With Kyson inks being a fraud, what should I go to now (MIS..or..)?

fraud? pigment ink is always milky. kyson's yellow ink looks dye not pigment.

Madcat207 wrote: For several months I have been running a Kyson CIS; of course, some new info about it came out: http://photo.net/digital-darkroom-forum/00JRDw So... now I don't really want to go order refills (as I am in need). I am running a Canon i9900, and having a CIS has been really handy, so I need an alternative. Is MIS my only solution, or are there other viable alternatives?

try MIS or Inkrepublic

bic50 wrote: fraud? pigment ink is always milky. kyson's yellow ink looks dye not pigment.

Madcat207 wrote: For several months I have been running a Kyson CIS; of course, some new info about it came out: http://photo.net/digital-darkroom-forum/00JRDw So... now I don't really want to go order refills (as I am in need). I am running a Canon i9900, and having a CIS has been really handy, so I need an alternative. Is MIS my only solution, or are there other viable alternatives?

try MIS or Inkrepublic

Well, that's the point. People (including me) who ordered pigment did not get pigment. So, with some amount of admitted ignorance, I have been using what I thought was pigment, and was deceived. Now, MIS/Inkrepublic is a name I know, but how is their quality? Is it fairly close to OEM? -- My ever-growing flickr gallery: http://www.flickr.com/photos/dsbphotography

Madcat207 wrote: Well, that's the point. People (including me) who ordered pigment did not get pigment. So, with some amount of admitted ignorance, I have been using what I thought was pigment, and was deceived. Now, MIS/Inkrepublic is a name I know, but how is their quality? Is it fairly close to OEM?

I have been using Kyson inks for over a year and have found no real problems. Their inks have proved to be far better than Canon in all respects. Remember that even pigment(ed - you choose) inks are in a dye solution, so fading can occur if the wrong paper is used. In so many cases, the paper is a major cause of fading. For example, Epson "archival inks" are only so if on the paper specially made for same (or on inerts art materials). Perhaps reason I have no problems with Kyson is because I print on acid-free art materials (watercolour paper, as one example) As regards MIS pigment/pigmented inks - I think they have changed and now supply same as Ink Republic. Their former pigment inks, whilst gave superb prints - have now totally clogged my two A3+ Epson printers - even the tubes are blocked solid - cannot even rod them through with stout wire. My language reached new depths! There are some pigmented inks (or pigment - whatever you want to call them) now appearing. I have a CIS on an Epson DX7400 all-in-one for my office and newsletter production. Not without problems but inexpensive. Without the CIS, I would need a second mortgage to keep the inks flowing. I think these were made in the desert as they are so thirsty. These alternatives - not sure about USA - but at least you can see via this link. Several eBay sellers of CIS and bulk inks use these - and it's what I have in the DX7400 - they are fine, even on glossy papers. http://advancedinkjetsystems.com/ They have clickable links for prices to be in dollars and €uros too, so think they may well ship worldwide

Hey Zone8, I remember you helping me a while ago, so it is nice to see you here. In regards to this ink, the thing that bugs me, is that I paid for something and never received it. I admit that I do not know everything, nor did i know what a true pigment ink would really look like. The fact is, I ordered 110ml ink tanks filled with pigment ink, and got 55ml tanks with dye. Sure, the kyson prints are ok (though color accuracy has never been quite right..). From what it seems, if i order more ink (paying the premium for pigment, not pigmented) i will again get scammed, which does not please me. Now, I am considering the MIS refill system; in this case its dye, but at least I know what I am getting. But I am wanting to make sure this time, I really get the best i can, with no surprises down the line. -- My ever-growing flickr gallery: http://www.flickr.com/photos/dsbphotography

Madcat207 wrote: Hey Zone8, I remember you helping me a while ago, so it is nice to see you here. In regards to this ink, the thing that bugs me, is that I paid for something and never received it. I admit that I do not know everything, nor did i know what a true pigment ink would really look like. The fact is, I ordered 110ml ink tanks filled with pigment ink, and got 55ml tanks with dye.

I have raised this issue several times in this forum, but some Kyson supporter accused me of being "persistently wrong". Based on the info from the link you provided, Kyson apparently admitted that the ink is not pigment and is replacing it.

1. The CIS has 110 ml of ink, not the tanks. there is a lot in the tubes and in the dampers (cartridges). 2. I also called Kyson about the transparent "pigment" on my R1800 CIS and got the same "finely ground" answer. However there are pigments in there. You can see it clump together when washing syringes or whatever you use to fill the tanks. Obviously there is more dye in the R1800 pigment than the normal pigment ink since they are trying to give good results on glossy paper. Something no aftermarket real pigmant can do. If you notice the R1800 inks are labeled "For R1800 only." I am on my third set of refills and have had no worse clogging than when I was using Image Specialists inks from Weink and MIS. That which is wet tends to dry out! Keeping the parking pad seal clean will help. It would be interesting to find out who makes the ink. In some of the pictures on the Kyson web site you can make out the name "Coastal." td

Tucsondave.2 wrote: 1. The CIS has 110 ml of ink, not the tanks. there is a lot in the tubes and in the dampers (cartridges).

The tubing is long but has a very small inside diameter. The damper will hold one cartridge's worth of ink. These cannot account for "missing" ink if each tank only holds 55 ml.

Dominic.Chan wrote:

Tucsondave.2 wrote: 1. The CIS has 110 ml of ink, not the tanks. there is a lot in the tubes and in the dampers (cartridges).

The tubing is long but has a very small inside diameter. The damper will hold one cartridge's worth of ink. These cannot account for "missing" ink if each tank only holds 55 ml.

I must agree with this. if the ink tanks hold no more than 55ml, then there is no way there is another 55ml in the rest of the system. So guys.. do you think I should stick with Kyson regardless or would it be worth trying something else? I mean, the quality has been good, but my color has always been too dark (ok, it may no be the ink, but still..). At this point, I just really need ink, so i gotta go with something. But, i will admit to being still amateurish at this, and really respect this forum's advice.. so.. -- My ever-growing flickr gallery: http://www.flickr.com/photos/dsbphotography

OK - So, MIS doesn't seem too bad, but having to constantly refill cartridges with syringes seems like a real pain (especially when I really get printing). So, i see two options 1) Order MIS ink; flush the old kyson ink (somehow) and refill the system with MIS ink. 2) Order Kyson Pigment(ed) ink and hope I get what i have ordered 3) Order Kyson Dye ink, and get what I assume I have been using (despite ordering pigment). One other thing - anyone have any idea how fast Kyson has been shipping? Or even MIS for that matter?

If you think Kyson only rips you off on "pigmented" inks, Think again, it appears they sell really cheap quality ( even for MADE IN CHINA brands) CIS units as well. If you bought a CIS unit from kyson for your Epson R-1800 you should look at the warning posted on http://photo.net/digital-darkroom-forum/00Th7r Apparently the spring in the cartridges are proned to RUSTING and can clog your printhead.

Only a quickie. My Kyson CIS came with the full 100ml and is "still" working fine (but see below). The build quality is also fine, as have been the inks. That's all I can comment - except ..... Although no complaints about Kyson - the Canon i9950 (think is the 9500 in USA) has turned upside down and died. Not a lot of throughput either. Even though I brought it back from UK to Spain (UK price then was 2X USA price and the Spanish rate for this was 50% more than the UK price!). I kept on a UK fused plug - one day the printer turned on OK, started to work and then stopped. No Power. Found the fuse in the plug had blown. Replaced - printer grunted a bit but has never worked since - clearly some internal electrical fault. Out here in Spain, Canon wanted almost as much as the price for a new printer PLUS I would have been required to get it to and from Madrid at my own cost (about 300 miles) so total cost would be more than a new printer. So, I bought an Epson 1400 - also more than 2X USA price (and no cashbacks!) and in Spain would have been 2X UK price and thus 4X USA price - so I bought that in UK and brought back as hold luggage. But I emphasise the Kyson CIS was fine and I had no problems with their inks either. I would also add the Canon i9950 was pretty dreadful at feeding paper, other than normal 80gsm office paper (used occasionally for a newsletter). That's why I changed back to an Epson. Getting good B+W with the 1400 required quite a bit of testing (a lot in fact) as I print on art watercolour paper (Canson - Montval 300gsm) but solved that.

Zone8 wrote: My Kyson CIS came with the full 100ml and is "still" working fine (but see below). The build quality is also fine, as have been the inks.

Kyson is offering their Epson R1800/R800 CIS system AND "This system comes pre-filled with over 80 cartridges worth of ink (110 ml per color)." for only $ 47.25. But, if you just want the 110ml refill, it would cost $ 58.00 ( $6.50 X 9 bottles) so it would appear Kyson will PAY YOU $11.25 to take the CIS off their hands. SO what's the catch ?? Is it because the spring in the cartridges will rust and can clog the print heads as documented on http://photo.net/digital-darkroom-forum/00Th7r Or is it because it is filled with only half (55ml) the ink Kyson claimed ( see http://photo.net/digital-darkroom-forum/00JRDw ) ? BUYER BEWARE . If it looks too good to be true ........

Just an update, seems like all the negative press has forced KYSON to change their name. They are now called INK USA SYSTEMS ( inkusasystems ) . BE AWARE....

NikonUser2 wrote: Just an update, seems like all the negative press has forced KYSON to change their name. They are now called INK USA SYSTEMS ( inkusasystems ) . BE AWARE....

Why? I used their inks and was very satisfied.

This update is for the many dissatisfied Kyson customers. If you are satisfied with their inks, you now know their new name and can continue to do business with them.

NikonUser2 wrote: Just an update, seems like all the negative press has forced KYSON to change their name. They are now called INK USA SYSTEMS ( inkusasystems ) . BE AWARE....

They have changed their name again, they are now called INK USA SYSTEM ( inkusasystem ). and they offer a 5 year warranty plus a 30 day money guarantee on their products. LOL Try getting warranty from a company that changes it's name every couple of years.

Madcat207 wrote: For several months I have been running a Kyson CIS; of course, some new info about it came out: http://photo.net/digital-darkroom-forum/00JRDw So... now I don't really want to go order refills (as I am in need). I am running a Canon i9900, and having a CIS has been really handy, so I need an alternative. Is MIS my only solution, or are there other viable alternatives?

As far as I know, there really isn't a viable way to run pigment inks in a Canon bubble-jet printer. There's a fundamental difference between pigments and dyes. Pigments are particles that are not soluble in their base: they are simply ground small enough that they form a colloid. That is, they stay suspended in the base by the action of Brownian motion. Somewhere in this thread, there was mention of problems occurring if the pigment particles are ground small enough to disrupt their molecular structure. This does not happen.

• The smaller you grind particles, the more chance that friction and pressure in th grinding process will cause the particles to "sinter", to reattach to each other.
• Long before you ground a pigment to molecular levels, you would end up with really dangerous nanoparticles. It's one thing for particles to stay in colloidal suspension in liquid base, and quite another for them to be able to do that in air. Nano dust kills.

Dyes actually dissolve in the base, they do break down to molecules, mingling freely with the molecules of the liquid base. Epson piezo heads can print with almost anything: they use physical force (literally, little hammer blows) to "flick" cold ink at the paper. Canon and low end HP designs boil or vaporize some of the ink in order to use the steam pressure generated to shoot the majority of the ink at the paper. In order for this to work, the particular dyes chosen must boil well, and not undergo chemical reactions at printing temperatures that causes them to produce solid compounds. Pigments, already being solid compounds, coat thermal print heads, bringing them to a grinding halt. My sources say that HP gets around this in thermal printer certified for pigment inks, by adding one monster of a head cleaning mechanism. The Canon 9000 has nothing like this... Elsewhere in this thread, there's also mention of pigment inks also containing some dye. Maybe this is true of Kyson, but I've centrifuged Epson and MIS pigment inks, and there is no dye component.

Aren't the Canon 9500, and the ipf5100/6100/8100 still themal bubblejet technology? Or did they use something else? I'd assumed it was still something related to bubblejet since they have so many nozzles (which would be rather difficult on a piezo head). Those printers do use pigment inks as well. Despite the initial complete lack of customer support the printers seem to have held up relatively well over time as well. I must admit I haven't owned a canon since my bj-10 though. heh. xilvar

Joseph S Wisniewski wrote:

Madcat207 wrote: For several months I have been running a Kyson CIS; of course, some new info about it came out: http://photo.net/digital-darkroom-forum/00JRDw So... now I don't really want to go order refills (as I am in need). I am running a Canon i9900, and having a CIS has been really handy, so I need an alternative. Is MIS my only solution, or are there other viable alternatives?

As far as I know, there really isn't a viable way to run pigment inks in a Canon bubble-jet printer. There's a fundamental difference between pigments and dyes. Pigments are particles that are not soluble in their base: they are simply ground small enough that they form a colloid. That is, they stay suspended in the base by the action of Brownian motion. Somewhere in this thread, there was mention of problems occurring if the pigment particles are ground small enough to disrupt their molecular structure. This does not happen.

• The smaller you grind particles, the more chance that friction and pressure in th grinding process will cause the particles to "sinter", to reattach to each other.
• Long before you ground a pigment to molecular levels, you would end up with really dangerous nanoparticles. It's one thing for particles to stay in colloidal suspension in liquid base, and quite another for them to be able to do that in air. Nano dust kills.

Dyes actually dissolve in the base, they do break down to molecules, mingling freely with the molecules of the liquid base. Epson piezo heads can print with almost anything: they use physical force (literally, little hammer blows) to "flick" cold ink at the paper. Canon and low end HP designs boil or vaporize some of the ink in order to use the steam pressure generated to shoot the majority of the ink at the paper. In order for this to work, the particular dyes chosen must boil well, and not undergo chemical reactions at printing temperatures that causes them to produce solid compounds. Pigments, already being solid compounds, coat thermal print heads, bringing them to a grinding halt. My sources say that HP gets around this in thermal printer certified for pigment inks, by adding one monster of a head cleaning mechanism. The Canon 9000 has nothing like this... Elsewhere in this thread, there's also mention of pigment inks also containing some dye. Maybe this is true of Kyson, but I've centrifuged Epson and MIS pigment inks, and there is no dye component.

Joseph S Wisniewski wrote: As far as I know, there really isn't a viable way to run pigment inks in a Canon bubble-jet printer.

Lots of Canon and HP wide format models that combine thermoheads and pigment ink. Down to A3+ size. With less clog issues and lower ink waste on cleaning processes if compared to Epson models. Actually HP thermohead technology was used with pigment inks before Epsons converted part of their printer range to pigment. Encad wide formats with UV resistant ink for example. HP officejet and other desktop models often have/had a black pigment head and the rest dye inks. HP has a choice to equip their wide formats with their own developed thermoheads / piëzo heads or third party piëzoheads. They often select the thermoheads where one would expect them to go for piëzo, a nice example is the Latex printer and fast dual sided web printers that compete with offset machines. The real problem is that third party manufacturers are not able to make good pigment inks for thermoheads. Dye is more or less alright, pigment and dye for piëzo too. Ink medium burning in on the nozzle chamber walls is the thing to tackle in thermohead ink design.

I'm a new owner of a Kyson dye system for my Canon pro9000. Any suggestions/photos of installed systems appreciated and how you went about the installation. Found Kyson's instructions completely lacking in real helpful detail. Also any source for inexpensive auto resettable chips, Hate to take my existing ones off before I get the Kyson installed

Barry Pendergast wrote: I'm a new owner of a Kyson dye system for my Canon pro9000. Any suggestions/photos of installed systems appreciated and how you went about the installation. Found Kyson's instructions completely lacking in real helpful detail. Also any source for inexpensive auto resettable chips, Hate to take my existing ones off before I get the Kyson installed

My best advice is to return it. I now own a Pro9000 in addition to my i9900, which no longer uses the Kyson system. I had constant flow problems (gaps were showing up in the lines), and the tanks had nowhere near the amount of ink advertised. I can certainly agree though - their setup instructions were pretty much useless. As for the chips - if nothing else, pick up a chip-resetter from ebay for about $20. -- My ever-growing flickr gallery: http://www.flickr.com/photos/dsbphotography

I do have a resetter but think the autoreset chips I got from a Canadian source look promising - just turning the printer on/off seems to reset them. I should have video taped the performance of trying to make the Vintax system work! Would have made a great YouTube disaster movie. Thanks goodness the rubber gloves kept me mostly clean. I am experimenting refilling cartridges while they are still in the printer - sort of midway approach

I know you are all using the word Kyson here...are they different to Lyson (of the UK)? http://www.marrutt.com/r2880-bulk.php

hangerhead wrote: I know you are all using the word Kyson here...are they different to Lyson (of the UK)?

Yes. I use Kyson but would not use Lyson. No other comment.

Zone8 wrote: Yes. I use Kyson but would not use Lyson. No other comment.

Could you elaborate a little more? Iw as going to buy the Lyson system to go with an Epson R2880 I have on order, along with some Lyson papes satin lustre and the 13" wide Satin Roll) and I would prefer not to make a daft mistake if there is better info available.

Just for information here are the instructions for the Vintax System - will leave it to readers to access its value. If there is anybody who has used the Vintax system successfully they may want to comment and make suggestions: http://www.jspeer.com/barrypendergast/Pro9000_Vintax_System.pdf

why not lyson? they have a good replutation in the UK

Zone8 wrote:

hangerhead wrote: I know you are all using the word Kyson here...are they different to Lyson (of the UK)?

Yes. I use Kyson but would not use Lyson. No other comment.

where in that thread does it say Kyson inks are a fraud? Have replys been deleted from it?

Madcat207 wrote: For several months I have been running a Kyson CIS; of course, some new info about it came out: http://photo.net/digital-darkroom-forum/00JRDw So... now I don't really want to go order refills (as I am in need). I am running a Canon i9900, and having a CIS has been really handy, so I need an alternative. Is MIS my only solution, or are there other viable alternatives?

2008 thread lol