Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: HP ink cartridge woes

This is topic HP ink cartridge woes in forum Film-Yak at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=007606

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 09-23-2004, 05:42 PM:

I have an HP 1220 inkjet printer. I have a brand-new ink cartridge (which has been on my shelf for about 8 months) in which the yellow won't work. I tried another new cart and it worked fine. Anyone have any tips for coaxing the yellow ink out of this bad cart? Or am I just screwed?

I can't find the receipt, so returning it to the store is out of the question.

Posted by Ken Layton (Member # 133) on 09-23-2004, 05:52 PM:

Soak the end of the printhead of the cartridge in 99% rubbing alcohol for a few minutes. You only need a thimble full to do it. Then place the printhead part of the cartridge on a wet paper towel and gently squeeze the sides of the cartridge. That should get the ink flowing again.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 09-23-2004, 06:12 PM:

This is just a little off topic. I also use a HP1220c printer (it's pretty good for printing large, tabloid size sketches).

Recently one of the people in our office bought some recycled ink cartridges from Office Depot. The prices were quite a bit lower than the new HP cartridges. The price might have been nice, but the output SUCKS. The color is muted. There's lot of banding. Black line work bleeds. Overall it's just shit. Recycled ink cartidges might be fine for a cheapo printer in the kids' bedroom. But they are flat out useless for any kind of office work, especially when you need at least acceptably good print quality.

The high price of inkjet ink cartridges really has us looking at color laser printers. Prices on a lot of those units have dropped quite dramatically. I saw a Konica-Minolta model for under $600; the unit even had a built in Ethernet to work as a network printer. Color laser printers commonly feature a decent amount of built-in RAM. This is another area where ink jet printers suck much ass. My HP 1220c can print a plain paper page fairly quick. But while it's printing, I can't do too much with my computer since it has to spool out the print job. It's like the PC suddenly got drunk or something. This would not be a problem if the printer had a decent amount of built-in RAM.

As cheap as RAM and hard disc capacity has become, I believe all office environment printers (especially any used for graphics work) should have full Raster-Into-Postscript "RIP" functions. That means a good amount of RAM (64MB, 128MB or more) and a 20GB or larger hard disc for spooling up high rez jobs. This could be easily done while keeping the cost of a color laser or ink jet printer well below the $1000 price point.

Posted by Jack Ondracek (Member # 1466) on 09-23-2004, 06:59 PM:

That's well within my price range... but if the laser people market their equipment like HP does, I probably can't afford the toner cartridges!

Posted by Wayne Keyser (Member # 2420) on 09-23-2004, 08:45 PM:

I have been extraordinarily happy with the "discount" cartridges from carrotink.com - the product is really quite good (used to be so-so but the printers accept them better, now, as well.)

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 09-24-2004, 02:37 AM:

About a decade ago I had an HP inkjet (a Deskjet six hundred and something, if I remember correctly), which gave me no end of problems with the cartidges drying up. It was one of the worst buys I ever made. The big problem was with the black cartridges: if you didn't use them pretty much every day the printing would get streaky for the first half the page and then spray ink all over the place. After going away for a fortnight's holiday it really played silly buggers. I tried gently dabbing the head with a lens cleaning cloth soaked with IPA (isopropyl alcohol, not India pale ale!), which did practically nothing. I then thought 'sod this' and in frustration gave it a scrub with an IPA-impregnated toothbrush. It never printed anything again.

I've never bought another HP inkjet since, and nor do I ever intend to.

Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 09-24-2004, 03:21 AM:

Ignoring printer cost, I've never really been totally satisfied by any inkjet printer that uses disposable print heads (print head on the cartridge).

The only ones I've used, or seen output from, that I've liked (and used in camera ready artwork) are the higher end Epson Stylus series of printers with built in (and expensive to replace) print heads.

My Epson Stylus 850Ne could print the best counterfit, err nevermind. [Big Grin]

Posted by Stephen Furley (Member # 1277) on 09-24-2004, 06:18 AM:

Generally speaking, the cheaper the printer, the more expensive the supplies. There are some very cheap laser printers available these days, I cannot believe that they can possibly be made for the price they are selling for. I'm sure that they're sold at a loss, and the profit is all made on the consumables.

Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 09-24-2004, 09:40 AM:

I would enjoy having a color laser and the price is really making it tempting but my primary use for color (not that some other uses would not come up if I had one) is printing photos and lasers are still not up to what a good ink jet will do. I liked my Epson Photo Stylus 750 until it clogged. (I was using an aftermarket continuous feed ink system with dummy cartridges linked by tiny tubing to ink bottles.) And I love my new (earlier this year) Canon i860 (or was it 960?) on which I have not yet dared use anything but OEM ink.

On the B&W side my HP Laserjet 6L has served me long and well and is now my oldest piece of in-service computer gear.

Posted by John Walsh (Member # 168) on 09-26-2004, 06:49 AM:

My understanding is that HP designed an 'orginal' type of ink cartridge, and patented it. This design is being used in many new printers, to prevent aftermarket companies from making knock-offs and taking some of HP's profits away.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 09-26-2004, 08:48 AM:

quote: Steve Kraus
lasers are still not up to what a good ink jet will do.

Its obvious that you've never had any pictures printed on a really high end color laser printer such as at a photographic digital printing center or a simple place like Office Depot. The quality of those exceeds ink jet by so many miles as to make it not worth owning a "home type" color printer at all. Of course these are 40,000.00 plus color laser printers. For a buck I can get a full page color photo laser printed that'll put to shame any ink jet printed photo. The other benefits are that laser printed pictures are permanent and not subject to water damage and do not require special "Photo Paper" to make the prints on. For the cost of 50 sheets of good photo ink jet paper and ink for my H-P printer I can get almost 100 8X10 pictures printed at Office Max on a 40,000.00 color laser printer. I've given up for the most part on home color printers as its cheaper in the long run to have them printed by someone else. Home color ink jet printers are really a scam when you sit down and analyze the situation closely [Eek!]

!! Of course there are those people that don't have access to these printers any where near where they live........

If you need larger prints form digital files then I suggest the Flex method that is supported by many fine photographic labs. Cibachrome like prints from digital photos are easy and inexpensive with this incredible printing process.
http://www.xmission.com/~borge/DS_lambda.html

Mark

Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 09-26-2004, 10:21 AM:

Well my comparison wasn't just against a home office-type machine but also with output given me by a friend who works in graphics at a large business. But I don't know what kind of machine they have. But I'm willing go concede that the best is probably better than I've seen. I think therefore that a comparison test is in order.

Is there some particular color laser I should seek? Would Office Max / Copy Max (there is one closer) have this or should I seek out an Office Depot? I should also find something really hi rez to print. My love my Olympus camera but its almost 5 years old now and its 1600 x 1200 isn't high enough rez for a good comparison. So I'll find something snappy to print and try it on both the commercial color laser and my own inkjet.

My ink spritzer is in fact the Canon i960.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 09-26-2004, 11:26 AM:

I don't know what make-model they have out here but I can find out tommrrow as I plan on going there. Be sure to purchase some really good heavy white paper to have the lasers printed onto, I think I bought some heavy Kodak paper stock last time.... lots cheaper than photo paper!! Lasers cannot do glossy, so if you like glossy forget about the laser thingy all together.
The laser will blow the ink jet away for rez but what you're really after is just a comparison of quality vs. cost from both types and rez doesn't matter a bit for this comparison. Pick a picture with alot of colors in it.

Mark

Posted by Ron Yost (Member # 1850) on 09-26-2004, 12:15 PM:

Why not have real photo prints made? The Fuji Frontier and/or Noritsu printers used at one-hour places, WalMart, Costco, drugstores (and pro-labs, too), make wonderful prints and enlargements from digital files .. if they're given a good file to work with.

The Kodak system found many places these days is nice to work with, too, for 'ordinary' family prints and such from digital files.

Yes, I know, it all depends on who's running the machine and how well it's calibrated and maintained, but most places will work with you to get the best results possible from your files. If they don't want to, or you don't like the results, find another processor. They're 'all over' these days. [Big Grin]

Even WalMart makes excellent real photo-paper prints and very nice enlargements from digital files these days. Mine has two Fuji Frontier's.

I use WalMart all the time for digital enlargements up to 8 x 10 from my Canon DigitalRebel. For larger prints there are several online photo printing places that produce gorgeous prints for relatively little money. Lots of competition keeps the prices reasonable. [Big Grin]

Color laser is kind of good, IMHO, but no where near as nice looking as what a real photo printer can do. I've never cared for the 'greasy' look of laser toner for photos. They are definitely getting better, but I don't think they're good enough yet. I haven't tried every laser out there [Big Grin]

, but I have used our local Staples and OfficeMax. One amateur shooter's opinion. [Big Grin]

I definitely agree it's not worth doing it yourself, and, believe me, I've spent plenty on printers and cart's in the past. Isn't worth it, as others have said, with all the higher-quality and lower-cost options available these days. Not even mentioning all the time involved.

Ron Yost

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 09-26-2004, 01:45 PM:

Ron, What format do those store printers have to see, JPG, TIFF, etc? Do they accept them just on CDR's, or on Zip disks and other formats? The reason I like Laser os because you can get a nice 8X10 for a buck and the color always has matched exactly what the original looks like on the first try. Ya can't do an 8X10 that looks as nice as they do for a buck anywhere else. A bit greasy looking... sort of...perhaps waxy looking.... but some matte spray tales care of that problem anyway. Seems that the world of shot on film photography is quickly drawing to a close......

Mark

Posted by Adam Wilbert (Member # 1184) on 09-26-2004, 10:03 PM:

Look for a print shop that uses a Xerox DocuColor 12. They'll absolutely blow you away, and they're pretty standard for office print shops including OfficeDepot and Kinkos. You can in fact do glossy in a laser, but it can't be "photo paper" that ink jets use. The gloss finish just melts to the fuser. You'll need a special laser safe gloss stock, which comes in various weights. I know Kinko's has this available if you ask. Matte stocks also usually look nice, but for an image that has a lot of coverage, they tend to be a bit on the glossy side anyway because of the amount of toner used. Stay away from color printers that use wax sticks instead of toner, the color has always faded really quickly (six months or less) and the wax process plays havoc with line wieghts.

As far as phot printing, I love the SONY picture station at my nextdoor kinkos. I'm not sure what the Kodak machines use (or others at walgreens, walmart, etc) but the sony model uses a dye sublimation printer that will even blow away color laser prints. For smaller stuff (4x6), the price can't be beat. They'll take CD, memory sticks, compact flash, smart media, secure digital, and have a scanner for hard copies. So there's my raving about digi-printing.

-Adam

Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 09-26-2004, 10:28 PM:

I believe the Kodak self-service kiosks are Kodak dye sub printers. (John can confirm or refute.)

And, yeah I do like glossy.

Posted by Ron Yost (Member # 1850) on 09-26-2004, 10:32 PM:

Hey Mark,

Sorry to be so long answering .. been gone all day.

I'm not sure of all the formats accepted by the Fuji's, but I give it Quality-10 JPG's at 300 dpi (the printer prints at 300 dpi), sRGB color-space. I work on the files in PShop first. I shoot mostly Canon RAW-format files (the largest, highest-quality least-processed file the camera is capable of), so they have to be 'adjusted' in Photoshop.

When done I save them on CD and insert it into the Fuji Kiosk and tell it what I want. I think the interface-kiosk takes all common 'portable' digital storage media, but not sure about ZIP Disks.

Full specs and how to prepare digital files for these printers is available on several websites, but I don't have any URL's handy. It does take a bit of 'getting used to', however. [Big Grin]

I'm still doing 'manual'-control of the printer .. meaning at the kiosk. Print by print.

There IS a way around that, tho. One can 'imbed' a custom printer profile in EACH image ahead of time (at home) and, thus, 'tell' the printer what to do with that file, very precisely. However, I'm just learning how it's done and haven't actually tried it yet. The 'standard' printer profiles are available on the web and one starts with this profile, somehow adjusting it .. in Photoshop, I think. Kind of neat .. as you can tell it to do all sorts of things. More than are available at the kiosk.

Takes more time, tho. But, you can do it at home and not standing at the kiosk with people waiting in line behind you. Just load the disk, it reads it, and presto (sort of) [Big Grin]

you're done.

You DO have to find out the exact model number of the printer, tho. That I do know. Each model has a different standard profile, apparently.

So, in sum, it's a tradeoff. Your method is DEFINITELY faster and cheaper. (Wally 8x10's are only about $1.80, tho.) If it works for you not much reason to change, huh? [Smile]

I, too, lament the 'change' to digital from film. I'm a long-time Nikon user, still using a couple of black "F's" I bought back in the late 70's. When I decided it was time to 'try digital' I switched to Canon because I like the velvet-smooth color rendition of their CMOS sensor better than Nikon. I bought the Rebel so I could sort of evaluate the system without investing too much in it if I didn't like it. I do like it, tho, so will probably 'trade up' to a Canon with more features in the near future. The 20D looks attractive, but it has a couple of small 'issues' that need to be worked out. The 1D's are waaaay out of my price range! [Big Grin]

Anyhow, sorry to ramble on so, Mark. Hope I did a little good. [Smile]

Edit: Steve, you're probably right. I don't pay much attention to them and didn't notice any other printer standing there. Probably the Kodak printer is smaller, if it's 'dry' .. it may be built into the kiosk itself?? Thanks, Steve. [Big Grin]

Edit 2 .. Did a quick cursory check on the Kodak Picture Maker kiosk online, and they are indeed 'thermal' dye-sub prints. From what I saw on the web they're pretty pricey, compared to wet prints. A tad over $6 for an 8x10 .. but this may or may not be accurate. No personal experience from me. YMMV. [Big Grin]

Ron Yost

Posted by William Hooper (Member # 71) on 09-27-2004, 03:28 AM:

All I know that is inside the Kodak Picture Maker kiosk is a man who continuously speaks to the air in an affected, unreal, unconversational fake-DJ voice, & if I can get close enough to one with a crowbar, I'm gonna let him out.

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 09-27-2004, 01:44 PM:

Kodak's new products at Photokina:

Kodak at Photokina 2004

quote:
Kodak is presenting at Photokina 2004 a complete digital imaging system that connects picture taking with storing, organizing, sharing and printing. The innovations include an agreement with many of the world’s leading digital camera manufacturers, who will design future cameras that fit onto KODAK EASYSHARE Printer Docks. This unprecedented partnership will give more consumers the ability to enjoy prints from the world’s fastest-growing seller of snapshot photo printers.

Kodak On-Line Photo Services

quote:
Ordering Kodak prints online is more convenient than ever. With advanced photo labs on both coasts, Ofoto delivers your order in 2 days or less!

Kodak Prints at Home

quote:
Get high-quality prints at home
Printing at home is a quick, convenient way to get prints from your digital camera. Kodak provides several simple solutions, from a full range of KODAK Inkjet Papers to a family of KODAK EASYSHARE Printer Docks (Thermal Media). You can even have them delivered to your door by ordering through Ofoto, Kodak's online printing and sharing service. The KODAK EASYSHARE System makes it easy for you to get the brilliant, long-lasting prints you've come to expect.

Kodak Picture Maker Kiosks

quote:
The Digital Imaging Marketing Association (DIMA) named Eastman Kodak Company's KODAK Picture Maker G3 kiosk a DIMA Innovative Digital Product Award winner at the 2004 Photo Marketing Association (PMA) Annual International Convention and Trade Show, held last week in Las Vegas.

DIMA recognized the KODAK Picture Maker G3 kiosk as one of 10 products, out of hundreds of digital products on display, for its influence on the future of digital imaging. Judges defined the KODAK Picture Maker G3 kiosk as a product utilizing new technologies in such a way as to make it either unique or the first of its kind.

Also, at the first annual DIMA Photo Kiosk Shoot-Out, the KODAK Picture Maker G3 Order Station LS and the KODAK Picture Maker G3 Print Station 24 won in the "Remote and Stand-Alone/Remote Combination" categories, respectively. Manufacturers brought their digital photo kiosks to the DIMA Shoot-Out studio where the kiosks were evaluated based on user friendliness, quality of print, feature set, overall experience, number of steps to get to the print function, ergonomics and speed and specification sheet rating. A panel of digital imaging experts and the DIMA board judged the competition.

Kodak Thermal Printing Media (Dye Sublimation)

quote:
Thermal media from Kodak Professional, along with KODAK PROFESSIONAL Thermal Printers, delivers the same high-quality photographic prints that you have built your reputation on. Whether you are producing digital portraits in the studio, creating high-quality transparencies for presentations, selling digital photos at an event or making CMYK proofs for your next offset print client, Kodak has a thermal output solution to meet your needs. From 4 x 6” photo prints on the 4720 printer up to 9-1/2 x 14” professional prints on the 8670 PS printer, Kodak offers a media and printer to suit your digital application.

quote: William Hooper
All I know that is inside the Kodak Picture Maker kiosk is a man who continuously speaks to the air in an affected, unreal, unconversational fake-DJ voice, & if I can get close enough to one with a crowbar, I'm gonna let him out.

I was offered that job, but failed the psychological test because I am claustrophobic. [Big Grin]

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 09-27-2004, 03:43 PM:

Once William's through liberating the man in the Photo CD booth, though, I'd be grateful if he could refrain from releasing what sounds like the female SS officer in my telephone answering machine ('You have NO messages vaiting!').

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 09-27-2004, 05:30 PM:

Every color printing method has its pluses and minuses. In dealing with large format color printing for signage, I choose different mediums based on cost, print longevity and other factors.

Ink jet printing on glossy paper or vinyl (and preferably laminated) is the way to go for prints featuring photographic content and optimal for close-up viewing. Lamination makes the color pop even more. The downside with ink jet is the prints have a shorter lifespan. UV enhanced inks have helped, but I still would not recommend this method for any long term outdoor displays.

Thermal resin / solid ink printers can generate product that will last outdoors longer, and can even be used without lamination. However, photographic quality is not as good. Devices like the Gerber Edge or Roland's ColorCAMM are best used for printing (and cutting) graphical looking artwork.

Electrostatic printing (from small office color lasers to a $250,000 Scotchprint Graphic maker from 3M) does a little better than thermal resin for making prints with photographic imagery. Color toner is less expensive than ink jet color for space coverage. Electrostatic still lacks a bit of the color fidelity of ink jet. This includes the high end laser printers and color copiers far out of the price range of affordability to the average consumer or small business. Next to a good large format thermal ink jet printer, electrostatic based output is a little drab by comparison. Print longevity has improved with electrostatic printing. We'll get billboard prints with a 5 to 7 year warranty, which is way more than enough considering the standard billboard display will only be up for a few weeks to a few months.

Posted by Scott Jentsch (Member # 1681) on 09-28-2004, 12:23 PM:

If you haven't tried them out yet, take a look at Shutterfly, which is an online photo printing service.

We had 300 digital photos and scans to print for a big scrapbooking project my wife had planned, and I didn't really wish to take on the job of printing that many photos on my trusty Epson 870.

We took a sample of 15 photos that would expose color saturation, shadow highlights, and other characteristics, and took them to a local discount store (Target) and then uploaded the same files to Shutterfly.

The photos from Target were dull and not at all similar to what I saw on screen, whereas Shutterfly did an excellent job with them.

I wanted to check out more places, like WalMart, Walgreens, and Ofoto, but we got such good results and decent prices from Shutterfly that we went through them.

This was definitely simpler and faster than printing them myself, but nothing beats the ability to have results immediately, or be able to tweak endlessly to get just the right result you're looking for. It's nice to have such choices depending on the task at hand!