Thanks for the explanation. One suggestion: since the Ultra K is not an official Image Specialists product you should not label it as Image Specialists despite that you may have used Image Specialists inks to produce it. The ink may be a better one (than Image Specialists official WJ1128 or WJ1020) but in reality it is not a product of Image Specialists. Glad that you explained. I actually thought of checking with Image Specialists about it.
Ultra K / Ultra black pigment ink from Precision Colors
- Thread starter Token
- Start date
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2006
- Messages
- 3,645
- Reaction score
- 85
- Points
- 233
- Location
- La Verne, California
- Printer Model
- Epson WP-4530
I would also like to know if it smudges when used on plain paper with ColorLok which seems to be all the rage these days. See my report.mikling said:
Colorlok appears to be a coating similar to what is applied to photopaper but to a lesser degree. So it appears we are fighting physics of differing technoligies which is not possible.
I just happen to have some Xerox paper with Colorlok so I tested. Let me see, the Colorlok logo says "Faster Drying" "Bolder Blacks" "More Vivid Colors" These are all aspects we would expect if there was a microporous coating on the paper...which makes me suspect it is such. And it proves itself to follow my expectations.
Colorlok is not good with Pigment Text Black inks smudgewise. It smears as you have discovered. It also appears appears to increase dry time for pigment inks. Not suprising. Why is that? Simple. For the same reason you should not use Pigment Text Black ink on photopapers. The pigment ink solids will not penetrate the ColorLok surface well and will partially sit on top of the coating. This is the reason why smudging will occur with Colorlok.
With ColorLok, dye inks will excel. The dye ink immediately penetrates and goes beneath the Colorlok coating and is protected by the coating. Thus instant "drying" though not quite, more vivid colors because of the coating as you would expect from photopaper because of the physics of a coating and similar for black because of less absorption and the same reason as before. So if you are using Colorlok, a good substitute is my 1008 Photoblack Dye ink. This is the Photoblack from the BCI-6 era. Testing with ColorLok, Dye Black and highliters is good. No smudging. As expected on a microporous surface. If you are using an Epson Dye Photoprinter like an Artisan. Colorlok is a good choice.
The benefit of using the 1008 dye ink is that there will be minimal solids buildup over prolonged use as opposed to pigment which you might well know already is solids suspended in a carrier. These solids do not evaporate and will deposit themselves eventually somewhere. Now do not let the ColorLok fool you though. Dye inks will still fade as opposed to pigment particles which will not. There is nothing Colorlok can do about that.
So the gist is, if you want to use Colorlok as well as highliters, you might well be better served by purchasing dye ink instead of pigment. If you want and need the permanence of pigment and want to use highliters, drop the Colorlok. ColorLok looks to cost more anyways. ( I got the Xerox Colorlok because it was a special at Office Depot and was cheaper than the regular stuff at the time)
Now if you use a pigment black ink with a resinous coating like what is used on Epson pigment photoprinters, colorlok might well be better in that application. However, hardly anyone would use photo pigment black for printing text except for emergencies. Too often many get confused over pigment inks thinking that the pigment ink for Canon text printers is what is used for Epson printers. The fact that there are black particles suspended in a carrier is where the similarities end.
One thing I noted is that the Colorlok paper feels thinner and limper than the standard paper by a little. the standard paper is also rated as a 20lb paper. So here is what I think. ColorLok might be a coating that allows the use of thinner papers. Technically they both weigh the same amount because the microporous resin coating itself is HEAVIER than paper fibres. So the coating might well achieve the dual purpose of using less paper, keeping the print quality high AND still keep the rating as a 20lb paper.
It saves trees though but the resinous coating might have a larger carbon footprint. Who knows?!!!!!
I just happen to have some Xerox paper with Colorlok so I tested. Let me see, the Colorlok logo says "Faster Drying" "Bolder Blacks" "More Vivid Colors" These are all aspects we would expect if there was a microporous coating on the paper...which makes me suspect it is such. And it proves itself to follow my expectations.
Colorlok is not good with Pigment Text Black inks smudgewise. It smears as you have discovered. It also appears appears to increase dry time for pigment inks. Not suprising. Why is that? Simple. For the same reason you should not use Pigment Text Black ink on photopapers. The pigment ink solids will not penetrate the ColorLok surface well and will partially sit on top of the coating. This is the reason why smudging will occur with Colorlok.
With ColorLok, dye inks will excel. The dye ink immediately penetrates and goes beneath the Colorlok coating and is protected by the coating. Thus instant "drying" though not quite, more vivid colors because of the coating as you would expect from photopaper because of the physics of a coating and similar for black because of less absorption and the same reason as before. So if you are using Colorlok, a good substitute is my 1008 Photoblack Dye ink. This is the Photoblack from the BCI-6 era. Testing with ColorLok, Dye Black and highliters is good. No smudging. As expected on a microporous surface. If you are using an Epson Dye Photoprinter like an Artisan. Colorlok is a good choice.
The benefit of using the 1008 dye ink is that there will be minimal solids buildup over prolonged use as opposed to pigment which you might well know already is solids suspended in a carrier. These solids do not evaporate and will deposit themselves eventually somewhere. Now do not let the ColorLok fool you though. Dye inks will still fade as opposed to pigment particles which will not. There is nothing Colorlok can do about that.
So the gist is, if you want to use Colorlok as well as highliters, you might well be better served by purchasing dye ink instead of pigment. If you want and need the permanence of pigment and want to use highliters, drop the Colorlok. ColorLok looks to cost more anyways. ( I got the Xerox Colorlok because it was a special at Office Depot and was cheaper than the regular stuff at the time)
Now if you use a pigment black ink with a resinous coating like what is used on Epson pigment photoprinters, colorlok might well be better in that application. However, hardly anyone would use photo pigment black for printing text except for emergencies. Too often many get confused over pigment inks thinking that the pigment ink for Canon text printers is what is used for Epson printers. The fact that there are black particles suspended in a carrier is where the similarities end.
One thing I noted is that the Colorlok paper feels thinner and limper than the standard paper by a little. the standard paper is also rated as a 20lb paper. So here is what I think. ColorLok might be a coating that allows the use of thinner papers. Technically they both weigh the same amount because the microporous resin coating itself is HEAVIER than paper fibres. So the coating might well achieve the dual purpose of using less paper, keeping the print quality high AND still keep the rating as a 20lb paper.
It saves trees though but the resinous coating might have a larger carbon footprint. Who knows?!!!!!
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2010
- Messages
- 15,824
- Reaction score
- 8,854
- Points
- 453
- Location
- Residing in Wicklow Ireland
- Printer Model
- Canon/3D, CR-10, CR-10S, KP-3
mikling
I whole heartily agree with you on using dye instead of pigment ink when needed.
Two of my printers are set up to use dye ink in the pigment cartridge as I print on a lot of different papers.
I have in the past suffered from the black pigment smudging on certain papers and drying became a problem too.
So now if I have a problem with a particular paper I just switch to a different printer
which has the pigment substituted for dye and my problem is solved..
I whole heartily agree with you on using dye instead of pigment ink when needed.
Two of my printers are set up to use dye ink in the pigment cartridge as I print on a lot of different papers.
I have in the past suffered from the black pigment smudging on certain papers and drying became a problem too.
So now if I have a problem with a particular paper I just switch to a different printer
which has the pigment substituted for dye and my problem is solved..
Mikling, I am afraid you have a lot of misunderstanding about Colorlok. Maybe the testing of your ink lead you to the misconception.
Here are a few that you said:
"Colorlok is not good with Pigment Text Black inks"
"It smears"
"It also appears to increase dry time for pigment inks"
The fact is Coloclok paper is plain paper and is a technology innovation by HP which improves inkjet black text and color printing on non colorlok plain paper. You seemed to imply that it is more a photo paper. That's incorrect. It is for black text pigment ink, it reduces smearing and it dries 20% faster. Please refer to the following pdf document of a professional test result:
http://www.spencerlab.com/reports/SpencerLab-ColorLokvsNonColorLok-SlideDeck_January2010.pdf
Two Canon Pixma inkjet printers (MX860 and MX7600) were included in the testing with dye and pigment black ink.
The report did not include smudging test with highlighters unfortunately. It is largely dependent on the ink you use. If you experience smudging you should allow the ink to truly dry up (not just absorbed by the paper). It also has a dependency on the pigment particle size. Inks formulated with larger pigments will be more likely to smudge. The Colorlok technology improves black text printing significantly found by the test. Your statement that it is not good with pigment black text ink is not true.
I am sorry that I must say readers of forum topics need to exercise his/her own discretion selectively as many of the posts are in fact based on misconception or micunderstanding of facts.
Here are a few that you said:
"Colorlok is not good with Pigment Text Black inks"
"It smears"
"It also appears to increase dry time for pigment inks"
The fact is Coloclok paper is plain paper and is a technology innovation by HP which improves inkjet black text and color printing on non colorlok plain paper. You seemed to imply that it is more a photo paper. That's incorrect. It is for black text pigment ink, it reduces smearing and it dries 20% faster. Please refer to the following pdf document of a professional test result:
http://www.spencerlab.com/reports/SpencerLab-ColorLokvsNonColorLok-SlideDeck_January2010.pdf
Two Canon Pixma inkjet printers (MX860 and MX7600) were included in the testing with dye and pigment black ink.
The report did not include smudging test with highlighters unfortunately. It is largely dependent on the ink you use. If you experience smudging you should allow the ink to truly dry up (not just absorbed by the paper). It also has a dependency on the pigment particle size. Inks formulated with larger pigments will be more likely to smudge. The Colorlok technology improves black text printing significantly found by the test. Your statement that it is not good with pigment black text ink is not true.
I am sorry that I must say readers of forum topics need to exercise his/her own discretion selectively as many of the posts are in fact based on misconception or micunderstanding of facts.
The Hat, you may have smudging problems with some papers. It may be an issue of the paper alone but do not imply that colorlok paper has the same issue for the same reasons. But it is understandable that there are so many brand of paper bearing colorlok logo. Some of them may still be poor quality depending on who makes them and how good they are made.
Grandexp.
Please take a look at this thread, and the example link shown in message #12.
http://www.nifty-stuff.com/forum/viewtopic.php?id=6300
That is the problem I am having with ColorLok. It certainly does not improve my black text printing. ColorLok is worse compared to the plain paper I have tried. I get form letters returned & they look like they were folded up when the ink was wet. While I have not tried a highlighter, the ink sure does come off when it comes into contact with another paper surface.
I have to agree that ColorLok is not good with pigment black text ink.
Please take a look at this thread, and the example link shown in message #12.
http://www.nifty-stuff.com/forum/viewtopic.php?id=6300
That is the problem I am having with ColorLok. It certainly does not improve my black text printing. ColorLok is worse compared to the plain paper I have tried. I get form letters returned & they look like they were folded up when the ink was wet. While I have not tried a highlighter, the ink sure does come off when it comes into contact with another paper surface.
I have to agree that ColorLok is not good with pigment black text ink.
I was wrong about Colorlok. It uses a different technology as opposed to a coating but it appears that it might make smearing smudging more likely nonetheless. I had run a casual test right after I was asked about the smearing. I had never thought twice about plain papers. Just bought the cheapest.
Colorlok causes the pigment particles to drop out as it hits the surface of the paper. This causes the particles to mainly sit on top or near the surface of the paper while the carrier continues to be absorbed into the paper. This will expose the particles more to physical ruboff and smearing. Larger particle size will make this worse. This was experienced by other users and it is confirmed even with OEM Canon ink.
The Colorlok also allows more abosrptive fibers to be used. This is supposed to allow faster drying maybe it does but having most of the particles on the surface might also cause other problems that mask themselves as drying problems. Hours later, I retested the smudging and I still get smudging with the highliter.
Is it a drying issue about the smearing with the highliter. No, because my test between the two papers differed by about thirty seconds at most. The non colorlok paper outperformed the colorlok paper in this regard. I would have to rub the highliter a few times to loosen the particles on the normal paper but one stroke on the colorlok would smear. This can be attributed to the particles on the surface.
in comparing the two sheets, neither looks sharper than the other one to the naked eye and neither looks darker than the other one to the naked eye. If I measured it, there might and possibly will be a difference. There might be a standard with colorlok as to the brightness requirements.
My statements that colorlok allows the particles to sit on the surface as that is the reason why the additives are placed in the paper still stands and is still true. Is it good for pigment ink? yes sure it is. However, the quick test was done mainly to answer the question of whether smudging occurred and in this respect, it is not very good with the inks I used and unlikely to be because of the physics of what colorlok is doing. The non colorlok paper was better in this regard.
In my making up the Ultra-K no testing was done with the Colorlok issues and smearing issues. I simply wanted something that looked darker and appeared sharper and equally reliable to the 1020.
I have done no testing with 1128 and that ink might prove to be more suitable with Colorlok.
Appendix
http://www.hp.com/hpinfo/newsroom/p...0/ColorLokBackgrounder-CLB-20100128041350.pdf
Colorlok causes the pigment particles to drop out as it hits the surface of the paper. This causes the particles to mainly sit on top or near the surface of the paper while the carrier continues to be absorbed into the paper. This will expose the particles more to physical ruboff and smearing. Larger particle size will make this worse. This was experienced by other users and it is confirmed even with OEM Canon ink.
The Colorlok also allows more abosrptive fibers to be used. This is supposed to allow faster drying maybe it does but having most of the particles on the surface might also cause other problems that mask themselves as drying problems. Hours later, I retested the smudging and I still get smudging with the highliter.
Is it a drying issue about the smearing with the highliter. No, because my test between the two papers differed by about thirty seconds at most. The non colorlok paper outperformed the colorlok paper in this regard. I would have to rub the highliter a few times to loosen the particles on the normal paper but one stroke on the colorlok would smear. This can be attributed to the particles on the surface.
in comparing the two sheets, neither looks sharper than the other one to the naked eye and neither looks darker than the other one to the naked eye. If I measured it, there might and possibly will be a difference. There might be a standard with colorlok as to the brightness requirements.
My statements that colorlok allows the particles to sit on the surface as that is the reason why the additives are placed in the paper still stands and is still true. Is it good for pigment ink? yes sure it is. However, the quick test was done mainly to answer the question of whether smudging occurred and in this respect, it is not very good with the inks I used and unlikely to be because of the physics of what colorlok is doing. The non colorlok paper was better in this regard.
In my making up the Ultra-K no testing was done with the Colorlok issues and smearing issues. I simply wanted something that looked darker and appeared sharper and equally reliable to the 1020.
I have done no testing with 1128 and that ink might prove to be more suitable with Colorlok.
Appendix
http://www.hp.com/hpinfo/newsroom/p...0/ColorLokBackgrounder-CLB-20100128041350.pdf
