i950 print head

  • Thread starter Thread starter no one
  • Start date Start date
The O.P. has a good point. I would love to see a lawyer take the inkjet
printer manufacturers on. He's right that the waste ink pad situation
is really fraud. And at least with the Epsons I have, replacing the
waste ink pads is no simple feat. It involves completely dismantling
the printer's interior to get to them.

Several cars now come with 10 year bumper to bumper warranties.


Art

Ivor said:
[..]

I've also read discussions about the waste ink counter. My printer shows
this counter has already reached 1/3 of it's full capacity already. When
it's full, the software will disable the printer and an error message will
pop up advising me to take it to Canon for servicing. This is outrageous.
It is like the automobile scams of years ago when the dash light would
illuminate a warning lamp that only the dealership could reset. In that
instance, the car didn't require any service, it only required dealer
profits. It comes down to greed. The excuse that ink will run all over
your desk are absurd. Solve the technical problem rather than plan
obsolesence. The notion that the consumer is unable to service a blotting
sponge in the waste ink retainer is unfounded.
Click to expand...


You mean people would be quite capable of unclipping a cover and removing a
waste ink pad, replacing it with a new one and clipping the cover back into
place? Well, I wouldn't of believed it - that sort of 'technical servicing'
usually requires 3 years technical training (or 5 years in the case of the
automobile industry).

These counters should not
disable the printer. All consumables should be affordably serviceable by
the consumer.
Click to expand...


Nah, there'd be no need for people to change their printers every 2 years
then......

Really, it is time for the trial lawyers to jump into this game. With ink
cartridges "chipped" to prevent consumer refilling, usage counters that
disable the device and print heads that won't last three reams of paper,
this is all corporate misconduct.
Click to expand...


Or "market forces" as its known thesedays.

Perhaps in time other industries will follow the same marketing techniques -
TV and Video recorders that only last 3-5 years and are uneconomical to
service if the fail, Computers that become obsolete after 3 years, DVD/CD
players who's laser burns out after 2 years, Cars that rust after 5
years.....

Hmmmm...
Click to expand...
 
Arthur said:
As much as I like 4 color (or five with the extra pigment black in the
case of the Canon) for their cheaper ink costs, there is something to
keep in mind with these printers that might change your decision to
buy one over another type.

All inkjet printers have a finite number of times the ink nozzle with
fire. With Epson the number is huge, baring catastrophic failure, so
I'm not suggesting equating between technologies. but still the
concept holds true within a type of head design.

With any printer of the same technology consider the following. The
more times any one nozzle has to fire, the shorter lived is that
nozzle and therefore the head.
Click to expand...


All carts have a finite number of miles they can be driven. The more
miles driven the faster they will wear out.
If, for instance, you have two printers, and let's assume for a minute
they both have the same number of nozzles per color. For the sake of
this experiment, let's say each color has 100 nozzles.

In the case of a printer that only has four colors, each nozzle is
going to fire more often to create a certain size photo print than if
the printer has 6 or 8 or 10 colors. In effect, the printer with more
colors "spreads around" the use of the nozzles between them, and in
theory, each nozzle should last more images. So the head in a 4 color
printer might wear out sooner than one with 8 colors.
Click to expand...


That depends on the photograph. If there is little use of the subtle
shades in the majority of photos then the theory is not accurate. The
bottom line is that the printer's physical life should at least last as
long as the economic life. In most cases, especially for photo
printing, this is about 5 years. Most of the printers made in 2000 have
been technically improved upon today.
 
Arthur said:
The O.P. has a good point. I would love to see a lawyer take the
inkjet printer manufacturers on. He's right that the waste ink pad
situation is really fraud. And at least with the Epsons I have,
replacing the waste ink pads is no simple feat. It involves
completely dismantling the printer's interior to get to them.

Several cars now come with 10 year bumper to bumper warranties.
Click to expand...


I would also like one to take the aftermarket ink industry and get laws
passed for full disclosure.
Art

Ivor said:
[..]

I've also read discussions about the waste ink counter. My printer
shows
this counter has already reached 1/3 of it's full capacity already.
When
it's full, the software will disable the printer and an error
message will
pop up advising me to take it to Canon for servicing. This is
outrageous.
It is like the automobile scams of years ago when the dash light would
illuminate a warning lamp that only the dealership could reset. In
that
instance, the car didn't require any service, it only required dealer
profits. It comes down to greed. The excuse that ink will run all
over
your desk are absurd. Solve the technical problem rather than plan
obsolesence. The notion that the consumer is unable to service a
blotting
sponge in the waste ink retainer is unfounded.
Click to expand...



You mean people would be quite capable of unclipping a cover and
removing a waste ink pad, replacing it with a new one and clipping
the cover back into place? Well, I wouldn't of believed it - that
sort of 'technical servicing' usually requires 3 years technical
training (or 5 years in the case of the automobile industry).

These counters should not
disable the printer. All consumables should be affordably
serviceable by
the consumer.
Click to expand...



Nah, there'd be no need for people to change their printers every 2
years then......

Really, it is time for the trial lawyers to jump into this game.
With ink
cartridges "chipped" to prevent consumer refilling, usage counters that
disable the device and print heads that won't last three reams of
paper,
this is all corporate misconduct.
Click to expand...



Or "market forces" as its known thesedays.

Perhaps in time other industries will follow the same marketing
techniques - TV and Video recorders that only last 3-5 years and are
uneconomical to service if the fail, Computers that become obsolete
after 3 years, DVD/CD players who's laser burns out after 2 years,
Cars that rust after 5 years.....

Hmmmm...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Actually, that's not accurate. The driver design on printers which add
low dye load inks, in fact, emphasize those ink colors over the high dye
load inks, because they can produce more subtle tonal ranges, and
because those inks can be used up more rapidly because they are of lower
dye content. This sells more ink, since the load dye load inks usually
sell for the same prince as the high dye load inks, and actually cost
less to make.

In general, with typical photographic image content, the low dye load
inks are used up at approximately twice the volume as the high dye load
inks, meaning those nozzles are fired twice as often, and therefore they
are likely, in the color head, to fail first. However, today most
printers gang all the heads together as one, meaning the first head
failure is typically the back head should it have the same number of
nozzles as the color, since it gets the most use if text is also
generated on the printer in question.

I have not studied the design of Canon printers well enough to comment
without further research, but most Epson printers which are deigned for
both text and photo use, have double the number of nozzles in the black
head as the color to help to better equalize head wear and to speed up
text printing.

Art
 
Arthur said:
Actually, that's not accurate. The driver design on printers which
add low dye load inks, in fact, emphasize those ink colors over the
high dye load inks, because they can produce more subtle tonal ranges,
and because those inks can be used up more rapidly because they are of
lower dye content. This sells more ink, since the load dye load inks
usually sell for the same prince as the high dye load inks, and
actually cost less to make.
Click to expand...

So are you saying that these additional subtle tones are not that big a
deal and they are really there to just sell more ink. That the high dye
load inks will produce a good enough result at a far less cost? Is that
what you are saying?
 
measekite said:
So are you saying that these additional subtle tones are not that big a
deal and they are really there to just sell more ink. That the high dye
load inks will produce a good enough result at a far less cost? Is that
what you are saying?
Click to expand...

How on earth did you get to that conclusion? Didn't you read the line that
says: "they can produce more subtle tonal ranges" ?
 
I am saying exactly what I stated.

1) the low dye load inks are used up more rapidly than the high dye load
inks in the design of the printer drivers.

2) Those inks can produce more subtle tones, but if the dot is small
enough, the difference at viewing distance is difficult, if not
impossible. to see

3) One of the advantages to these types of inks to the ink vendor (be
that the printer manufacturer or 3rd party ink suppliers) is that they
get used up quicker and therefore more ink is sold.

4) and lastly, especially in dye colorant inks. these low dye load inks
tend to fade more rapidly than the high dye load inks and are usually
the ones most problematic when fading does occur.

Art
 
Actually, the gist of my comments are that use of low dye load inks are
somewhat a stop gap due to the dots having been too large for quite a
while. The earlier inkjet printers used dots from about 23 to 6
picolitres. These are still visible to the naked eye, although the
smaller ones are not at viewing distance.

Now that printers are down to 2 and even 1 picolitre, the tonal
differences are almost a moot point, unless you look at the photographs
with a loupe, which is not how a print is supposed to be viewed.

In my opinion, one of the things Canon got right was moving toward a
very small ink volume dot (1 picolitre) with a CMYK printer. Now that
printers can produce that small a dot and do so rapidly, with the right
driver design, such a printer can provide smoother gradients than
previous CMYK printers, perhaps even equal to CcMmYk printers, with more
stable color with less rapid fading and use less ink, because the white
of the paper between the dots provides the lighter colors rather than
diluted inks.

Now, why Canon appears to be abandoning the 1 picolitre design, I can
only speculate. Perhaps they are having head clogs, perhaps the fact
that these printers have to produce a lot more dots per image is causing
premature head failures, or perhaps they found they are just not making
enough on ink sales since these printers use less ink overall, or some
other factors, but from a strictly logical point of view, high dye load
inks and smaller dots makes a printer more versatile.

Inkjet printer companies are moving toward adding more full dye load
colors and removing low dye load inks in more recent products. This can
increase color gamut, and speed (for instance, having a blue ink may
allow for one dot to replace two (C+M) or red (M+Y). Again, it also adds
to ink replacement costs, and makes 3rd party ink set more complex to
create.

One thing I think anyone who is going to evaluate the inkjet printer
market must consider in looking at new designs, is that manufacturers
live or die (Dye ;-)) by their ink sales, so design features that use up
ink or reduce the likelihood of an owner using 3rd party inks improves
profitability. The last thing any inkjet printer manufacturer can
afford to do is sell the printers at current pricing, and not "score" a
good percentage of the ink sales for that printer.


Art
 
Arthur Entlich wrote:

[edited]
Now, why Canon appears to be abandoning the 1 picolitre design, I can
only speculate. Perhaps they are having head clogs, perhaps the fact
that these printers have to produce a lot more dots per image is causing
premature head failures, or perhaps they found they are just not making
enough on ink sales since these printers use less ink overall, or some
other factors, but from a strictly logical point of view, high dye load
inks and smaller dots makes a printer more versatile.
Click to expand...

I haven't heard or read anything official other than the wild guesses
from various members of this newsgroup. But I can tell you, officially,
that I have the iP5000 with its nifty 1 pl printhead. I use a
combination of non OEM prefilled and bulk filled cartridges for it -
bulk for the BCI-3e black and prefilled for the colour. I have never had
to perform a head clean other than when I change the cartridges (to
prime the system). So I doubt very much it's a clogging problem. Am I
just lucky? I doubt it, I've never won the 6/49 :-).

Premature head failure?... I'll have to wait and see.

-Taliesyn
 
Arthur said:
I am saying exactly what I stated.

1) the low dye load inks are used up more rapidly than the high dye
load inks in the design of the printer drivers.
Click to expand...


Have you programmed these printer drivers in assembler or C++? How do
you know this?
2) Those inks can produce more subtle tones, but if the dot is small
enough, the difference at viewing distance is difficult, if not
impossible. to see

3) One of the advantages to these types of inks to the ink vendor (be
that the printer manufacturer or 3rd party ink suppliers) is that they
get used up quicker and therefore more ink is sold.
Click to expand...


If that is true (and I do not know) then it seems logical that it is
using one color at the expense of another so how is more ink being able
to be sold?
4) and lastly, especially in dye colorant inks. these low dye load
inks tend to fade more rapidly than the high dye load inks and are
usually the ones most problematic when fading does occur.
Click to expand...


I have heard that. So it would seem more logical that the Canon IP4000
prints should hold their own against the 6 color Epson R300 when
appropriately cared for.
 
1) No, not only have I not programmed these printers in C++, but I've
never programmed anything in C++. Nor does one have to have programmed a
printer to know about ink usage. All one has to do is use one, and
determine how quickly each color gets used up. Ask anyone who has a
printer which uses low dye load inks what the percentage of use
difference there is between the low dye load inks and the high dye load
inks.

2) Let's say you have a cyan sky you want to print and for the moment to
simplify the process, let's assume the printer uses only one dot size.
In order to get the correct color, with the darker ink, you have to
distribute dots over 50% of the paper area. In other words, a dot, then
two equal size spaces without ink, another dot, etc, in both X and Y
vectors. From viewing distance, the color density will appear about
1/4th the depth of the cyan ink in it's pure form, because your eye
mixes the "one part" white paper with the "one part" high dye load dot.

Now, let's assume you have a cyan ink that is made up of one part high
dye load ink and four parts water, making it have one-forth the density
or chroma. To get the same color density as discussed in the first
example, the printer needs to lay down continuous dots with no spaces in
both x and y directions, thus using up 4 times the ink as the first case.

Hence, example 2 uses up four times more ink as example 1. Since both
cartridges of ink sell for the same price, and have the same volume of
ink, guess which type of ink the manufacturer makes more money on quicker?

Art
 
Arthur said:
1) No, not only have I not programmed these printers in C++, but I've
never programmed anything in C++. Nor does one have to have programmed
a printer
Click to expand...

Programming a printer is programming firmware. We were referring to
drivers ie writing a driver program which is software.
to know about ink usage. All one has to do is use one, and determine
how quickly each color gets used up. Ask anyone who has a printer
which uses low dye load inks what the percentage of use difference
there is between the low dye load inks and the high dye load inks.
Click to expand...


Maybe Canon's usage is different from Epson.
 
measekite said:
Programming a printer is programming firmware. We were referring to
drivers ie writing a driver program which is software.
Click to expand...

Is that the Royal "We"? Obviously, I skipped the word "for" in the
first sentence. However, the driver software requires firmware within
the printer to interface with.

Art
 
Arthur said:
Is that the Royal "We"? Obviously, I skipped the word "for" in the
first sentence. However, the driver software requires firmware within
the printer to interface with.

Art

DUH
Click to expand...
 
Hi All,

I just have to add to this thread that I went ahead and purchased a new
print head for my i950 because I was getting the 7 yellow flashes. As
it ended up, I wasted $70 dollars. After installing the print head I
got the exact same error.

This printer certainly didn't get a lot of use and it was well kept.
Since it is out of warrenty, Canon only suggested I take it to be
serviced or get a discount on a new Canon printer! I, for one, will not
buy another Canon product. I just can't stand that to a company like
Canon a $200+ printer is a throw away item.

I just wanted others to know that spending the money on the print head
may not do the trick - as I saw in one other post in some other thread.
At this point I have nothing else I can do but throw away a printer.

Brenda.
 
Hi Brenda,

Sorry that you wasted $70 on an i950 printhead. From the Canon Service
Manual for the i950, 7 orange flashes is described as "Cartridge Error" and
can be one of three different error codes - 1403, 1405 or 1485. It can be
caused by any of the following - bad printhead or a problem with the
carriage (not moving etc.) or a bad logic board. My guess would be that if
the printer was working fine one day and then the next time you went to use
it you received the 7 oranges LED flashes then either the carriage mechanism
or the logic board is porked. Unlikely that the head would just "die". Its a
crap shoot anyway you look at it.

Blitzko
 
Back
Top