Printer testing

[roytje]

Dear visitors,

One of the visitors of my site (www.printeradvice.com) asked me what data I use for my printer cost calculator. I told him I use official manufacturer data, because it's impossible for me to test 40 printers. First, ofcourse I don't have 40 printers and second, I can't afford 40 original cartridges. The problem is that printer manufacturers publish very optimistic data and don't use one standard (or don't publish the results). He (known as Osage at this forum) came with a great idea:

I can open an account so that people can pay a small amount (he was willing to pay $ 5). Depending on the amount I collect, I can pay people for testing (reliable people such as the moderators of nifty stuff) as many printers as possible, using a standard test (like the ISO test). They can print this test until the cartridge is empty and send me the results. Then I can put the results at my site and see whether the manufacturer data is reliable and, if not, inform you about it.

Please let me know what you think about this idea!

 

[Osage]

I can confirm that I did write roytje about his printer calculator methodology. He pointed out that the printer calculator did relie on manufacters published per page yields using OEM cartridges at full manufacters list price---which may or may not have anything to do with reality.

We began a discussion about how a printer study could be conducted---I suggested the concept of a standard page---that could be repeatably printed in a given printer with a new OEM cartridge until the cartridge ran dry---then the same standard page could be tested in some other printer with similar methodology but a different make or model----that way a apples to apples per page yield could be obtained
across various printer makes and models.--with royjte pointing out there is already an iso standard of a standard page meaning there is no reason to invent a standard because a good standard exists already.

But the question of how to fund such a study arises---I suggested I would be willing to contrute some money but the rest could be possibly raised through these forums ( or by other sponsors possibly) if enough are interested.----and the methodology of such a study could stand alot of refining and suggestions-----with many better ideas possibly coming from other forum members.

Of course, until the idea is proposed, there is no way of gaging support---so I hope others will weigh in and give their reaction.

 

[websnail]

Well, I've been playing with my own spreadsheet calculator and in truth I've hit a number of problems... Apologies now if I seem go off on a tangent with this.

The problems were:
#1 The manufacturers do indeed publish data that is perhaps optimistic or in conditions that do not match normal use or worse (as I found with the recent C88 release from Epson, they don't publish anything other than a "rough" figure which is useless

#2 Canon use a different standard to Epson so there's little in the way of comparison... Chances are something similar happens with other printer manufacturers, I don't know

#3 After-market manufacturers (eg: InkRite) provide different cartridge technology that is claimed to provide an additional 15% volume so you then have the issue of testing these sorts of cartridges as well.

#4 What about quality of print? Personally I'd avoid this little chestnut like the plague and just stick to actual output under pre-defined parameters that match standard usage (none of this "draft" quality rubbish).



Anyways, despite all that, I'm probably going to be thinking seriously about doing this for my own business purposes with the Epson D88 (C88) if nothing else, so we'll see when I have the time AND the funds to do it..