[frogoutofwater]

I'm pretty sure this is a stupid question but I'll ask anyway. I have an Epson SureColor P600 and I know that when I switch from black ink for matte prints (MK) to photo black ink for glossy/luster prints (PK), I lose a little ink as the printer purges one as it switches to the other. Here's the dumb question - is it just the black ink that gets purged on the switchover (i.e., a lose a little PK or MK, as the case might be) or do I lose a little ink across the whole ink set?

Thanks

[disconnekt]

From the reviews I've read about printers that have glossy & matte black, black is the only color that you lose some ink when you switch from glossy to matte.
It'll vary just how much ink is lost from printer to printer (low end to high end), even from the same company.

[Fenwoodian]

Good question.

I have done this same procedure with my large format Epson Stylus Pro 7600.

Last time I did it was about 3 years ago when I went from using matte paper to lustre / glossy paper. Now that I only use lustre / glossy paper I suspect that I will never need to make this change again.

The change over process for me worked like this... I changed the ink, then I put in some super-cheap/throw away paper. Then I printed up a number of black and white photos on this disposable paper. This process ended up wasting some of the photo black and light black inks, but I really do not think that it used much (if any) of the other 5 ink colors in this purging process.

Frankly, I don't think that this switch over process is all that big of deal. I didn't measure how much of the black inks were wasted, but it certainly was not all that much. But having said that, it is a bit of a hastle, and if one can afford it, I would certainly recommend dedicated printers (one for matte paper, and one for lustre/glossy/semi-glossy).

[disconnekt]

Good question.

Frankly, I don't think that this switch over process is all that big of deal. I didn't measure how much of the black inks were wasted, but it certainly was not all that much. But having said that, it is a bit of a hastle, and if one can afford it, I would certainly recommend dedicated printers (one for matte paper, and one for lustre/glossy/semi-glossy).

This is actually a pretty good idea, especially nowadays when you can get a "refurbished by manufacturer" printer from Adorama/B&H, or a refurbished one directly from the manufacturer for cheap.

[frogoutofwater]

This is actually a pretty good idea, especially nowadays when you can get a "refurbished by manufacturer" printer from Adorama/B&H, or a refurbished one directly from the manufacturer for cheap.

It's not so much a question of $ as of space (in our already crowded NYC apartment).

Luckily, I currently have access to excellent printers in the digital labs at the International Center of Photography, where I'm taking courses. I get free lab time with some of the courses I take, and the printing costs (basically the ink costs) are priced at pretty close to what I'd pay for ink at home.

[Fenwoodian]

Printing your own photos is expensive and takes space.

But, if one likes to have total creative control over the entire process, I guess one really should master the printing process and print your own photos.