Spongeless cartridge from inkjetreset.com

[tony22]

Just ordered my Epson 3880 today expect by Tues, will be using my Canon Pro9000 in parallel.

Irv, when I was using Espons, Jon Cone's inks (Inkjetmall) were considered among the best available. Excellent gamut and longevity.

 

[pharmacist]

Hi Tony22,

actually I have heard the Cone's ink have a lesser gamut compared to original Epson K3 ink. This is not my information, but actually from a well-known and reputable CISS/refill ink reseller in the USA (NOT Inkrepublic.com, from which I have purchased the refillable cartridges from, but in which I still do not have used their IRK-4 nano pigment ink still far, so I cannot comment on the quality and gamut) who actually says Lyson is much better, and this guy is not even sells this ink. So this guy must be unbiased, since he do not sell Lyson inks, but his comments are a bit negative about the Cone's ink (lesser gamut and muted prints).

My comments on the Image Specialists IM-K4 ink compared to the original Epson K3 ink: a bit less glossy, but still very acceptable when using semimatte and satin papers. a bit smaller gamut in the reds/magenta, but considerably larger gamut in the blues/cyan regions. Epson K3 is still better, but I get very good results with Image Specialists IMK-K4 inks with dedicated profiles. About the Inkrepublic.com's IRK4-nano pigment inks for my Epson Pro 3800 I cannot comment, because I am still using my stock of IM-K4 ink in them, so I will wait for a review in the future when I will switch over to this ink.

 

[tony22]

Hi Tony22,

actually I have heard the Cone's ink have a lesser gamut compared to original Epson K3 ink. This is not my information, but actually from a well-known and reputable CISS/refill ink reseller in the USA (NOT Inkrepublic.com, from which I have purchased the refillable cartridges from, but in which I still do not have used their IRK-4 nano pigment ink still far, so I cannot comment on the quality and gamut) who actually says Lyson is much better, and this guy is not even sells this ink. So this guy must be unbiased, since he do not sell Lyson inks, but his comments are a bit negative about the Cone's ink (lesser gamut and muted prints).

Pharmacist, there is some truth to this. I'd found the Cone inks to have a bit less gamut but I liked the way it produced prints. And yes, Lyson is considered another source of very high quality inks. An online search of Lyson and ConeColor will yield evidence of battles on the same order of LCD vs. plasma by the TV display enthusiasts.

 

[pharmacist]

Well I always check ones history about the praising hallelujahs of some members on both nifty-stuff.com and dpreview.com about a certain product or (re)seller. I become suspicious if someone only praises a specific ink or reseller to obviously, especially if it has nothing to do with the question or problem of the topic starter and actually not having contributing to the forum it is most likely a subtile way of product placement and promoting a certain product or reseller. Sometimes this becomes so obviously I onced noticed a complete scientical nonsense at dpreview.com of someone halleluyahing a website/reseller I wrot about it, nobody seems to take notice about it. According to the website the ink was filtered using reverse osmosis, to purify the ink. Now from my technical background as an scientist this a complete nonsense. Reverse osmosis is so powerful it can filter molecules and ions like sodium, chloride and actually produces destilled water. Now tell me how a pigment particle, thousands if not many ten thousands fold larger compared to this simple sodium ion and having much more electric charge on it to keep it suspended into solution, can pass through the filter ? This is the information once mentioned on the very website of this seller, which seems to be praised halleluyah at dpreview.com. This will shut the door for me.