines and then they say a Con of the Photo centric AIO machines is that it is not as fast on text nor as sharp. Honestly, if the reviewer tested in proper context, then it was a foregone conclusion before the box was even opened. So the photo oriented machine gets a rap. Obviously it is reflective of the ignorance of the reviewer but the reader does not know that. Today's consumer no longer think nor take the time to learn. They review without regard on social media etc. Then the world just consumes it.

The problem is that the reader is not well informed and these tests will be taken totally out of context. I guarantee you it will. Just folks testing for fade without any proper controls for controlling ozone nor UV. It is totally wrong and they don't know. That's the problem with tests.

Can I compare a Krell amplifier to a Pioneer? Sure I can but what's the point. The Pioneer has no chance from the get go but the uninformed buyer and reviewer will say they sound the same. Now seriously.

I will refer you again to this by Canon. Read the fine print and the conditions and then read their recommendations. They are not sure themselves and there is a disclaimer at the end. There are so many people that think Chromalife 100 lasts 100 years like pigment ink usual ratings would show. Nice one Canon.

https://www.usa.canon.com/sites/Chromalife100Plus/gas.html

The very last paragraph.
Note for preserving and displaying photos

"The image permanence estimates presented in this technology guide may vary depending on display/storage conditions. The expressed numbers of years estimates are the result of simulated, accelerated tests conducted by Canon Inc. and do not represent a product guarantee.

Light, environmental gases, high temperature and humidity can accelerate color fading. When displaying your photographs, avoid high intensity lighting and use glass-filtered frames. Photos stored in the dark, using archival quality albums or storage materials, will tend to last longer than photos that are exposed to light. Avoid high temperatures and high humidity to promote the image permanence of your photos."

If you sell prints for a living and they are expected to last. Use pigment. I have often said that refilling with pigment is way cheaper than buying OEM Chromalife ink. People just don't get it.

 

[Roy Sletcher]

Why are we even discussing discussing this non issue?

Red River papers Website give the average cost of OEM ink on a 13 x 19 print on the PRO 100 as US$2.70

Surely the cheapest component in the complete printmaking chain.

Rather like reducing the cost of a cup of coffee by using cheap sugar.

rs

 

[turbguy]

I print for a local non-profit, and the prints are sold with the following disclaimer...

"Bear in mind that even the best dyes eventually change with time. Your print will last much longer if displayed under subdued lighting and longer yet if behind glazing. Never display the print in full sunlight conditions".

Actually, even Kodak products had similar disclaimers...

 

[Vorkolor]

Colour photos from film are dye-based, all the silver is removed in processing.

 

[Roy Sletcher]

Colour photos from film are dye-based, all the silver is removed in processing.

Ah yes the good old days when you could sell the used processing solution for the value of the silver content and make enough money to hold the staff annual shindig or party.

Of course nobody, for the most part, worried about colour print longevity. Probably because it was so bad. Makes our current die based inks look really good by comparison.

rs