The TRUTH about dye prints both Canon & Epson

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.

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.

In article ,
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.

"Larry" wrote in message
T...
In article ,
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.

In article , Larry
writes

My whole point was that PROPER CARE is a bigger factor than most people seem
to think.

That is exactly where Epson fouled up - they actually advertised the
fact that they could be left in the open and handled "normally" without
any proper care.

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.

The tests undertaken by Henry Wilhelm (under much more stringent and
repeatable conditions than yours) prove that this is not the case.
Typical corner store photos, whether on Fuji or Kodak paper, typically
last more than 10x and up to 1000x times longer than Epson or Canon dye
ink glossy prints when left in open air. You might also take a look at
Bob Meyer's page detailing some of the tests he did over 5 years ago
with Epson dye materials - at least one of those tests compared the fade
directly with a a print from a Fuji Frontier "photo store" machine.
--
Kennedy
Yes, Socrates himself is particularly missed;
A lovely little thinker, but a bugger when he's ****ed.
Python Philosophers (replace 'nospam' with 'kennedym' when replying)

In article 423f42f1$0$27855$61c65585@un-2park-reader-
01.sydney.pipenetworks.com.au, says...

"Larry" wrote in message
T...
In article ,
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.

In article ,
says...
In article , Larry
writes

My whole point was that PROPER CARE is a bigger factor than most people seem
to think.

That is exactly where Epson fouled up - they actually advertised the
fact that they could be left in the open and handled "normally" without
any proper care.

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.

The tests undertaken by Henry Wilhelm (under much more stringent and
repeatable conditions than yours) prove that this is not the case.
Typical corner store photos, whether on Fuji or Kodak paper, typically
last more than 10x and up to 1000x times longer than Epson or Canon dye
ink glossy prints when left in open air. You might also take a look at
Bob Meyer's page detailing some of the tests he did over 5 years ago
with Epson dye materials - at least one of those tests compared the fade
directly with a a print from a Fuji Frontier "photo store" machine.


Having no "Quality" lab in my area except for one I havent tried yet (New
Mystic Color Lab), has been the bane of my existance as far as film is
concerned. The prints form Wal-Mart dont look good, and dont last well.
(they tend to crack, fade and curl rapidly).


--
Larry Lynch
Mystic, Ct.

Here is a test you can perform. Take a real photo and one you made with
a pigmented ink printer and lay then o a table. Now pour sulphuric acid
evenly on both. I bet they both will look crappy within seconds.

Case in point, Larry did a real world test in the way they were used.
He then saw or did not see changes.

Kennedy McEwen wrote:

In article , Larry
writes


My whole point was that PROPER CARE is a bigger factor than most
people seem
to think.

That is exactly where Epson fouled up - they actually advertised the
fact that they could be left in the open and handled "normally"
without any proper care.

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.

The tests undertaken by Henry Wilhelm (under much more stringent and
repeatable conditions than yours) prove that this is not the case.
Typical corner store photos, whether on Fuji or Kodak paper, typically
last more than 10x and up to 1000x times longer than Epson or Canon
dye ink glossy prints when left in open air. You might also take a
look at Bob Meyer's page detailing some of the tests he did over 5
years ago with Epson dye materials - at least one of those tests
compared the fade directly with a a print from a Fuji Frontier "photo
store" machine.

"Larry" wrote in message
T...
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.

snip -

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).

First, and no big deal, but I have no idea what 'Illford Premium Glossy' is. I
am aware of the 'Ilford Galerie' series, which includes a 'Smooth Gloss Paper',
a 'Classic Gloss Paper' and a new 'Smooth Highgloss Media'. Which is 'Illford
Premium Glossy'?

Second, and it is a big deal, your observations would probably be more useful
[and you may be doing yourself a favor] if each print was done on the vendors'
own media. In my experience, it does make a difference. And even within a
vendors line, there are differences. As an example, Epson's 'ColorLife' paper
has a surface that softens to receive the ink and then later hardens to protect
the dyes better than an 'instant dry' paper which leaves open pores through
which atmospheric contaminants can attack the dyes.

In article ,
says...
Here is a test you can perform. Take a real photo and one you made with
a pigmented ink printer and lay then o a table. Now pour sulphuric acid
evenly on both. I bet they both will look crappy within seconds.

Case in point, Larry did a real world test in the way they were used.
He then saw or did not see changes.


I really dont care whether people agree with what I find in my little
experiments, I just throw it out there for people to use or not use as they
see fit.

What I learned from it (so far) is that any customers that need re-prints due
to fading in a time period as short as a year are not storing or mounting the
prints properly.

I can compensate for that when I give them a reprint. (by matting & framing
it for them, or putting it in a "proper" album for them).


--
Larry Lynch
Mystic, Ct.