Photo quality difference between non-Claria and Claria printers.

[Fenrir Enterprises]

I have been running an Epson R220 for everyday printing and an Epson R340 for photo printing. The R220 I converted to aftermarket pigment when I got it, the R340 has been running on OEM cartridges. I still have about three sets of cartridges left. The R220 died and I'm currently in the process of modifying a Workforce 1100 to be the replacement "everyday printer". I also picked up a 1400 with the intent to change it to pigment to print gicles on matte paper and canvas. I now have the opportunity to pick up a second (used) 1400 for $100. I have been considering getting it and putting a dyebased CIS on it for glossy photo printing. I am curious as to whether there is any significant difference in quality between the R200-R340 generation of printers that were pre-Claria and the R240 and higher ones, or if it is pretty much the same and I'd need an 8+ color printer to see any massive quality increase. I've never had a problem with the R340 but I do wonder if I'm better off switching to a Claria printer for quality purposes, especially if I wind up selling enlargements. I know the higher priced Epsons have pigment inks, but they also have a gloss optimizer tank which wouldn't be replicable with the 1400 (I also wonder about the color gamut of photo printing with pigments... most artists I know who do in-house printing only use their pigment printer for art prints, not photographs). I don't really care about the UV resistance claim on Claria inks (what, they last two weeks outside in the sun vs one week?), but up until recently, most refill companies flat out said that their dyebased aftermarket inks were not Claria quality. Now they're advertising Claria-equivalent inks and anything I print would be on good paper and be framed or in an album.

I feel ridiculous buying so many printers but I really can't do what I want to do with a single one of them (Workforce 1100: Everyday high volume printing and menus/signs/banners to sell, Photo 1400 w/pigment: higher quality matte-only art/poster/canvas printing, cannot be used for everyday printing since you can't ICC the pigment inks in Microsoft Office, Photo 1400 w/dye: glossy photo enlargements).

 

[OutOFtheinkwell]

Claria (Type) inks are all I use and I really like the results I get with Kirkland ( Costco) papers,Glossy paper!
It still blows my mind that I can print with a dye based ink and then hold the print under a running water facet with no runs at all!
I've tried several ink sources and settled on ink from InkJetCarts that seems very good. But I'm sure there are more than a few good sources out there.
As for fading I only know that I've had prints inside the home next to windows that have zero evidence of any fading over a two year period and counting so I can't say fading has been a problem for me. So your thinking of selling prints? We have also thought about that as my wife is a fine artist and we have played with books of photo's that we make up with a binding machine, however that is mostly for friends and family. Lately though we have thought about upgrading to something like a Canon Pro1 printer which uses 12 large size cartridges, Many professionals think and speak very highly of the quality of prints they are getting on this printer. I have had good results with Epson printers but I'm getting really tired of dealing with there counter/chip/shutdown polices that basically make a perfectly good printer unusable! There are ( workarounds) to be sure but they take the fun out of the printing process for me and I've about had it with them. The thing is, I don't know for sure that Canon doesn't do the same thing. If I find a good printer company that does NOT play that game I will be one of their best customers. Happy Printing, "outoftheinkwell".

 

[Tin Ho]

Claria (Type) inks are all I use and I really like the results I get with Kirkland ( Costco) papers,Glossy paper!
It still blows my mind that I can print with a dye based ink and then hold the print under a running water facet with no runs at all!
.

Are you sure the ink did not wash off from the Kirkland paper? It is the paper that makes the print waterproof, not the ink. The Kirkland photo paper is not 100% waterproof. Some ink will wash off but not a whole lot. The fact is all paper including Canon will wash off. But Canon paper will wash off only a very small amount that is not visually obvious. The Kirkland paper will be washed off a little more and it is more visible. The Claria ink is good especially when you print with Epson paper and with Epson supplied profiles. There are good 3rd party inks that do just about equally well too.

 

[OutOFtheinkwell]

Tin Ho
To answer your question I not only ran the print under the water but I took a piece of paper towel and lightly scrubbed the print and then let it air dry and saw no visible sign of streaking. The print looked as it did coming out of the printer. That was Claria (Type) ink from inkjetcarts and Costco (kirkland) professional glossy inkjet paper ( 150 count) (Under $19.00 a box.) And I have done it many times for friends that wanted to see it. This is all accurate information as I have no reason to embellish the facts. Just sharing my personal experiences with my fellow printers. outoftheinkwell!

 

[Tin Ho]

Last time I washed a print on a Kirkland glossy photo paper it was at least 5 years ago and it was printed on a Canon printer. Some small amount of ink washed off under a faucet. But the same ink printed on a Canon Photo Paper Plus was completely intact from washing. Tried the 3rd party ink I had at the time too and same result. I concluded that it was the paper not the ink that made the print waterproof. I noticed that the Kirkland paper I tested was made in Switzerland back then. Now the the paper sold at Costco under a same name of Kirkland is made in Mexico. I wonder if that is why the difference. It may be a totally different paper now. Thanks for the clarification. If I get a box of the paper in the near future I will test it with my Canon printer again.

 

[OutOFtheinkwell]

I'm happy I could give you some useful information. I do always want to be as accurate as I can and appreciate it very much when others do the same.
There are so many really knowledgeable printer people in here that know so much more about the subject than I do that I feel privileged indeed to be at least able to give my own experiences with printing and really want to be at least accurate and up front when relating my personal experiences. As time goes on I will be reading about and looking for all the knowledge that others bring to this venue. Please do let us all know what your experiences are when you do your testing and thank you very much for that opprotunity! Happy Printing...."outoftheinkwell".

 

[Fenrir Enterprises]

I was actually more curious as to whether the actual print quality itself was noticeably better on newer generation printers than older ones. I remember my ancient Canon BJC-4000 was terrible even with the photo cartridge, then the HP Business Inkjet 1100D was much better, then the Epson R340 was photo-lab quality... so I kind of figure any quality upgrade at this point is going to be color reproduction rather than actual print quality.

These are all good tips though, good to know that Claria (and aftermarket) really does have some UV resistance, though I'd still prefer pigments for archival stuff. Wish there was a Costco closer to me!