Green tint with hobbicolors

[panos]

hpnetserver, I agree that the price for OEM cartridges really sucks, but remember all Canon printers come with a full set of cartridges, so you buy only one full set. I don't deny that there _are_ good cartridges out there (Hobbicolors is particularly interesting for its refilling-friendly cartridges), I just think that the risk is minimized with OEM cartridges. As fotofreek points, using Grandad's technique I clean up the cartridges after some uses and they work fine. I've had zero clogs so far.

I'll add to this topic in a later time.

 

[jonalava]

Ok, to answer some of your questions:

- Printhead was changed because I got a permaclog with previous bad ink.
- I never said 8 out 12 carts were defective. I said 3 to 4. Maybe my English was not clear on this (sorry).
- I assumed there was a feeding problem as I never got a bad nozzle check with this new printhead and some of you kept mentionning a misfeeding problem. So now, I guess I never had a bad cart. How can I explain the difference in prints made wiht the other carts. Both gave a perfect nozzle check...
- I never pretended to be a scientific. I am an end-user. I draw conclusions from my experiences and what seems logical to me. You are right trying to isolate the problem is a good thing. But I sure don't have the time and energy to test every single possible cause.
- Also, print made with the know working carts don't have a strong green cast anymore but only a little green tint.

Thanks!

 

[Osage]

You are correct in mentioning uou said only three to four cartridges out of 12 gave you feeding priblems. That did stick in my mind but I typed 8 o12--when I meant to say only eight of 12 were good. So that is my fault there and not yours--but even if its only three of 12 or a fraction defective of 1/4--the chance of me getting nine of nine perfectly feeding cartdiges in my lot would be------7.5% of the time. Were the fraction defective one out of three, that chance would reduce to 2.6%---or the odds against that happening for me would be 13.32 and 38.44 to one against respectively

So it still boils down to --either the rest of us are very lucky, or you are incredably unlucky, or you are just doing something different.

 

[hpnetserver]

Sorry for jumping on the gun. I took the number from Osage's words. I agree with Osage, even 3 out of 12 is still very unlikely. If you can't find anything wrong with nozzle check they are not defective.

Well, you are here to ask for help, aren't you? That's fine. But my gut feeling is you were here to bark but at the wrong tree, blaming the wrong causes for the problem. I have used Hobbicolor products long enough to be confident that they do not have such problems. If you appreciate the support you got. Then don't blindly shoot a shotgun back at the company. You were shooting at us too who have tried to help you. You discredited all our helps and made your own wrong conclusions.

Sorry to be an a$$ here. I had a hard time to understand why in the begining you said HC virgin cartridges are great. But you later concluded they are inconsistent, unreliable and 3 are defective out of 12. You know what I mean? Never mind. I hope you will find the real cause of the problem soon. Good luck.

 

[on30trainman]

I need to make a correction to my first post early in this thread. Over the past two weeks when I had time, two of my grandkids were visiting from before Easter thru the next weekend, I went back over a lot of prints I had made using Hobbicolors ink and Costco Kirkland Glossy paper. Jonalava was correct - at least to a degree, Yes, I did see a slight GREEN tint to many prints from photos I had made at Valley Forge Park - I was testing a new digital camera. Also prints with people had a yellowish skin tint. The camera pictures on the monitor didn't have the tints. A print of a test file I had with pictures, color charts and gray scales showed a definite yellow skin tone and a greenish tint in some of the grays. Then I looked at some prints made with Canon OEM inks on the Kirkland paper - no green tint but yellowish skin tones and other colors. The Kirkland paper seems to emphasize yellow. I still wanted to use the Hobbicolors ink and Kirkland paper. I had played around with some of the color controls in the print driver but couldn't get much better results.

I had been planning for a while on buying Profile Prism - already have Qimage which is a great program. I had already bought a new scanner which I had been wanting - a Canon LiDE model which the Profile Prism developer had suggested as a decent model - I got the LiDE 60. After the grandkids left I ordered PP and got it last Thursday. Made my first printer profile for my ip6000 yesterday and to my somewhat surprise the results were excellent. The reason I say "to my somewhat surprise" wasn't that I didn't think the program would work, but that my first result worked so well without having to do any tweaking of the profile. I reprinted the TEST print and the greys were clean and the skin tones to my liking. Even had my wife do a comparison for me without telling her why and she picked the last print as being much nicer and better coloring. Redid several of the Valley Forge Park prints and the green cast was gone - colors looked richer and the sky bluer and much more like the pictures on the monitor. Wife agreed again.

Using a profile program like PP can be daunting I guess. But it actually turned out easier and better than I expected. It lets you calibrate your monitor (calibrate not profile), plus profile scanners and digital cameras. but it main purpose to me is printer profiling. BTW all the printing for the tests was done using Qimage since it makes use of printer profiles. Any color profiling/processing in the Canon print driver was turned off. Need to run some print tests using Corel Draw/Photo Paint which also uses printer profiles plus some program that needs the profile enabled in the print driver.

Hope this is some help to anyone who is having unsatisifactory results with some ink/paper combo they want to use.

Steve W.