I have an Epson 1290 printer and have always used genuine replacement Epson cartridges.
Has anyone any experience with compatible ink cartridges and are they any good .ie damage to printer, fading of prints, number of pages etc.

I haven't had great experience with 3rd party ink carts. They seem to run out more quickly and are prone to leak. It's also pretty much impossible to verify the lifespan of prints made with them. Given that I sell mine, I can't afford to take the risk of having them fade or change colour.

The exception to this is the high quality greyscale inks that are made for black & white fine art prints but I guess you're not talking about them.

The inks from non-genuine manufacturers tend to fade more quickly than genuine inks. Also, with Epson's permanent piezo ink head, i would only be wanting to use genuine inks, as replacing the head if it gets stuffed is expensive.

Having had non-original inks ruin three printers in the past, I won't buy anything but the maker's mark.

Companies that make generic 'compatible' ink cartridges will use the same ink formulas for multiple brands, which isn't a good idea as each maker designs the ink and the print-head / nozzles as a complete solution. Change the amount of lubricant in the ink by a fraction of a percent and the chances of things gumming up multiply a hundred-fold.

As soulman says, you can get better inks than the maker's own, for specific jobs, but you're paying more for them.

"Cheapskates always pay twice." -- Old Portuguese saying.


Brains

i was sent this by epson this week (seee below) and whilst a manufacturer will always be negatuve to a non genuine ink , we used to sell non genuine and broke a printer and had to replace the printer as it voided the warranty - subsequently we only sell genuine (att good prices!) now..

Epson is issuing this release at PMA today about tests conducted on Calidad inks marketed as substitutes for Epson's DURABrite inks. Henry Wilhelm, President of Wilhelm Imaging Research, Inc., will be briefing the media on these results over the next few days

Wilhelm Imaging Research (WIR) is the world's leading independent laboratory and research institute for image permanence evaluation.

Full results of the tests will be available to you soon. Please advise your ink customers of these results.

Tests show Calidad inks "not suitable for printing photographs"

Following these key points is a detailed media release about tests by Wilhelm Imaging Research (WIR) on the longevity of Calidad's recommended substitute for Epson's DURABrite pigment based ink.

Epson has issued its strongest warning yet against the use of third party inks following the release of independent test results showing that samples of one of the best known brands of third-party ink, Calidad, has one of the poorest results for print life ever measured.

Wilhelm Imaging Research (WIR), the world's leading independent laboratory and research institute for image permanence evaluation, concludes that displayed prints made with genuine Epson DURABrite pigment inks on Epson paper will last more than 40 times longer than prints made with the Calidad inks on Calidad paper by the same Epson printer.

Wilhelm Imaging Research considers the permanence of the Calidad inks to be so poor that they are simply not suitable for printing photographs.
Press Release as follows:

Sydney 3 May 2007: Epson has issued its strongest warning yet against the use of third party inks in its printers with the release of independent test results showing that one of Australia and New Zealand's best known third-party ink brands, Calidad, has one of the poorest results for print life ever measured.


"When Epson users see these results they should be in no doubt that using third party inks in their Epson printers will lead to rapid fading and loss of their precious photographs," Epson's Marketing Communications Director, Mr Mike Pleasants said.


"I am sure that no parents would want to give or receive as a gift a framed photograph of treasured children, friends or relatives, or that special occasion, that can suffer significant fading in less than a year," Mr Pleasants said.


Wilhelm Imaging Research (WIR), the world's leading independent laboratory and research institute for image permanence evaluation, tested samples of Calidad inks that are marketed as being suitable for use with Epson's home and office printers that use Epson's DURABrite pigment based ink.


The Calidad package for the cyan, magenta, and yellow inks include the claim that the inks are "Waterproof," "Fadeproof," and "Pigment Ink." When tested with Calidad Photo Paper Glossy the inks had a WIR Display Permanence Rating of less than one year. Epson DURABrite inks used with Epson Premium Glossy Photo Paper used in the same Epson Stylus C87 printer achieved a WIR Display Permanence Rating of 40 years.


The conclusion of the tests, according to Henry Wilhelm, President of Wilhelm Imaging Research, Inc., is that displayed prints made with genuine Epson DURABrite pigment inks on Epson paper will last more than 40 times longer than prints made with the Calidad inks on Calidad paper.


"The Calidad ink cartridges appear to contain low-stability dye-based substitutes for Epson high-stability DURABrite pigment inks. The Calidad inks have poor resistance to atmospheric ozone that may be present in homes and offices, and the Calidad inks also give up waterfastness when printed on plain paper," Mr Wilhelm said.


"If the Calidad Magenta ink is indeed a pigment ink as Calidad has claimed, it is by orders of magnitude the lowest stability pigment ink that we have ever tested. Calidad's claim that the inks are "Fadeproof" has no basis in fact and the company is misleading consumers in making such a claim. Wilhelm Imaging Research considers the permanence of the Calidad inks to be so poor that they are simply not suitable for printing photographs," Mr Wilhelm said.

Thanks everyone, there is no substitute for quality!

There's a reason the inks are so expensive, it's because they're costly to produce. The machines themselves can be churned out by the thousand in Chinese factories for next to nothing, but the inks have to be manufactured in special labs, hence their cost.

Yes, as a newbie I was seduced by the 'something for nothing' attractions of compatibles but bitter experience has taught me to stick with the manufacturer's brands - in my case Epson.

I've found 3rd party inks work well for me - since all I do is print on DVDs with my Canon iP3000.
I've printed a couple of photos, and they're not really any different to those printed with the real inks. Only thing I've noticed is that the black tends to run more with the 3rd party inks.

Given the artificially high cost of inks*, I'd rather lose a little bit of quality and not have to worry about how much every print job is costing me.


*A Canon inks cartridge is about $25 retail. Cost price is about $4. I learnt years ago when I worked at Officeworks - it's not the printer companies that are screwing you - it's the retailers.

I used non-genunine once in our old epson, sucked! leaked, clogged and stank!

This is an interesting topic for me, I have been using the Officeworks brand ink for my Epson R210 for a very long time now and except for twice when I installed a cartridge and it showed me it was empty (and Officeworks replaced no questions asked) I have had no trouble, I just looked at a photo of my son which has been on a filing cabinet since Oct 05 and it looks good, having said that I think I will print this photo again and see what it comes out like and see if the original print has faded.
I have never used any photo paper except for Canon or Kodak and always found them great value for money, I have used A4 Glossy Kodak paper for my pricelist/catalogue for quite a while now and because each customer usually gets 3-4 of these a year it probably doesn't matter if it fades in a year because they end up in the recycling (hopefully) bin before this time.
I guess it all depends on what your needs are, I wonder if the testers were to have used the non genuine ink on a higher quality/different brand paper would the results be different?

The ONLY paper you should be using for prints are the ILFORD Galleria range. About $30 for 25 or $85 for 100 in A4 size.

They even come with there own ICC profiles to ensure accurate printing

yeah the ilford is lovely!

NEVER usse crap generic brand inks in your printer, I have seen two and a half printers destroyed by these carts.

I borrowed my old man's printer the other day, only to find he'd replaced the carts on the cheap, and low and behold, they sucked

The blacks were dark green
, it bled like hell, and no colour depth whatsoever.

I ended up buying a new printer for myself!

Alessiman, there are quite a few fine art papers on the market. Plenty of people like the Ilford but plenty of people like brands such as Canson-Arches & Hahnemeule as well. All premium papers come with ICC profiles and, if you're serious about your colour, you need to get custom profiles anyway.

Wilhelm Imaging Research also tested HP Vivera inks-I only buy new HP catridges (used to refill-but poorer quality).