First this place sounds like a game of politics. I was asked if it smeared and I did some quick testing and found that it did on Colorlok as compared to non colorlok. Now I was honest about it and based on my observations I quickly concluded that it was similar to having a coating like a microporous coating. That is where my mistake was it was not a microporous coating. It was a coating that would cause the same effect to occur.
If the accusers would have taken the time to read the link I provided and"understood" then they would understand. So that is where I was wrong. Colorlok attempts to leave the pigments at and near the surface. In Hp's own words. The reason when you think about HP's statement they qualify AT AND NEAR is likely because some pigment particles are in fact exposed to be AT and some pigment particles are NEAR. Now that the tests were done and the observations digested, we now know some key differences between 1128 and other pigment inks like 1020. I initially said that I don't know. I now know, you now know and it is there for the world to know.
How many ink vendors could tell you that? By doing what I do, I can make mistakes ( That is the risk.) but the observation is not wrong and conclusion is still NOT WRONG with respect to highgliters. If pigment particles are left AT the surface it is more likely to be subject to ruboff both physically and when dissolved by a highliter.
I take a progressive actions when I can do so for users.. I am not a multimillion dollar enterprise with a PR department and an advertising budget. I am my own R&D and testing.
When I make a mistake, and my mistake again was that it is NOT an resin coating but an salt based coating that attempts to leave the pigments at the surface. Read it again.
This place had been a place to help others. I tried to help when someone asked if it woulfd fix a highliter issue on colorlok papers. I said it would not after testing. But in the end I think that 1128 will fix the problem with Colorlok. This aspect is the stuff we should focus on, not trying to get someone to shoot their foot off.
In the end nche11, you will be seen as the villain here not me. Your desire to see someone hurt themself is not good.
I will shoot myself in the foot even further. There is likely a correlation between pigment size and darkness and the correlation is a positive one. This would have a bearing on depth of penetration or as HP calls it shrikethrough. There is also a spec on colorlok for a specfied surface smoothness. This will also have a bearing. This also has an effect on the required minimum particle size as well. The thinkers will understand why.
If the accusers would have taken the time to read the link I provided and"understood" then they would understand. So that is where I was wrong. Colorlok attempts to leave the pigments at and near the surface. In Hp's own words. The reason when you think about HP's statement they qualify AT AND NEAR is likely because some pigment particles are in fact exposed to be AT and some pigment particles are NEAR. Now that the tests were done and the observations digested, we now know some key differences between 1128 and other pigment inks like 1020. I initially said that I don't know. I now know, you now know and it is there for the world to know.
How many ink vendors could tell you that? By doing what I do, I can make mistakes ( That is the risk.) but the observation is not wrong and conclusion is still NOT WRONG with respect to highgliters. If pigment particles are left AT the surface it is more likely to be subject to ruboff both physically and when dissolved by a highliter.
I take a progressive actions when I can do so for users.. I am not a multimillion dollar enterprise with a PR department and an advertising budget. I am my own R&D and testing.
When I make a mistake, and my mistake again was that it is NOT an resin coating but an salt based coating that attempts to leave the pigments at the surface. Read it again.
This place had been a place to help others. I tried to help when someone asked if it woulfd fix a highliter issue on colorlok papers. I said it would not after testing. But in the end I think that 1128 will fix the problem with Colorlok. This aspect is the stuff we should focus on, not trying to get someone to shoot their foot off.
In the end nche11, you will be seen as the villain here not me. Your desire to see someone hurt themself is not good.
I will shoot myself in the foot even further. There is likely a correlation between pigment size and darkness and the correlation is a positive one. This would have a bearing on depth of penetration or as HP calls it shrikethrough. There is also a spec on colorlok for a specfied surface smoothness. This will also have a bearing. This also has an effect on the required minimum particle size as well. The thinkers will understand why.