Perfect blacks with Canon ink, paper

[Paul Verizzo]

Long time lurker, decided to make some observations and share them.

We've all heard that you can't get perfect blacks from using the colored inks in combination. Well, that was my experience, too, until recently when I got a new Pro 9000. It was the first time I had a factory OEM inkset in a long, long time. And since I now needed 13x19 paper, I ordered the glossy Photo Paper Plus II since it has the alleged longest image life. (You gotta dig for this stuff in the hard to find Chromalife pages.) I've liked the Canon semi-gloss, in fact, that's my preferred gloss level, generally.

Without any corrections or manipulations, I threw an image with huge amounts of black background at the 9000. Three minutes later I was looking at a stunning, perfectly black image background.

Since then, I've run test images with Ilford Classic and Smooth, Arista II (I think it's Premier Imaging), HP Photo Paper, a cheap high def matte, and the Canon Semi-Gloss. In terms of B&W accuracy, only the Canon Semi-Gloss and HP come (very) close. The Ilford Smooth did very well after using the suggested changes of -15 yellow and +5 intensity.

On my go-to Canon Pixma ip4300 printer with MIS inks, the color is pretty bad. Correction, our eyes adjust to accept a lot of color variance. But in gray scale, the differences jump. But that's another post........

I guess I'm going to have to choke up and buy the OEM inks or else spend as much on custom ICC profiles. Quite the admission from a guy that's been refilling for almost 15 years with a Canon BJC-600.

 

[Roy Sletcher]

Long time lurker, decided to make some observations and share them.

We've all heard that you can't get perfect blacks from using the colored inks in combination. Well, that was my experience, too, until recently when I got a new Pro 9000. It was the first time I had a factory OEM inkset in a long, long time. And since I now needed 13x19 paper, I ordered the glossy Photo Paper Plus II since it has the alleged longest image life. (You gotta dig for this stuff in the hard to find Chromalife pages.) I've liked the Canon semi-gloss, in fact, that's my preferred gloss level, generally.

Without any corrections or manipulations, I threw an image with huge amounts of black background at the 9000. Three minutes later I was looking at a stunning, perfectly black image background.

Since then, I've run test images with Ilford Classic and Smooth, Arista II (I think it's Premier Imaging), HP Photo Paper, a cheap high def matte, and the Canon Semi-Gloss. In terms of B&W accuracy, only the Canon Semi-Gloss and HP come (very) close. The Ilford Smooth did very well after using the suggested changes of -15 yellow and +5 intensity.

On my go-to Canon Pixma ip4300 printer with MIS inks, the color is pretty bad. Correction, our eyes adjust to accept a lot of color variance. But in gray scale, the differences jump. But that's another post........

I guess I'm going to have to choke up and buy the OEM inks or else spend as much on custom ICC profiles. Quite the admission from a guy that's been refilling for almost 15 years with a Canon BJC-600.

Now here's a turn up for the books. I have been recently commenting on my inability to produce a good B&W on the pro900 mk11. Thinking back, I now recall the B&W problems I had were with my previous i9900 no the pro 900.

Based on the above message just carried out a quick test this very minute, and got what I consider a very acceptable B&W print.

Paper: Ilford Galerie Smooth Pearl.
Ink Image specialist.
Profile is the canned Ilford profile from their website IGSPP9_CAN9000_MKII_PPPGLIIn

I am using the canned profile until I am certain there is no cross contamination with remnants of the OEM inks in my refilled carts. Should get even better results when I profile the Image specialist inks.

Will wait till tomorrow for better daylight evaluation, and to ensure image does not change when dry. Up to now have been sending B&W to either Costco, or a lab if for local competitions.

Roy Sletcher
Still the Grumpy old man.

 

[rodbam]

Paul you can get profiles made for $20 each from an Adobe colour scientist here's his link. You can then go on using your non OEM inks.
http://people.csail.mit.edu/ericchan/photos/profiles.html
Gday Roy
Glad you had some success printing B&W with the pro 9000. Someone did a test using only one black & three grey inks in a printer just set up for B&W printing & he found that he was getting a slight colour cast out of some different papers so some experimenting is in order to maybe get consistent results. The strange experience I had when trying out different A4 B&W prints on a Red River sample pack & some Canon papers was I judged the Canon photo paper pro 11 to be the worst with it's slight colour cast but when I looked again a few days later the Pro 11 paper print looked the best, it must have something to do with the ink drying & curing for a day or two.
I've had great results so far with Canon photo paper plus semi gloss yet one dense print looks to have a very small amount of warmth compared to the others & I'm getting a feeling that I'm getting better B&W prints by using the Canon Ezy print pro plug in when in Photoshop & ticking the greyscale box than when I let Photoshop manage the printing. I haven't done a comparison test of this yet using the same print so it's only a feeling at the moment.
Regards Rod

 

[mikling]

Most know that dye inks are always shifting in color especially while drying. How long does it take to dry and stabilize. Recent testing with certain Red River Papers and my dye inks for Epson printers showed that it took at least three days to cure and dry properly. I imagine that slow curing might be indicative of less exposure to the environment and possibly more durability.... A desired feature.

The big question is how many people will want to wait that long for colors to stabilize? The serious ones I am sure.

Also remember that gray and thus B&W is the touchiest color balance to get right. Especially so with dye ink.Even with an ICC profile. some papers vary too much between batches to allow perfect grays all the time. One such example is the Kirkland paper, it made me think I was always doing something wrong.....make profile with letter size and then print on 4x6!!! I ended up like a dog trying to catch its tail. Be careful of this.

 

[Grandexp]

I guess I'm going to have to choke up and buy the OEM inks or else spend as much on custom ICC profiles. Quite the admission from a guy that's been refilling for almost 15 years with a Canon BJC-600.

It should be expected. The reason OEM ink works so well is because the profile is made for the ink. I imagine Canon spent an enormous amount of effort to make it right. This is a reason Pro9000 sells for much more money than any 5 color printers. With good 3rd party ink/paper you still need a lot of effort to profile or it would be still behind OEM.

 

[Paul Verizzo]

Roy, might I suggest changing only one variable at a time? Start with Canon paper, then switch once you see what The Authorized Version can do.

Rodbam, thanks for that $20 profile link. Since I have a fair stock of MIS inks, I might go that route for a preferred paper or two. Or, I have a decade supply for my desk printer, just fine there.

mikling, you are SO right about color shifts while drying! In fact, I'm starting to wonder if that fact, and that the colors shift with light source type, we aren't in a fruitless attempt to get to "perfect." One cheap matte paper I have starts with a very ruddy tone on B&W, after three weeks it's a pleasant sepia. The more normal pro papers can shift over at least three days, both microporous and swellable polymer. (Humidity here in Florida presently running about 50% daytime, 80% before dawn.)

Grandexp, I'm not so sure. I'm old enough to remember that a good auto body man was partly measured by how well he could match paint colors. Now, any $8/hr clerk at Home Despot can do it better due to technology. Dye inks are pretty damned simple and what with spectroscopic, qualitative, and quantitative analysis I'm sure China's Best could dupe any formula to the nudge. Or, pilfer it from where it is being made, the oldest industrial espionage method. I think the reasons 3rd party inks aren't exactly the same are things like ingredient substitution for cheaper, sourcing availability, and ultimately, the "good enough" factor.

It's a good thing Canons sip ink if I'm going OEM!

 

[nche11]

Dye inks are pretty damned simple and what with spectroscopic, qualitative, and quantitative analysis I'm sure China's Best could dupe any formula to the nudge.

This is probably true but... In terms of duping colors there is not much secret in it. But in reality due to cost and greed it's not always done right. You will find lots of cheap inks formulated with low grade low cost dyes. This is usually the strategy of many Asian manufacturers. They don't have the big brand name so they flood the market at unbelievable cheap prices. They can still take a big chunk of market away.

OEM inks are probably formulated with the highest quality wide gamut dyes. Those dyes can't be too cheap. But OEM manufacturers have no problems justifying the high cost because they sell their ink cartridges at a high premium always.

3rd party manufacturers live a tougher life because they can only sell their ink at a big discount. Not sure they can afford to formulate the ink with the best color dyes like Canon can. The difference between OEM and 3rd party inks starts from there. Only a few 3rd party manufacturers can afford the high cost of better quality dyes. So while most cheap inks use cheap dyes a few reputable 3rd party inks are almosy on par with OEM.

However, there is another problem that has nothing to do with the 3rd party manufacturers. It has everything to do with resellers. You will never know what resellers may do to the good quality inks from good 3rd party manufacturers. One common practice is to dilute the ink and make more profit. A same brand of ink bought from different resellers may result in totally different outcome. Another problem is some resellers basically carry cheap 3rd party inks but they manage to acquire some high quality inks from a top 3rd party brand name. They name themselves as the distributors of the top brand name ever since. You will never know what ink you will get. The next problem is less common but does exist. Some resellers sell home brewed inks while carrying a big brand name. The ink you get is not the same as the big brand name ink.

Because of all these problems dye inks are not as simple as you thought. Using OEM ink makes life a lot easier if cost is not an issue to you.

 

[Paul Verizzo]

As I said, briefly, " I think the reasons 3rd party inks aren't exactly the same are things like ingredient substitution for cheaper, sourcing availability, and ultimately, the "good enough" factor." And I forgot possible legal repercussions, although it would be really hard to prove some copyright violation on something as universal as inks and dyes. Remember Epson's lawsuit? They gave up.

As to the reseller scenarios, that's treading pretty thin on the "Maybe's." I doubt if the big boys of third party ink to things like that.

 

[nche11]

The most expensive ingredient is the color dyes in the ink. Most cheap inks are made with lowest cost color dyes. These type of inks are made with a take or eat the market share by the low price strategy. If you avoid dirt cheap inks you will not be affected by them. The real problem is big boys selling BMW with a VW engine in it or worse selling with a Mercedes logo on the hood but with a Hugo chassis at the bottom. This is where legal issues surface.