Canon OEM vs Inktec Ink print result

[Serville]

I'm trying to compare original Canon OEM ink vs Inktec compatible ink for IP3500 (bulk C908).
And I have very bad result with Inktec.

Here is Canon OEM ink:
http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/339/canonoem.jpg/


And here is Inktec compatible ink:
http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/854/inktecink.jpg/


Both are printed with Canon IP3500 using the same photo paper & printing options with Auto Color Setting (default).
Canon has deeper color. Inktec print is very yellowish.
The pool on the other side tends to be yellowish/greenish (vs bluish on Canon ink).
The boy face on Inktec print looks like he's suffering a yellow fever (vs more natural skintone on Canon print....a little magenta cast actually , but still look more natural when you look at the photo directly)

On other prints, like building, trees, garden or other objects, Inktec inks looks more acceptable, since the difference in color cast in those objects doesn't completely ruin the whole photo.
But for portrait prints where the skintone is the major focus, the default Inktec color is very unacceptable. Even the pool looks greenish instead of bluish.
Is this expected on Inktec ?

Any comment ?

 

[The Hat]

To be perfectly honest with you there isnt a whole lot of difference between the two photos,
yes I can see their not the same but obviously you want them much closer which is understandable.

Your Canon printer is deliberately setup to take full advantage of the their own inks and no other
so if your currently using Inktec ink and cant get a satisfactory match
then your only recourse is to change the ink to another supplier or go back to using OEM.

You could however do what most guys do and spend some time profiling your paper with your ink
till you get the Wow factor youre looking for with all your photos.

While I can sympathise with your current dilemma over colour differences in your photos there is no simple answer to it
except to profile or changing to a better compatible ink and then profile that ink.

Sorry..

 

[mikling]

The inskset you are using might be better suited for the BCI-6 series and not optimized for the CLI-8 which the 3500 uses... it shows in the magenta. This is my guess.

 

[inkoholic]

You could however do what most guys do and spend some time profiling your paper with your ink
till you get the Wow factor youre looking for with all your photos.

Profiling paper with the ink: never thought of that! Is any specific software required?

 

[The Hat]

You could however do what most guys do and spend some time profiling your paper with your ink
till you get the Wow factor youre looking for with all your photos.

Profiling paper with the ink: never thought of that! Is any specific software required?

The best one I can think of is PhotoShop just make the changes then name and save your very own personal profile..

 

[rodbam]

You can't really profile your printer with software only because you will need hardware like the Colormunki but you can play with the colours in software to try & improve things.
I bought the Inktec refills for our MP280 & when that is used up I will use the tools in their kit to put Image Specialist inks in (IS ink). You will find the IS inks are a very close match to your OEM ink.
You can get IS inks from Precision Colors on Ebay or Octoink on their web page.

 

[Serville]

Ok. I was busy trying to profile my printer using Inktec.
I'm not an expert in this area, so I just tried adding reducing CMY to find the best combinations.
The process was extremely frustrating for me. I thought I've found the right combi when some printed photos looked good, but then I found other photos looked bad. Gray suit became choco, black becomes dark chocolate, etc.
When I seemed to hit all the colors generally correct, the colors was too saturated/dark for my liking. Reducing brightness in Canon printer driver helped, but it looked too washed out. So, I kept experimenting with other options like Vivid photo, ICM, intensity, contrast.....God knows what else !
I wasted about 50 photo papers, and I finally got the color I want.
I have to add +10 C, +10 M, -20 Y, with High Quality printing + Vivid Photo enabled, but with Brightness level to Light.
That's the only way I could get the right depth of colors without being too dark or too light on the photo paper.
It's not perfect, but at least it is a mile better than using the default options from Canon.
At least almost every photos I tried to print now looked pleasing & natural to the eyes.
But personally I think paper+ink profiling is almost an impossible undertaking without hardware & software.
It seems to correct 1 problem, while creating others. It's like a jigsaw puzzle. It's very difficult to find the right balance.
Well, at least now I feel so much happier with the printed output. Most photos print quite nicely on the paper now. This is the best output for me so far.
My eyes get so tired comparing photos because it's often difficult to judge when many of them only have slight color differences.
For whatever reason, I think I will stop now & just go on with my current settings before I go color-crazy.
It's a world of psychedelic experience where you don't even realize that you are almost going back to square 1 (which you have dumped several hours ago)

 

[turbguy]

Good profiling is not easy at all. To do it near-properly, you need test targets, calibrated equipment, colorimeters, and specialized software. Welcome to the the complications of color management!

 

[The Hat]

Ok. I was busy trying to profile my printer using Inktec.
I'm not an expert in this area, so I just tried adding reducing CMY to find the best combinations.

I wasted about 50 photo papers, and I finally got the color I want.

It's a world of psychedelic experience where you don't even realize that you are almost going back to square 1 (which you have dumped several hours ago)

I am sorry that Id forgotten to mention to you when undertaking any colour test or profiling to reduce your test photos to 25%.
The idea is to get 4 to 6 prints on an A4 sheet which saves photo paper but allows you to see your progress on one sheet at a time..

 

[RogerB]

Ok. I was busy trying to profile my printer using Inktec.
I'm not an expert in this area, so I just tried adding reducing CMY to find the best combinations.
The process was extremely frustrating for me. I thought I've found the right combi when some printed photos looked good, but then I found other photos looked bad. Gray suit became choco, black becomes dark chocolate, etc.
When I seemed to hit all the colors generally correct, the colors was too saturated/dark for my liking. Reducing brightness in Canon printer driver helped, but it looked too washed out. So, I kept experimenting with other options like Vivid photo, ICM, intensity, contrast.....God knows what else !
I wasted about 50 photo papers, and I finally got the color I want.

As turbguy said - welcome to the world of colour management!

Your experience looks like the perfect justification for custom printer profiling instead of trial-and-error. You say you've finally got the colour you want, and I hope that's true. Unfortunately my experience tells me that you probably haven't got it quite right. You will still find photos that don't look right in some way. Have you tried printing a B&W photo yet?

The real problem is that printer response tends to be non-linear, that is you need different colour adjustments for different tones in the image. Reddish shadows with greenish highlights can't be corrected by tweaking CMY values in the driver. That's why we have printer profiles. A custom profile is not that expensive these days and it would have avoided your wasted time and paper, and above all your frustration.

Good luck anyway - I hope your colours are good because there's a lot of satisfaction in making a nice print yourself. But if you're still not happy, get a custom profile.