Re: Pigmented inks was Re: filmscanners: SS4000 and LS-2000 real value?

[Arthur Entlich <artistic@ampsc.com>]

Photoscientia wrote:

> Hi Art.
> 
> Arthur Entlich wrote:
> 
> 
>> Epson tries to walk a fine line on this matter.  One the one hand, they
>> are absolutely within their rights to refuse service, or charge for
>> service for any printer returned during warranty which has head problems
>> which could be related to the ink used, and in fact, I would go as far
>> as saying they should do so.
> 
> 
> Do you work for Epson by any chance Art?
> 

No I don't, did you used to be on the Epson printer list?  The reason I 
ask is that I got the same response there, usually from people who sent 
their printers to Epson 2-3 times due to ink clogs with bad (non-Epson) 
ink, and I still believe my warranty option with Epson printers was 
shortened due to people like this.

> If Epson charged a reasonable price for the 20 pence worth of ink you get in a
> cartridge, or simply put a reasonable quantity of ink in them, then their
> customers wouldn't feel quite so cheated, and so wouldn't feel the need to
> exact some recompense from Epson by what you term 'deception'.
> 
> I have absolutely no sympathy for Epson, and I don't think anybody should 
>have.
> 

I do.  Epson spends a fortune on R&D, and they sell their printers at 
very reasonable prices.  They make their money on the ink, just as 
Polaroid does on their film, or razor blade companies, who used to give 
away the razor, do on the blades.  All name brand manufacturer's charge 
a fortune for their ink carts.  HP goes as far as to provide a partially 
filled cart with the printer when you buy it. (Epson might do the same 
now, I don't know...) When you buy an Epson printer, you can look at the 
shelf and know exactly how much the cartridges cost.  Then, if you don't 
like it, BUY ANOTHER PRINTER, or consider third party and realize you 
might void your ink head warranty by doing so.  Epson recognizes that 
the best quality output comes from a permanent ink head.  These heads 
need to be protected from people who decide they'd prefer to print with 
ketchup and mayo, or whatever else they choose to fill their cartridges 
with.  Epson cannot control what or how people do with their cartridges, 
how sanitary they are, how good the ink they use is, etc.  How can they 
possible warrant that those inks won't damage the inkheads in the machine?

Apparently, Epson is very liberal about their return policy.  To this 
day, they still pay for shipping both ways in the US and Canada, and 
supply 24 hour turn around if you don't insist on getting your own 
printer back.  This is costly service.  Why should I subsidize some 
nitwit who refills their ink cartridges with who knows what by having 
Epson pay these expenses and have to raise the cost for their printers 
to cover those expenses (which I pay on my next Epson printer)?

> I recently bought one of their so-called 1200dpi flatbed scanners, which had
> worse image sharpness than the cheap 600dpi Mustek that I had intended to
> replace. The 1200dpi was simply 'empty resolution' containing no detail,
> because they had obviously skimped on the optical system, and the image had 
>the
> same appearance as 600dpi interpolated to 1200.
> Another half-arsed Epson design job, which in my view was again falsely
> advertised.
> The box clearly stated 'true 1200 dpi optical resolution', and this was 
>plainly
> nonsense, since the lens couldn't actually resolve anything near that. I 
>tested
> it with a resolution test plate, and it struggled to about 600dpi. Contrary to
> popular belief, this isn't due to the glass in the way. Removing the glass
> platen gave the same result. It just has a poor lens.

Firstly, this has absolutely nothing to do with their printers. 
Secondly, since you seem to have the tools to do so, would you inform us 
which flatbeds meet or exceed their optical spec rating?  Do any?  You 
know as well as I, that the term "optical resolution" has nothing to do 
with the output.  It is simply a measurement of the density of the CCD 
elements on the CCD chip.  If you want to complain about their scanners, 
then, 1) complain about the scanners, their printers are great.

2) give me a comparison... what do other 1200 dpi "optical resolution" 
flatbed scanners measure at?

3) You might have a defective one, that's what the warranty is for

> 
> I see Canon will be pouring millions into R&D on their printer range over the
> next few years.
> Good luck to them!

Yes, good luck to them.  I mean that seriously.  Competition will drive 
all the product to be better.  However, one of the reasons Canon has to 
pour millions into their product is that it currently is not reliable. 
Notice there is no "Canon printer list"?  Wonder why?  If Canon ends up 
making a better product than Epson, and it is affordable, I'll buy it. 
I have no loyalty to Epson, but fair is fair.

Art

> 
> Regards,     Pete.