Pro-100 and PC inks for proofing

[Robert Lemlin]

I bought a second Pro-100 essentially as a backup unit, for the ink and head. I was planning on switching to Precision Colors inks for the tremendous cost savings but am a bit concerned regarding PC ink longevity, especially for prints I sell.

Are the PC inks close enough to the Canon that I could proof with them and then do a final print on the 2nd printer using Canon inks? Anyone tried this?

 

[The Hat]

You can use PC inks in your second printer to proof your handy work before committing yourself to using the more expensive OEM inks, BUT.

You must first use a profile for the PC ink on the paper you’re planning on using and that would give you a considerable saving on your costs, output your proofs on A5 size prints.

If you value your own reputation and that of your customers you should only use Canon inks and paper if you’re planning on selling your photos.
It’s the most sensible way of insuring that your customers return and also give word of mouth recommendations on your professional work..

 

[Robert Lemlin]

You can use PC inks in your second printer to proof your handy work before committing yourself to using the more expensive OEM inks, BUT.

You must first use a profile for the PC ink on the paper you’re planning on using "understood, I will be using canon papers so hopefully new profiles won't be required as PC indicates their inks are closely matched" .and that would give you a considerable saving on your costs, output your proofs on A5 size prints.

If you value your own reputation and that of your customers you should only use Canon inks and paper if you’re planning on selling your photos. -"yes, as I indicated above"
It’s the most sensible way of insuring that your customers return and also give word of mouth recommendations on your professional work..

"Thanks much for the prompt reply. I figured it would work, just wanted to be sure I hadn't missed something.
I hope someone who has tried this can comment too. Or have you and I misunderstood, sorry if so?"

 

[Smile]

If you value your own reputation and that of your customers you should only use Canon inks and paper if you’re planning on selling your photos.
It’s the most sensible way of insuring that your customers return and also give word of mouth recommendations on your professional work..

It's also good to tell people about options that there is cheaper way, and longer lastin way. This way everyone is happy.

 

[Robert Lemlin]

It's also good to tell people about options that there is cheaper way, and longer lastin way. This way everyone is happy.

Understood. I will offer archival and non-archival.
I was hoping to find someone who is proofing with PC inks and doing final prints on a Pro-100 with Canon ink, or has at least tried it.
No luck finding someone here or on DPR.
I am going to go ahead with this in the next month or so.
l'll report my findings.


Anyway, thanks to everyone for you replies.

 

[Paul Verizzo]

In my not so humble opinion, which goes back to not only my wet darkroom, but that of my professional father and grandfather, you can't proof with substantially different materials.

In those old days, the proofs, always B&W, had more to do with to subject or pose than any technical parameter.

Use what ink, printer and paper you intend for the final output, just make them smaller. Depending on your software, you can print three or four small(er) prints on a letter size for this purpose. I'm a negative fan of using 4x6 loose papers for this purpose.

 

[RogerB]

In my not so humble opinion, which goes back to not only my wet darkroom, but that of my professional father and grandfather, you can't proof with substantially different materials.

In those old days, the proofs, always B&W, had more to do with to subject or pose than any technical parameter.

Use what ink, printer and paper you intend for the final output, just make them smaller. Depending on your software, you can print three or four small(er) prints on a letter size for this purpose. I'm a negative fan of using 4x6 loose papers for this purpose.

Not sure that's true. One major application for inkjet printers is to make hard proofs for offset etc printers. In fact, the Iris printer that became the first "fine art" inkjet printer, was developed purely as a proofing printer for the print industry. Admittedly it is necessary for the proofing device to have a wider color gamut than the device being simulated, and that is where the OP's proposal may fall down. If the PC inks have a wider color gamut that OEM then it can work. If not, it can only work for those image colors that are in-gamut for the PC inks. All of this assumes of course that both set-ups have accurate profiles.

Having said all that I am not convinced in this case that it is worthwhile. When using glossy/luster papers the Photoshop soft proof is a very good starting point, once you've got to know your printer. I very rarely need to do hard proofs for glossy papers.

 

[Smile]

This is true if the Certified profile is used, with known tolerances not exceeded. This makes you trust the profile in given time period (until next re certification). Since OP is using Pro-100 this means he needs RGB certification, and if he tries to match FOGRA, then the FOGRA MW3 should do the trick.

If the PC inks have a wider color gamut that OEM then it can work.

This can easily be done by comparing the profiles, so no problem there.

 

[Paul Verizzo]

@Roger, Smile. Or, just used the OEM inks and print on smaller paper. Without knowing for sure, I did make the presumption that the purpose for his proofing was just consumer visual. Nothing you contributed changes my premise, use OEM inks to K.I.S. for many/most consumer situations.

 

[Smile]

OEM inks are a wise choice, however OP does not mention if he uses Canon paper. Like any artist it's most valuable when you can use any quality paper not just OEM.

Also by printing on the same printer with third party inks for proofing, the OP would save allot of money. Printing smaller images not always is good idea as smaller printed photos loose some important details, visual adaptation problem is also evident. For smaller prints your brain demands less quality then for say large one.