Do you have a strategy for infrequent printing?

[oldabelincoln]

I'm looking for comments about how to successfully use an inkjet printer infrequently - like once a month or two. I've got a laser printer that I use for almost all my work, but every once in a while I need to print a photo using a good inkjet photo printer.

I know that the usual wisdom is to print something - however small - every so often, or to run a nozzle cleaning cycle every so often, but those methods don't work for me - I've tried to do it, and I simply forget, so I need to find another way around the problem. I want to be able to put the printer - or the cartridges - aside when not in use, and forget about it till I need to print again - just like anything else on my computer system.

I had an Epson 700 Photo, which died a mechanical death - the print assembly kept banging - after 3 or 4 years. It had nozzle clogs, which cleared in the usual manner with lots of ink wasted. I foolishly stocked up on Epson ink for the 700 Photo only to find that the date on the ink really meant something and that old ink usually didn't work, even factory sealed (at least on the 700).

When the Epson died, I decided to open up a Canon BJC-2010 (360 dpi CMYK) that had been unopened since it came for free with a Dell computer that I had bought in February 2000. It stayed in its box for nearly 4 years because I was already running better printers when it arrived. I figured the ink would be useless after that long a time, but worth a try. To my amazement, it worked out of the box, with no ink problems.

The Canon 2010 is no photo printer, and I do need one, but it made me wonder - suppose I removed the cartridges after printing, wrapped them airtight in plastic film (e.g., Saran Wrap in the US) until I needed them again. That's a procedure that would work ok for me, but would it keep the ink ok? I believe that the HP 7960 has some sort of storage area for special purpose cartridges, but I don't know how well it works over long periods, and if that idea would work for other brands. And I don't know if my experience with inks for the Epson 700 (bad) or the Canon 2010 (good) is applicable to other printers - Epson, for one, has a bewildering array of inks out there, and new Epson inks might be a different story - as might new Canon inks, for that matter.

Of course the nozzles on the Canon had never been used, so they were not a problem, which might not be the case after some use. I know that HP's inclusion of nozzles in the cartridge "solves" the clogging problem in normal use, but if I can't put it aside for a few months, I'll end up buying a new set of cartridges every time I print, which is not much of a solution if that is the case.

So - has anyone tried this method, or any** method that would allow very infrequent printing??? Conversely, has anyone tried likely sounding methods that failed?

I'm not looking for any specific brand or model - I'll go with whatever works - I've gotten acceptable test prints out of all three brands using test files on cards.

----
Abe

 

[John Burns]

Go with HP. Perfect for those who print occasionally. Only major downside to current HP printers is the cartridges are more expensive than others partly due to the print head being on the cartridges. With the small amount of printing you seem to do the cartridge cost would not be much of a factor.

I'm looking for comments about how to successfully use an inkjet
printer infrequently - like once a month or two. I've got a laser
printer that I use for almost all my work, but every once in a
while I need to print a photo using a good inkjet photo printer.

I know that the usual wisdom is to print something - however small

• every so often, or to run a nozzle cleaning cycle every so often,

but those methods don't work for me - I've tried to do it, and I
simply forget, so I need to find another way around the problem. I
want to be able to put the printer - or the cartridges - aside when
not in use, and forget about it till I need to print again - just
like anything else on my computer system.

I had an Epson 700 Photo, which died a mechanical death - the print
assembly kept banging - after 3 or 4 years. It had nozzle clogs,
which cleared in the usual manner with lots of ink wasted. I
foolishly stocked up on Epson ink for the 700 Photo only to find
that the date on the ink really meant something and that old ink
usually didn't work, even factory sealed (at least on the 700).

When the Epson died, I decided to open up a Canon BJC-2010 (360 dpi
CMYK) that had been unopened since it came for free with a Dell
computer that I had bought in February 2000. It stayed in its box
for nearly 4 years because I was already running better printers
when it arrived. I figured the ink would be useless after that
long a time, but worth a try. To my amazement, it worked out of
the box, with no ink problems.

The Canon 2010 is no photo printer, and I do need one, but it made
me wonder - suppose I removed the cartridges after printing,
wrapped them airtight in plastic film (e.g., Saran Wrap in the US)
until I needed them again. That's a procedure that would work ok
for me, but would it keep the ink ok? I believe that the HP 7960
has some sort of storage area for special purpose cartridges, but I
don't know how well it works over long periods, and if that idea
would work for other brands. And I don't know if my experience
with inks for the Epson 700 (bad) or the Canon 2010 (good) is
applicable to other printers - Epson, for one, has a bewildering
array of inks out there, and new Epson inks might be a different
story - as might new Canon inks, for that matter.

Of course the nozzles on the Canon had never been used, so they
were not a problem, which might not be the case after some use. I
know that HP's inclusion of nozzles in the cartridge "solves" the
clogging problem in normal use, but if I can't put it aside for a
few months, I'll end up buying a new set of cartridges every time I
print, which is not much of a solution if that is the case.

So - has anyone tried this method, or any** method that would
allow very infrequent printing??? Conversely, has anyone tried
likely sounding methods that failed?

I'm not looking for any specific brand or model - I'll go with
whatever works - I've gotten acceptable test prints out of all
three brands using test files on cards.

----
Abe

--
John

 

[oldabelincoln]

Go with HP. Perfect for those who print occasionally. Only major
downside to current HP printers is the cartridges are more
expensive than others partly due to the print head being on the
cartridges. With the small amount of printing you seem to do the
cartridge cost would not be much of a factor.

John,

Are you saying that HPs can be relied upon not to clog if left unused for months, or are you endorsing my notion stated in my initial post about wrapping up the cartridges?

----
Abe

 

[John Burns]

I my experience with Epson, Canon and HP printers I have never had a clog with an HP printer. Right now I have a Canon S9000 that has been through 3 print heads using Canon ink only. I have an old HP970 that is now hooked up to my kids computer. It sits and then just prints as good as it ever did. The last time the S9000 clogged I had to print a few 8x10s so I ran them through the HP970. While not as good a print as the S9000 they were as good as the 970 ever produced. I now have the HP7960 and am very happy with the print quality and the feeling that I don't have to worry about clogging even if it sits for weeks without use.

Go with HP. Perfect for those who print occasionally. Only major
downside to current HP printers is the cartridges are more
expensive than others partly due to the print head being on the
cartridges. With the small amount of printing you seem to do the
cartridge cost would not be much of a factor.

John,

Are you saying that HPs can be relied upon not to clog if left
unused for months, or are you endorsing my notion stated in my
initial post about wrapping up the cartridges?

----
Abe

--
John

 

[HappySnapper1190646]

The advantage of the HP units is that the print heads are built into the print cartridge. So if you replace the ink cartridge you have replaced the print head as well.

If the printer is unused for a long time and the heads do clog its just a case of replacing the cartridges. The down side is that HP cartridges are more expensive but as a previous poster said if you are only printing a few pictures a month this is perhaps not too much of an issue.

Removing the cartridges from a more conventional printer where the cartridges are just ink tanks and sealing the cartridges in plastic bags might work - for the cartridges. But without a cartridge connected the ink in the delivery system of the printer and printhead might dry out which could be an even worse scenario. General advice is to leave the cartridges installed to keep the air out of the system and stop the ink already in the printer from drying out.

The newer HP photo-printers are said to produce very good results, althouigh I understand they can be a bit slow.

Hope this helps.
David.

Go with HP. Perfect for those who print occasionally. Only major
downside to current HP printers is the cartridges are more
expensive than others partly due to the print head being on the
cartridges. With the small amount of printing you seem to do the
cartridge cost would not be much of a factor.

John,

Are you saying that HPs can be relied upon not to clog if left
unused for months, or are you endorsing my notion stated in my
initial post about wrapping up the cartridges?

----
Abe

--
John

 

[Tricia]

Somebody posted a link here a few months ago to a utility that would automatically print something at intervals, like once every week, but I don't remember what it was called to search for it.

I have two printers connected to my computer, also. My personal strategy is to try to remember to send something to my 2200 every week or so if I haven't used it for photos during that period - whether it's a receipt for an internet payment or a tutorial I want to keep - or even a dpreview post, just something that I would normally print on my 870 that has at least a bit of color on it, like an ad or a header.

--
Tricia
Minolta Dimage D7(UG), Epson 2200, PS7, Qimage

 

[oldabelincoln]

Removing the cartridges from a more conventional printer where the
cartridges are just ink tanks and sealing the cartridges in plastic
bags might work - for the cartridges. But without a cartridge
connected the ink in the delivery system of the printer and
printhead might dry out which could be an even worse scenario.
General advice is to leave the cartridges installed to keep the air
out of the system and stop the ink already in the printer from
drying out.

In an HP, would removing and sealing the cartridges work well? That sounds as though it would be sealing up the entire print delivery system.

--
Abe

 

[oldabelincoln]

Somebody posted a link here a few months ago to a utility that
would automatically print something at intervals, like once every
week, but I don't remember what it was called to search for it.

I have two printers connected to my computer, also. My personal
strategy is to try to remember to send something to my 2200 every
week or so if I haven't used it for photos during that period -
whether it's a receipt for an internet payment or a tutorial I want
to keep - or even a dpreview post, just something that I would
normally print on my 870 that has at least a bit of color on it,
like an ad or a header.

--
Tricia
Minolta Dimage D7(UG), Epson 2200, PS7, Qimage

Thanks, Tricia.

I've tried running a timed batch job to print at intervals. It doesn't work out for me, as I eventually get a mess when the paper runs out.

Photo printing is an infrequent (but intense) activity for me, and anything that involves periodic attention to the printer, however minimal, won't win.

I want to completely avoid this type of approach if possible - I know it does a good job of keeping the printer alive if done properly, but it just isn't a practical approach for me.

That's why I posted the question in the first place, toi see if there are any alternatives to occasional printing.
--
Abe

 

[HappySnapper1190646]

I have used HP printers for some years but have never tried this myself. However my Dad had done this. He swapped his printer and had the new unit running before I got to him, result he used the new cartridges in the box, black cart from the old printer still 3/4 full. We used tape on the print head and put it into storage (stored the right way up). when he used it he reported it worked fine. However I didnt see any output from this cartridge and my Dad isnt a demanding user.

One trick I have used with HP cartridges that have become blocked is washing the print head in Methylated Spirits. Its not always worked but I have saved a couple like this.

Bottom line - I think if you taped the unit up well to keep the air off the print head completely you stand a better than even chance of this working. Would I like to guarantee this - no.

David.

In an HP, would removing and sealing the cartridges work well?
That sounds as though it would be sealing up the entire print
delivery system.

--
Abe

 

[snapshotdoc]

Abe,

Get a dye sublimation printer...problem solved.

 

[oldabelincoln]

Abe,

Get a dye sublimation printer...problem solved.

I know they exist, but I don't know anything about cost or capability. I typically print 8x10s. What would a decent printer cost for starters, and how does the cost of expendables compare with ink jet expendables?
--
Abe

 

[Robbrouse]

I'm looking for comments about how to successfully use an inkjet
printer infrequently - like once a month or two. I've got a laser
printer that I use for almost all my work, but every once in a
while I need to print a photo using a good inkjet photo printer.

I know that the usual wisdom is to print something - however small

• every so often, or to run a nozzle cleaning cycle every so often,

but those methods don't work for me - I've tried to do it, and I
simply forget, so I need to find another way around the problem. I
want to be able to put the printer - or the cartridges - aside when
not in use, and forget about it till I need to print again - just
like anything else on my computer system.

I had an Epson 700 Photo, which died a mechanical death - the print
assembly kept banging - after 3 or 4 years. It had nozzle clogs,
which cleared in the usual manner with lots of ink wasted. I
foolishly stocked up on Epson ink for the 700 Photo only to find
that the date on the ink really meant something and that old ink
usually didn't work, even factory sealed (at least on the 700).

When the Epson died, I decided to open up a Canon BJC-2010 (360 dpi
CMYK) that had been unopened since it came for free with a Dell
computer that I had bought in February 2000. It stayed in its box
for nearly 4 years because I was already running better printers
when it arrived. I figured the ink would be useless after that
long a time, but worth a try. To my amazement, it worked out of
the box, with no ink problems.

The Canon 2010 is no photo printer, and I do need one, but it made
me wonder - suppose I removed the cartridges after printing,
wrapped them airtight in plastic film (e.g., Saran Wrap in the US)
until I needed them again. That's a procedure that would work ok
for me, but would it keep the ink ok? I believe that the HP 7960
has some sort of storage area for special purpose cartridges, but I
don't know how well it works over long periods, and if that idea
would work for other brands. And I don't know if my experience
with inks for the Epson 700 (bad) or the Canon 2010 (good) is
applicable to other printers - Epson, for one, has a bewildering
array of inks out there, and new Epson inks might be a different
story - as might new Canon inks, for that matter.

Of course the nozzles on the Canon had never been used, so they
were not a problem, which might not be the case after some use. I
know that HP's inclusion of nozzles in the cartridge "solves" the
clogging problem in normal use, but if I can't put it aside for a
few months, I'll end up buying a new set of cartridges every time I
print, which is not much of a solution if that is the case.

So - has anyone tried this method, or any** method that would
allow very infrequent printing??? Conversely, has anyone tried
likely sounding methods that failed?

I'm not looking for any specific brand or model - I'll go with
whatever works - I've gotten acceptable test prints out of all
three brands using test files on cards.

----
Abe

--
John

 

[snapshotdoc]

Abe,

I recently purchased a Kodak 8500 during a time when Kodak was offerring a $300 rebate. The price of this model is now back up to $900 (US). I am sure that if you're patient, there will be another rebate offer. This is at least the second time I've seen this model rebated. The offers seem to coincide with large photographic equipment shows.

The cost per 8x10 print is about $1.65-$2, depending on where you buy the Kodak paper and ribbon required. The prints are gorgeous, true 8x10, indistinguishable from those of a professional lab and with "Kodak" printed on the back as a bonus! The prints also have a protective coating which is water and fingerprint resistant and is intended to extend the life of these prints to that of film prints.

There are probably other less expensive d-s printers availabe. I believe that Olympus is coming out with a new model. Search the web and I'm sure you'll find one that fits your needs and budget.

 

[oldabelincoln]

Abe,

I recently purchased a Kodak 8500 during a time when Kodak was
offerring a $300 rebate. The price of this model is now back up to
$900 (US). I am sure that if you're patient, there will be another
rebate offer. This is at least the second time I've seen this
model rebated. The offers seem to coincide with large photographic
equipment shows.

The cost per 8x10 print is about $1.65-$2, depending on where you
buy the Kodak paper and ribbon required. The prints are gorgeous,
true 8x10, indistinguishable from those of a professional lab and
with "Kodak" printed on the back as a bonus! The prints also have
a protective coating which is water and fingerprint resistant and
is intended to extend the life of these prints to that of film
prints.

There are probably other less expensive d-s printers availabe. I
believe that Olympus is coming out with a new model. Search the
web and I'm sure you'll find one that fits your needs and budget.

It sounds great, but for that kind of money, it would be cheaper to buy a low end HP and new cartridges every time they dry up because I printed months apart, or to take them to a photoprinter. Resolution might probably not be as good with an HP, but from my tests, it's good enough.

It would solve the problem, though...

Thanks for the suggestion.
--
Abe

 

[Tricia]

It sounds great, but for that kind of money, it would be cheaper to
buy a low end HP and new cartridges every time they dry up because
I printed months apart, or to take them to a photoprinter.
Resolution might probably not be as good with an HP, but from my
tests, it's good enough.

It would solve the problem, though...

The Olympus printers are also good and less than half the price:
http://www.olympusamerica.com/cpg_section/cpg_pp_printers.asp

--
Tricia
Minolta Dimage D7(UG), Epson 2200, PS7, Qimage

 

[ILia US]

Maybe I just got lucky. I purchased subj on sale for $159.00. The reason for that price is that printer was in warehouse for more than a year and they wanted to get rid of it. I wasn't planning to buy P-400, but I just couldn't let it go

Well, it works perfect, prints look, feel and behave like photolab.
People simply cannot tell that this is home print.

For me, dye sub is perfect, these days you can find P-400 for $300-$350.

I don't print every day, probably once in three weeks, I had Epson 750 I hated all these clogging issues.

• ilia

 

[oldabelincoln]

I have used HP printers for some years but have never tried this
myself. However my Dad had done this. He swapped his printer and
had the new unit running before I got to him, result he used the
new cartridges in the box, black cart from the old printer still
3/4 full. We used tape on the print head and put it into storage
(stored the right way up). when he used it he reported it worked
fine. However I didnt see any output from this cartridge and my Dad
isnt a demanding user.

Did you put tape directly on the print nozzles, or did you use tape to secure plastic wrap over the nozzles?

One trick I have used with HP cartridges that have become blocked
is washing the print head in Methylated Spirits. Its not always
worked but I have saved a couple like this.

How did they become blocked in the first place?

Bottom line - I think if you taped the unit up well to keep the air
off the print head completely you stand a better than even chance
of this working. Would I like to guarantee this - no.

David.

In an HP, would removing and sealing the cartridges work well?
That sounds as though it would be sealing up the entire print
delivery system.

--
Abe

--
Abe

 

[oldabelincoln]

Well, it works perfect, prints look, feel and behave like photolab.
People simply cannot tell that this is home print.

For me, dye sub is perfect, these days you can find P-400 for
$300-$350.
I don't print every day, probably once in three weeks, I had Epson
750 I hated all these clogging issues.

• ilia

Still high for my budget, but not impossible.

What are the limitations, compared to a typical inkjet?

--
Abe

 

[ILia US]

Well, there're some: It prints 7.64 x 10 max, but it fits nicely to 8 x 10 frame. Cost per 8x10 page is ~ 1.60 and it always prints full page. So, I can fit two 5x7 (my home albums are 5x7), but two 6x4 gets just too expensive.

For me those are not issues at all, and I really like prints I get.

I'd suggest you to visit any computer store near you and check for dye sub print samples and compare them to inkjets.

• ilia

 

[HappySnapper1190646]

Did you put tape directly on the print nozzles, or did you use tape
to secure plastic wrap over the nozzles

The tape was directly on the nozzles. When the cartridge was taped up it was working perfectly. This happened when my Dad purchased a new printer, by chance both the old printer (which died) and the new had the same model of black Cart. My Dad didnt realise this and fitted the new Carts that came with the new printer. As the black cart in the old printer was almost full I taped it up and hoped for the best.

One trick I have used with HP cartridges that have become blocked
is washing the print head in Methylated Spirits. Its not always
worked but I have saved a couple like this.

How did they become blocked in the first place?

This is an entirely different instance. I have come across several HP printers that have not been used in a long time (dont know how long they were laid up) and the Carts have dried out/clogged. On the basis that I cant do any damage to a Cart that isnt working I have cleaned in Maths by wiping with kitchen roll and generally swilling around in a shallow dish filled with Meths. Its worked a couple of times and failed a couple of times.

Bottom line - I think if you taped the unit up well to keep the air
off the print head completely you stand a better than even chance
of this working. Would I like to guarantee this - no.

David.

On ballance though I think the bast plan is to print something once in a while to keep the ink flowing. Remember you need sonething thats colour as well as black.

In an HP, would removing and sealing the cartridges work well?
That sounds as though it would be sealing up the entire print
delivery system.

--
Abe

--
Abe