# Printer Ink: Liquid Gold



## Nick (Apr 23, 2002)

*Regulators to look at ink cartridges*

At my own estimate of more than $100 per ounce, computer printer cartridge ink is very likely more expensive than the finest caviar. Even Russian _Ossetra Crown_ Farmed Caviar, which. according to Amazon, is _"...the highest quality and best of all farmed caviars"_, at $625.28 for a 7 ounce tin, is likely less than the per-ounce cost of some cartridge inks, but will we ever know for sure?

Not even "The Shadow" knows how much ink is in any given printer ink cartridge. Simply because mfrs don't want us to know. Despite the common law exhortation of _'caveat emptor'_, one of the basic tenets of relationships between reputable sellers and informed buyers is a reasonable level of trust and confidence, based on _more-or-less_ full disclosure on the part of the seller.

And who would question that HP, Lexmark, Canon, Kodak and most other well-known computer printer manufacturers are reputable? But when it comes to disclosing to buyers exactly how much ink, by volume, is in that cartridge for which they are about to pay anywhere from $15 to $35, printer mfrs have not been, and, according to their own admission, are not about to be voluntarily forthcoming.

God forbid that intelligent and cost-conscious consumers be put in a position to make an informed evaluation about ongoing operating costs when buying a new printer. But help may be on the way...

From *The Kansas City Star*:


> *Showdown looms between ink cartridge makers and regulators*
> Posted Fri, Jan. 08, 2010
> By STEVE EVERLY
> The Kansas City Star
> ...


More @ *Kansas City Star.com*


----------



## LarryFlowers (Sep 22, 2006)

Nick.. this can't possibly be news to you. The printer industries' answer to the razor/razorblade...

You are miles ahead with Laser printers, and way better off to take your photos somewhere like Wal-Mart.


----------



## Nick (Apr 23, 2002)

LarryFlowers said:


> Nick.. this can't possibly be news to you...


Of course not, Larry, I 'm old but I'm not senile...yet! But there is _some_ news -- it's the point of the article. See if you can find it.


----------



## Lord Vader (Sep 20, 2004)

The biggest perpetrator? HP with their tri-color cartridges. When one color runs out, it's time to ditch the whole thing. BTW, I've tried a few of those low-cost ink replacements. They're horrible! 

I hate it that HP has me by the balls.


----------



## Cholly (Mar 22, 2004)

Lord Vader said:


> The biggest perpetrator? HP with their tri-color cartridges. When one color runs out, it's time to ditch the whole thing. BTW, I've tried a few of those low-cost ink replacements. They're horrible!
> 
> I hate it that HP has me by the balls.


I agree with you regarding color cartridges that have yellow, cyan and magenta ink all in one cartridge. HP isn't alone in doing this, though. You'll find inkjets by all the manufacturers that use similar cartridges.
I confess to being pretty much of an HP bigot when it comes to inkjets. However, I learned quite some time ago to compare the features of their printers, and my current workhorse inkjet is an HP Photosmart 3210 all in one printer, which has six individual ink cartridges. When one goes dry, you aren't throwing away several other colors of ink. Most of the printer manufacturers make printers that have separate cartridges for each color of ink.


----------



## Marlin Guy (Apr 8, 2009)

Nick said:


> But there is _some_ news -- it's the point of the article. See if you can find it.


I found it. :lol:

Glad to hear it too!


----------



## Richard King (Mar 25, 2002)

> BTW, I've tried a few of those low-cost ink replacements. They're horrible!


Yep. I ordered a set for my HP printer and the black cartridge wouldn't work at all. I'm sticking with HP and stocking up when I find it on sale.


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

I rarely print anything. Maybe a few dozen pages a year. Once the original ink cartridge that came with the printer dries up, it's usually more efficient for me to buy a new printer. That way I get new ink and a new, upgraded printer.

Of course, now I have several old, outdated paperweights.


----------



## 4HiMarks (Jan 21, 2004)

SayWhat? said:


> I rarely print anything. Maybe a few dozen pages a year. Once the original ink cartridge that came with the printer dries up, it's usually more efficient for me to buy a new printer. That way I get new ink and a new, upgraded printer.
> 
> Of course, now I have several old, outdated paperweights.


It used to be that way, but the printer mfrs have gotten smart(er) and a new printer now frequently comes with just a "starter" cartridge, which is only enough to print a hundred pages or so, and then you have to buy a new one for half the original cost of the printer.


----------



## Grentz (Jan 10, 2007)

The sad thing is that there still is nothing as good as OEM for your printer.

All the printer companies have tons of patents on their inks and lots of continuing R&D into making them better which contribute to the high costs. I am not saying they are justified, just saying why they are so high.


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

In my home office, I have 4 printers, and a 5th in the basement.

- Color Phaser 
- 12 Year Old Laser 
- 1 Year Duplexing Laser
- MultiFunction Photo Printer
- 13x17 wide ink jet printer.

The phaser and the laser printers, based on usage, we use about one set of ink a year. So we typically keep that in check.

The MultipFunction photo printer... we use that actually not as much as we used to.
With sub 0.01 prints at Target, Walmart, and other places we just most of our picture prints there when practical.

I actually consider replacing the printer once a year, when the ink runs out. It is actually $20 CHEAPER to replace the printer, then to buy an entire set of ink.

I have had this one now for two years, so when it's ink is out, that is it... it gets e-cycled.

The 13x17 is only used for special purposes, so that one I go through the ink about once every 18 months or so. I send it a test print page about once a week, just to keep the nozels from drying up.

I will NEVER purchase another ink jet printer, if it doesn't have individual tanks for each color.


----------



## BubblePuppy (Nov 3, 2006)

Earl Bonovich said:


> In my home office, I have 4 printers, and a 5th in the basement.
> 
> - Color Phaser
> - 12 Year Old Laser
> ...


I thought about doing that.....but what an incredible waste.:nono2:


----------



## The Merg (Jun 24, 2007)

I currently have a KonicaMiniolta MagiColor Laser Printer that I got for free from a relative. When the black ran out, I found one of those toner replacement cartridge stores and decided to give it a try. I was able to get a high-capacity cartridge from them (4,500 sheets compared to 1,500) for a third of the cost of that same cartridge from Konica. It's worked great for me so far.

I used to use a Dell AIO a720 inkjet, but will never go back to that.

- Merg


----------



## TheRatPatrol (Oct 1, 2003)

SayWhat? said:


> I rarely print anything. Maybe a few dozen pages a year.


Same here. And if I do have to print something I usually save it on a thumb drive and take it to work. My work has gone away from printers and more to printing to copy machines over the network. I guess its cheaper to by one toner cartridge per area then it is to buy ink for multiple printers.


----------



## Herdfan (Mar 18, 2006)

I have had good success with non-OEM toner. But it is also usually from one of the office supply stores such as Staples or Office Depot.

As for after market ink. Only experience taught me I never wanted to do it again. I needed to print a large manual that had some color in it. So I went a bought a set of non-OEM ink cartridges specifically for printing this manual. I ended up with a mess. That ink smeared all over the page. Then I tried to put the OEM cartridges back, but the printer was never the same.

So I ended up with a budget color laser.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

I see the point, but don't quite feel the same pain.

One thing I learned a long time ago was to *shop the inkjet cartridge, not the printer*....meaning...the cartridge reflects the real cost of ownership, not the printer - heck, sometimes they give those away practically.

In my case, I bought 3 HP 2110 Inkjet printers (they also copy and scan) at Walmart on Black Friday for $25 each. One is a spare. I have the other 2 set up to operate at all times. They use inkjet cartridges that cost $14 for Black and $16 for Tri-color - *new* - not refills.

One *set* of cartridges last me about 6-7 weeks, and I use one printer for work and the other personal. That means I spend about $210 a year for a set of cartridges for one printer - the one I use the most for work (and gets paid by my company). They consider those cost very inexpensive. The personal one uses about half as much...perhaps $100 a year. At those prices, I have no problem.

Where folks get burned is first paying $100-$200 for an inkjet printer, and then $25 - $35 per cartridge. I agree with the basis of the article, however, I also had no problem getting around these costs by simply doing some homework before buying.

As for photos - I get those done at 9-10 cents a print at Walmart or Walgreens on sale.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

I went laser and never looked back. My father prints something once a week whether he needs to or not, just to keep the ink from drying up. My last inkjet, I believe a Canon, had a thing where it would keep track of the number of prints, then tell you that it was out of ink. Shake the cartridge and you could hear the ink sloshing around.

The next time I need a toner, I might get it from LaserMonks...not necessarily cheaper than Amazon, but I'd rather help a charity.


----------



## Grentz (Jan 10, 2007)

I can agree that laser is the way to go if you can stand B&W (color laser is still awfully expensive for carts). We don't print much, but when we do it is usually invoices and business forms that are fine in B&W. 

I have a Canon laser AIO and a HP color AIO which covers both bases, though the HP does not get used very often.


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

BubblePuppy said:


> I thought about doing that.....but what an incredible waste.:nono2:


That is why I e-cycle with a local organization, that repurposes equipment that is good condition.


----------



## scooper (Apr 22, 2002)

A color laser is the best way to go for infrequent color prints, (don't have ink drying out, etc.), but they are just so much more than inkjets. I don't know what the best answer is.


----------



## kevinwmsn (Aug 19, 2006)

My last several inkjets have the 4 colors(black,red,blue,yellow)... I bought my latest one a all-in-one HP 8500 Wireless, being my scanner been dead and I needed 2 inks for it and it was getting too slow for me. I agree that real pain is how many pages you can get out of the ink before replacing. I just don't do a ton of printing so inkjet is ok, a color laser is still too pricey, but in a few years I don't think it will be and it should be pretty fast(10+) and < $500.


----------



## djlong (Jul 8, 2002)

My Dell 3100cn color laser printer is still on it's original toner cartridges after 4 years of use.


----------



## 4HiMarks (Jan 21, 2004)

Nick said:


> *Regulators to look at ink cartridges*
> 
> At my own estimate of more than $100 per ounce, computer printer cartridge ink is very likely more expensive than the finest caviar. Even Russian _Ossetra Crown_ Farmed Caviar, which. according to Amazon, is _"...the highest quality and best of all farmed caviars"_, at $625.28 for a 7 ounce tin, is likely less than the per-ounce cost of some cartridge inks, but will we ever know for sure?


Why are all these comparisons in terms of weight? Ink is measured by volume. We should be talking about Dom Perignon or fine cognacs, not caviar and filet mignon.


----------



## Herdfan (Mar 18, 2006)

kevinwmsn said:


> a color laser is still too pricey, but in a few years I don't think it will be and it should be pretty fast(10+) and < $500.


We are already there: http://www.google.com/products/cata...ct=result&resnum=3&ved=0CCoQ8wIwAg#ps-sellers


----------



## Cholly (Mar 22, 2004)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm under the impression that color lasers really don't do a good job on photos as compared to inkjets or dye sublimation printers. For documents, they're ok, but for photos, stay with an inkjet or get them printed at Walmart, Target or Walgreens.


----------



## BubblePuppy (Nov 3, 2006)

4HiMarks said:


> *Why are all these comparisons in terms of weight? Ink is measured by volume. *We should be talking about Dom Perignon or fine cognacs, not caviar and filet mignon.


Sometimes that is very close to being the same amount as to be practically the same. It's just the higher number looks better.


----------



## Herdfan (Mar 18, 2006)

Cholly said:


> Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm under the impression that color lasers really don't do a good job on photos as compared to inkjets or dye sublimation printers. For documents, they're ok, but for photos, stay with an inkjet or get them printed at Walmart, Target or Walgreens.


That would be correct. Great for documents with some color or small low-res photos, but not photos.


----------



## scooper (Apr 22, 2002)

You might be surprised. 

What really gets you on the color lasers is actually the DPI. As in everything else computer related - the more the better.


----------



## Grentz (Jan 10, 2007)

I LOVE the output color lasers have for color documents. It is very unique. Though not good for photo prints because of the limited DPI.


----------



## Lord Vader (Sep 20, 2004)

Cholly said:


> Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm under the impression that color lasers really don't do a good job on photos as compared to inkjets or dye sublimation printers. For documents, they're ok, but for photos, stay with an inkjet or get them printed at Walmart, Target or Walgreens.


I don't know what printer you were using, but my color laser is far superior to my color inkjet when it comes to photos. I use a heavier and glossier paper for photos, and let me tell you, my pics look spectacular!


----------



## Grentz (Jan 10, 2007)

Lord Vader said:


> I don't know what printer you were using, but my color laser is far superior to my color inkjet when it comes to photos. I use a heavier and glossier paper for photos, and let me tell you, my pics look spectacular!


Which one do you have?

I have only worked with office grade ones that do not have the greatest DPI so photos look ok, but not perfect.

Laser color is amazing though, the colors really pop and look so smooth and good.


----------



## Lord Vader (Sep 20, 2004)

I'm using a Dell 3110cn.

I'm betting the paper I use, which as I said is a heavier weighted, brighter, and glossier type, makes the difference.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

Lord Vader said:


> I'm using a Dell 3110cn.
> 
> I'm betting the paper I use, which as I said is a heavier weighted, brighter, and glossier type, makes the difference.


Well, just the other day my wife asked me why we didn't have a color laser printer and I said they don't do photos as well as an inkjet. So now I'll have to backtrack. Thanks loads.


----------



## djlong (Jul 8, 2002)

I'm with Lord Vader on this one. I can back-up his testimony as to how good photos look on even ordinary paper on that printer. I've been ecstatically happy with my purchase. With the exception of a small challenge finding a driver for one of my machines, this has been the most trouble-free printer I've ever owned (and I go back to the days of daisy-wheel and dot-matrix printers). The printer cost me less than $500, it appears to be $270 or so on eBay now. It works via USB or LAN as it has an ethernet port so it's a good network printer. List price from Dell for a complete set of toner cartridges is just north of $300 but there are outfits out there claiming to sell sets for under $100.

Beats the pants of any inkjey.


----------



## jerry downing (Mar 7, 2004)

I have had refurbished toner cartridges at work and they tended to leak toner. I was told by the guy who serviced my printer that continued use of these cartridges could void my warranty. I don't know how this turned out as I was laid off when the company filed for bankruptcy.


----------



## Grentz (Jan 10, 2007)

Lord Vader said:


> I'm using a Dell 3110cn.
> 
> I'm betting the paper I use, which as I said is a heavier weighted, brighter, and glossier type, makes the difference.


Dell makes some good printers, makes sense 

The only color lasers I have first hand experience with are beastly HP corporate models that are more focused on speed and document quality vs. photos and all around use.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

"_Dell makes some good printers, makes sense_" - Dell is selling; who is the OEM for Dell OKI or Lexmark ?


----------



## davring (Jan 13, 2007)

P Smith said:


> "_Dell makes some good printers, makes sense_" - Dell is selling; who is the OEM for Dell OKI or Lexmark ?


I beleive Okidata makes the majority of them and I understand it is to Dell specs, not just rebadged units.


----------



## rvd420 (Mar 10, 2003)

My wife refills her ink cartridges. 

But my wife prints lots of activity stuff for the youth group at church.

$15.00 worth of refill ink to fill her 2 color and 2 black cartridges last a year.

But she also recycles cartridges yearly. After 7-8 refills they don't work as well she says. I don't know. I hardly ever use the printer.


----------



## The Merg (Jun 24, 2007)

Cholly said:


> Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm under the impression that color lasers really don't do a good job on photos as compared to inkjets or dye sublimation printers. For documents, they're ok, but for photos, stay with an inkjet or get them printed at Walmart, Target or Walgreens.


I don't have a terrific laserjet, but it does a fine job on photos, especially if I use photo paper.

- Merg


----------



## The Merg (Jun 24, 2007)

davring said:


> I beleive Okidata makes the majority of them and I understand it is to Dell specs, not just rebadged units.


Actually Lexmark makes a good deal of them too. I know for a while (if not still), they were rebadged units, but they slightly modified the ink cartridge so you needed to purchase Dell's as opposed to buying Lexmark cartridges off-the-shelf.

- Merg


----------



## Grentz (Jan 10, 2007)

P Smith said:


> "_Dell makes some good printers, makes sense_" - Dell is selling; who is the OEM for Dell OKI or Lexmark ?


Sorry, should have said contracts/sells. They do tweak some of them, and place specifications down for models and such.



The Merg said:


> Actually Lexmark makes a good deal of them too. I know for a while (if not still), they were rebadged units, but they slightly modified the ink cartridge so you needed to purchase Dell's as opposed to buying Lexmark cartridges off-the-shelf.
> 
> - Merg


Correct, almost all of the Dell printers are Lexmark. They used to just rebadge, then started tweaking a bit so they are not exactly the same as the Lexmark line.

The color lasers are the exception it seems, most seem to think Canon, Samsung, or Okidata are the suppliers. Could be a mixture as well.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

Well, we looked at the Dell lasers and I realized why I haven't even looked around at color lasers. The printers are cheap but the title of this thread is appropriate - the cartridges are expensive. Probably not for the square feet of paper they'd cover, but I'm not printing enough color to amortize one set of cartridges over my remaining life, much less the life of the printer.:eek2:


----------



## Nick (Apr 23, 2002)

Phrelin, here's hoping you long outlive your next set of ink cartridges. :goodjob:
To paraphrase the late Gen. Douglas MacArthur, _'Old ink never dies, it just fades away.'_


----------

