The TRUTH about dye prints both Canon & Epson
in [Printers]
|
Prev: Borderless laser printers
Next: I960 color problem
From: Larry on 21 Mar 2005 09:54 The truth of the matter appears to be that the dye ink prints from ALL dye based inkjet printers will fade if they are abused,,, PERIOD. The problem seems to be that they dont get treated properly after printing. I have an on-going experiment at my house (average home, 1 smoker, 1 non smoker, normal appliances generating normal levels of Ozome, Co and Co2, with forced hot air heat.) Results after 1 full year: Prints left laying on a shelf, out of sunlight, top sheet covered with acid free matting, cupboard kept closed 99% (or more) of the time. No noticable fading or color shift, on Canon prints from i960, i950, (and 6 months storage of prints from ip4000). Epson prints under same conditions as above from Epson 785 EPX, same length of time (1 year except for prints from R200 which are at 6 months)Gave identical results. Prints left on an OPEN (no cupboard door) shelf NOT covered with anything but NOT in sunlight.. Noticable shift toward Magenta in the Canon prints, Noticable shift toward cyan in Epson prints. Prints placed in an acid free photo envelope (clasp closure) One envelope kept in closed cupboard, one kept on open shelf Neither were in sunlight: No change whatever that I can discern with naked eye in Epson or Canon prints, when compared side by side with new prints of the same photos. Photos left in a "Photo Album" with clear plastic overlay on every page: Some fading on prints with the book that was left out on coffee table in living room, which alows sunlight to fall on pages about 2 hours a day. Same for Epson & Canon prints. Album that was stored in closet and taken out once monthly and paged through (mimicking family perusal) No easily noticeable fading of either Canon or Epson prints. 6 photos from Epson 6 photos from Canon and 6 photos from Olympus Dye-sub printer all properly matted, framed, Under UV glass and hung on Den wall, recieving 20 to 25 minutes Reflected sunlight per day. No noticeable change on Epson or Canon prints. HOWEVER, the dye sub prints seem to have some color shift along the EDGES of the prints. (none of the prints have glass touching the prints. Matting is cut to fit VERY tight to seal out airflow. All of my test prints were printed on Illford Premium Glossy and printed with OEM ink @ 8x10". (except of course the dye-subs which are proprietary Olympus Paper). All the "stacked/shelved" prints had seperator sheets of non acid tissue between them (both the "closed cupboard" and "open shelf" tests. My "Control" prints were 5x7 and 8x10 prints done on Fuji machines at the local Wal-Mart and stored/displayed under identical conditions. One of the framed, matted, uv glass covered prints faded HORRIBLY, for reasons I cant discern as yet. The rest are still good except the ones on an open shelf.. They ALL faded at the edge nearest the light. Though this is not a scientific test, it IS a real world test that showed (to my satisfaction at least) that "Instant Fading" usually is caused by poor treatment or poor storage methods. I have a dozen or so photos just "stuck- up" on the walls of my computer/photography room (used to be a darkroom) and I notice that they start fading after about 3 months, and the ones nearest to where I sit for hours on end editing and sorting ect turn yellow (the paper) very shortly after being hung (cigarette smoke will do that) The Ionic ar cleaner in this room is 4 times larger than the square footage requires, and gets cleaned every 2 days, but only seems to protect the photos at the far end of the room from me <G>. As an aside, I accidently left a black leather briefcase containing 80 8x10s from both Canon and Epson in my truck for 18 months (I thought it had been lost), where temperature ranged from over 130 deg F (summer parked in the sun) to minus 10 deg F (coldest weather this winter). The prints still looked pristene, though a plastic ruler, and several other plastic items in the case were warped and distorted by the summer heat. All of these test prints will remain where they are until March 20, 2006. Sorry about the time lag, but the only way to do a "Real World" test, is in "Real World" time. I almost forgot to mention that each room in my house has an ION type air cleaner running 24/7/365 (similar too (but not as costly as)the ones advertized ad nauseum on American TV). I dont know if they have ANY bearing on the test results. I did this test because I had told some of my customers that I would replace their prints if they had any fading problems with properly stored photos, and I wanted to know what I could expect. -- Larry Lynch Mystic, Ct.
From: measekite on 21 Mar 2005 12:35 I wonder what results you would get with pigmented inks? Larry wrote: >The truth of the matter appears to be that the dye ink prints from ALL dye >based inkjet printers will fade if they are abused,,, PERIOD. > >The problem seems to be that they dont get treated properly after printing. > >I have an on-going experiment at my house (average home, 1 smoker, 1 non >smoker, normal appliances generating normal levels of Ozome, Co and Co2, with >forced hot air heat.) > >Results after 1 full year: > >Prints left laying on a shelf, out of sunlight, top sheet covered with acid >free matting, cupboard kept closed 99% (or more) of the time. No noticable >fading or color shift, on Canon prints from i960, i950, (and 6 months storage >of prints from ip4000). Epson prints under same conditions as above from >Epson 785 EPX, same length of time (1 year except for prints from R200 which >are at 6 months)Gave identical results. > >Prints left on an OPEN (no cupboard door) shelf NOT covered with anything but >NOT in sunlight.. Noticable shift toward Magenta in the Canon prints, >Noticable shift toward cyan in Epson prints. > >Prints placed in an acid free photo envelope (clasp closure) One envelope >kept in closed cupboard, one kept on open shelf Neither were in sunlight: >No change whatever that I can discern with naked eye in Epson or Canon >prints, when compared side by side with new prints of the same photos. > >Photos left in a "Photo Album" with clear plastic overlay on every page: > >Some fading on prints with the book that was left out on coffee table in >living room, which alows sunlight to fall on pages about 2 hours a day. >Same for Epson & Canon prints. > >Album that was stored in closet and taken out once monthly and paged through >(mimicking family perusal) No easily noticeable fading of either Canon or >Epson prints. > >6 photos from Epson 6 photos from Canon and 6 photos from Olympus Dye-sub >printer all properly matted, framed, Under UV glass and hung on Den wall, >recieving 20 to 25 minutes Reflected sunlight per day. No noticeable change >on Epson or Canon prints. HOWEVER, the dye sub prints seem to have some color >shift along the EDGES of the prints. (none of the prints have glass touching >the prints. Matting is cut to fit VERY tight to seal out airflow. > >All of my test prints were printed on Illford Premium Glossy and printed >with OEM ink @ 8x10". (except of course the dye-subs which are proprietary >Olympus Paper). > >All the "stacked/shelved" prints had seperator sheets of non acid tissue >between them (both the "closed cupboard" and "open shelf" tests. > >My "Control" prints were 5x7 and 8x10 prints done on Fuji machines at the >local Wal-Mart and stored/displayed under identical conditions. One of the >framed, matted, uv glass covered prints faded HORRIBLY, for reasons I cant >discern as yet. The rest are still good except the ones on an open shelf.. >They ALL faded at the edge nearest the light. > >Though this is not a scientific test, it IS a real world test that showed (to >my satisfaction at least) that "Instant Fading" usually is caused by poor >treatment or poor storage methods. I have a dozen or so photos just "stuck- >up" on the walls of my computer/photography room (used to be a darkroom) and >I notice that they start fading after about 3 months, and the ones nearest to >where I sit for hours on end editing and sorting ect turn yellow (the paper) >very shortly after being hung (cigarette smoke will do that) The Ionic ar >cleaner in this room is 4 times larger than the square footage requires, and >gets cleaned every 2 days, but only seems to protect the photos at the far >end of the room from me <G>. > >As an aside, I accidently left a black leather briefcase containing 80 8x10s >from both Canon and Epson in my truck for 18 months (I thought it had been >lost), where temperature ranged from over 130 deg F (summer parked in the >sun) to minus 10 deg F (coldest weather this winter). The prints still >looked pristene, though a plastic ruler, and several other plastic items in >the case were warped and distorted by the summer heat. > >All of these test prints will remain where they are until March 20, 2006. >Sorry about the time lag, but the only way to do a "Real World" test, is in >"Real World" time. > >I almost forgot to mention that each room in my house has an ION type air >cleaner running 24/7/365 (similar too (but not as costly as)the ones >advertized ad nauseum on American TV). I dont know if they have ANY bearing >on the test results. > >I did this test because I had told some of my customers that I would replace >their prints if they had any fading problems with properly stored photos, and >I wanted to know what I could expect. > > > > > >
From: Larry on 21 Mar 2005 13:47 In article <xBD%d.20831$Pz7.18327(a)newssvr13.news.prodigy.com>, measekite(a)yahoo.com says... > I wonder what results you would get with pigmented inks? > Since most of my customers want glossy prints (cant say why, I preffer a MATTE print under glass myself) I have not persued it yet. My whole point was that PROPER CARE is a bigger factor than most people seem to think. Regular photo prints from the Photo Shop on the corner would fade nearly as fast as dye type ink-jet prints if not put away and kept out of the light. I have several Canon & Epson dye prints that are old enough (5 - 6 years) that I dont remember which model printer they were done on, but they have been in an album in a closet (where all un-mounted prints should be) and they look damn fine to me. -- Larry Lynch Mystic, Ct.
From: Caitlin on 21 Mar 2005 16:55 "Larry" <larrylynch3rd(a)comcast.net> wrote in message news:MPG.1ca8e0e5c0e74216989787(a)news.individual.NET... > In article <xBD%d.20831$Pz7.18327(a)newssvr13.news.prodigy.com>, > measekite(a)yahoo.com says... >> I wonder what results you would get with pigmented inks? >> > > Since most of my customers want glossy prints (cant say why, I preffer a > MATTE print under glass myself) I have not persued it yet. > > My whole point was that PROPER CARE is a bigger factor than most people > seem > to think. > > Regular photo prints from the Photo Shop on the corner would fade nearly > as > fast as dye type ink-jet prints if not put away and kept out of the light. > > I have several Canon & Epson dye prints that are old enough (5 - 6 years) > that I dont remember which model printer they were done on, but they have > been in an album in a closet (where all un-mounted prints should be) and > they > look damn fine to me. > > > -- > Larry Lynch > Mystic, Ct. Were your 'control' Walmart prints done in a photo lab, or one of those digital print booths? Without a doubt the quality of traditional film prints can vary drastically depending on the quality of the chemicals, paper and washing. The digital booths that are popping up are inkjet prints though (Though I'm not sure on the exact technology) For a true test, get photos printed at a professional quality lab, on archival paper - I think you will find that they last much better than those Walmart prints. Sadly though, even framed photos, though the fading rate will slow dramatically, will still fade over much longer periods of time. I work in a film archive, and can certainly vouch for the fading of traditional media - even in enclosed light free conditions. The newer pigment printers have Gloss optimisers in models such as the Epson R1800 and should resolve some peoples concerns about getting good glossy prints with pigment ink.
From: Larry on 21 Mar 2005 17:05
In article <423f42f1$0$27855$61c65585(a)un-2park-reader- 01.sydney.pipenetworks.com.au>, caitlin_online_spamtrap(a)hotmail.com says... > > "Larry" <larrylynch3rd(a)comcast.net> wrote in message > news:MPG.1ca8e0e5c0e74216989787(a)news.individual.NET... > > In article <xBD%d.20831$Pz7.18327(a)newssvr13.news.prodigy.com>, > > measekite(a)yahoo.com says... > >> I wonder what results you would get with pigmented inks? > >> > > > > Since most of my customers want glossy prints (cant say why, I preffer a > > MATTE print under glass myself) I have not persued it yet. > > > > My whole point was that PROPER CARE is a bigger factor than most people > > seem > > to think. > > > > Regular photo prints from the Photo Shop on the corner would fade nearly > > as > > fast as dye type ink-jet prints if not put away and kept out of the light. > > > > I have several Canon & Epson dye prints that are old enough (5 - 6 years) > > that I dont remember which model printer they were done on, but they have > > been in an album in a closet (where all un-mounted prints should be) and > > they > > look damn fine to me. > > > > > > -- > > Larry Lynch > > Mystic, Ct. > > Were your 'control' Walmart prints done in a photo lab, or one of those > digital print booths? Without a doubt the quality of traditional film prints > can vary drastically depending on the quality of the chemicals, paper and > washing. The digital booths that are popping up are inkjet prints though > (Though I'm not sure on the exact technology) > > For a true test, get photos printed at a professional quality lab, on > archival paper - I think you will find that they last much better than those > Walmart prints. > > Sadly though, even framed photos, though the fading rate will slow > dramatically, will still fade over much longer periods of time. I work in a > film archive, and can certainly vouch for the fading of traditional media - > even in enclosed light free conditions. > > The newer pigment printers have Gloss optimisers in models such as the Epson > R1800 and should resolve some peoples concerns about getting good glossy > prints with pigment ink. > > "Control" prints were from 35mm film on Fuji Paper, done by Wal-Mart. -- Larry Lynch Mystic, Ct. |