I have no problem with being wrong. However, If you are truly DIM, then you should be able to explain in what way the two methods I outlined is wrong. I would appreciate learning and I'm sure that other members of this forum would as well. After all learning is one of the reasons that folks, including me, subscribe to this forum.
Originally Posted by D Ink Man
Last edited by gordo; 07-06-2012 at 09:17 PM.
D Ink Man you have baited us all up. We are all waiting.
This only finds the pigment strength/load in the ink..
Originally Posted by D Ink Man
It does not give you the real world mileage test....
Give your highest strength ink and I will run it with a fount that contains a concentrated 80% glycol, as well as 15% - 20% alcohol....
I will then put an ink designed for non solvent fountain solution along with the correct fount and compare the findings
I know which one will have less overall pigment but will trump your ink set in terms of mileage...
It looks like D Ink Man is just a Troll.
Originally Posted by Green Printer
page 3 shows far more effects on ink mileage to prove a bleach test means didly squat
I have contributed to the Print Planet forums for over 3 years. I try to offer intelligent, witty posts and replies from my experience in the printing and ink industry. I am not out to try to please someone, in fact I enjoy the debates of the subjects between the participants. I only post and reply on subjects that I feel I have great expertise on. I read the other headline posts to try to learn something, but rarely participate unless I have a question. There is much to learn here at Print Planet. The trick is to separate the factual from the fictional. It has gotten now to the point where I have been called a troll. My contributions have no value, it's obvious. I feel at this time it is no longer necessary to share my key strokes with the forum. Best wishes to you all. I am sorry I have been a disappointment. D Ink Man
I have a few comments or views on this subject that maybe are of interest to get this topic off the usual skill based view point that tends to lead to endless discussions.
First I would say that I am not so interested in ink mileage per se. What I would be more interested is in ink performance overall. Saving paper seems to me to be much more important than saving ink or saving ink cost.
I am quite happy with the idea that if one wants to talk about the ink mileage of the ink then I would accept the idea that ink strength directly related to ink mileage.
On press things might be different as many examples have been presented have shown but that to me is a different set of questions.
If one thinks of ink mileage as an on press performance value, then you have to do on press testing or monitoring which is not consistent and controllable to the extent that you will get a practical number.
If one thinks of ink mileage as strictly an ink quality issue, I am happy to think in terms of ink strength.
From a manufacturing view point I have never thought playing around with inks was a good idea as long as they are working properly. Changing properties of an ink to get some minor cost benefit can lead to all kinds of other problems with prepress data and other unknowns.
It is just in the nature of skilled people to want to do something, while it is in the nature of a manufacturing manager not to do something that may upset the balance of complicated manufacturing issues.
I don't think calling someone who has offered technical info towards the forum for a long period of time a "troll" is acceptable.
D Ink Man - I'm sure your info if put forth would be appreciated by fellow members so please continue.
This forum is for learning and sharing. This is going to be taken all wrong and I apologize before I make this comment. I had no idea what the troll reference was about and it's association to the Internet. I searched google now I know.
Hello D Ink Man
I valued the contribution you made to this forum, hopefully you will
reconsider your decision to leave.