High price of Epson ink dilemma!...

Who in the hell would ever had thought that the price of Epson ink would be
similar to the price of an expensive wine?...

I use an Epson Stylus Photo R280 printer and in the past I've always used "Generic" ink which was much much less than the real stuff!.. for years I would drift along with this cheap ink with no problems in printing out my photos. But, LATELY there must have been a meeting of the minds to kill a good thing!..

So, now, what used to be my "generic salvation" has definitely gone off a steep cliff!.. the ink from these generic vials are not the same. So, what in the world is going on with generic in.

In the past year, I've changed generic ink dealers about three times, and its all pretty bad.
But, not so, in the past!... I"m confused!..

Would this be some kind of ploy to get me to buy the real expensive stuff?..

Listen, I would really appreciate it so much if anyone out there knows the real story about where the good "generic ink" is hiding, and I beg you to let me know so I can order some..
Otherwise, I'll have no choice but to buy Epsons vintage original...

PLease, help!..... and, thanks....

Have you done something else, like switched paper?

Generic ink will always be a roll of the dice -- maybe the vendors switched suppliers, and there is absolutely no guarantee to you that a generic ink will produce any kind of quality print on any given paper, as far as I know.

I wouldn't mind using generic ink on the "office" printer for text, graphic/web stuff on "plain" paper, but I really wouldn't look to it for printing photos -- I use papers that are spec'd for use with my printer/paper/ink combo, and I'm happy that way, although I know some people say they get great results from generic ink.

I'm with Tony. I print on an EPSON R2400 and I only use EPSON original ink. Yes, it is more expensive, but I value my prints too much to roll the dice. Compared to the cost of wet darkroom prints, even the Epson inks are cheap.

What about taking a step up from "generic" inks to some of the better-known 3rd-party inks, like MIS, Image Specialists, or Lyson? I've never used any of these, mind you, but these are the names that get tossed around the most when people talk about non-OEM inks. They probably cost more than the true generics, but less than OEM cartridges.

Are you already using refillable cartridges, or are you refilling Epson carts and resetting the chips?

Keep in mind that with any non-OEM ink, you'll probably need to create custom profiles in order to get the best results.

--Greg

mypoppy31 wrote in post #11199644
Who in the hell would ever had thought that the price of Epson ink would be
similar to the price of an expensive wine?....

Not me... OEM ink is price-wise, more in line with weapons grade plutonium. Fine wine is a bargain.

For wide format printing, I switched to an HP 9180. The HP ink cartridges are expensive, too, but much larger and far longer lasting than Epson's are, for comparable 13" wide, pigment-based printers.

Generic inks are a crap shoot... Might make fine prints, or might not... Could work fine for years, or might damage your printer and void your warranty.

I'll stick with OEM.

I do still use an Epson R300 for proofing and thumbnail catalogs, letters, spreadsheets and such. Tiny little ink cartridges, but I make them stretch by using cheap (~$15 for 100 sheets) Kodak "gloss" paper for the proofs and thumbnails. Color is just okay, but adequate for my purposes. The paper is the key. It is really more of a satin finish than gloss, but uses a "matte" paper setting on the R300. That makes the ink cartridges go a whole lot farther. By comparison, Epson's premium gloss paper really soaks up the ink. Best guess, I probably get around double the mileage out of the little Epson cartridges by using the "heavy weight matte paper" setting, instead of "premium gloss".

Look into some sort of discount plan. I have a business account at Staples, so get a recycling rebate for up to 20 ink cartridges a month there. It works out about the same or cheaper than most online sellers of OEM, plus the store is only a couple blocks from home so I don't need to keep a large back stock of cartridges.

Probably the thing I hate most about Epson is that they actually have a built in "self destruct" counter in their printers (at least some of them). Three times my R300 has given me the "Printer has exceeded it's useful life, is worn out and must be replaced" warning and shut itself down. I found an applet online to reset the counter and have kept using the printer without any issues. Screw Epson... I won't be buying another one of their printers! Will probably get a Kodak for proofs and thumbnails in the future. They claim to be the cheapest to operate. I can set up custom ICC profiles, if needed.

I went into printing my own photos open eyed. I have no delusions about the high cost... but frankly, I don't give a damn! I reduce costs by using the higher capacity cartridges for my printer and recycling the emptys at my local office supply store for credit.

For document or color presentation printing, I use an actual OFFICE printer, not my photo printer.

mypoppy31 wrote in post #11199644
similar to the price of an expensive wine?...

Very expensive wine

http://consumerist.com …ore-than-human-blood.html

amfoto1 wrote in post #11204355
Three times my R300 has given me the "Printer has exceeded it's useful life, is worn out and must be replaced" warning and shut itself down. I found an applet online to reset the counter and have kept using the printer without any issues.

Are you aware that that warning is for the waste ink pads inside the printer? If you are not using an external waste ink tank, you could be in for a very messy surprise one day when the pads are finally 100% saturated and overflow. FYI...

--Greg

"Are you aware that that warning is for the waste ink pads inside the printer"?

That's what killed my 950. But apparently it can still be rescued. All it needs is a syringe of ink solvent, a shed load of paper towels and a lot of patience. Dye inks can be flushed with water, I imagine pigment inks need something stronger.

There seems to be a movement afoot to lock users in to the printer manufacturers ink. I am pretty sure that the ink sales contribute more to the bottom line than printer sales. The best solution I have found for ink supplies is ATLEX.COM.

Hope this helps,

110yd

Printers and ink use the razor and blade model. Get 'em hooked, milk 'em dry.

Lab prints are relatively inexpensive, and while the gamut of lab prints isn't as good as a high end inkjet the prints seem more robust.

110yd wrote in post #11207092
There seems to be a movement afoot to lock users in to the printer manufacturers ink. I am pretty sure that the ink sales contribute more to the bottom line than printer sales. The best solution I have found for ink supplies is ATLEX.COM.

Hope this helps,

110yd

It is true that printer companies make the bulk of their profits from ink. This goes back for over 10 years, when the inkjet market got flooded with "global competition" that priced printers at very low prices, sometimes actually below the cost of making them, so that companies could gain market share. At the same time, photo printing became competitive, meaning that ink research and development became a leading factor. The consequence of all this is that we have had to pay a premium in ink, not just to finance the R&D that has gone into it, but also to balance the fact that printers have been sold for very little if any profit. The model is money on ink, not printer. In fact, over the years there have been "giveaway deals" with printers, and if you can find one with ink included, you get more than you would by just buying ink for an existing printer.