Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (
More info?)
David Chien's comments here should be taken with a very large grain of
MSG. He has (and probably intentionally) taken numerous statements out
of context, and exaggerated those as well.
Epson did indeed have a problem with a failure of their light cyan dye
ink in a series of ink formulations, and also indeed Wilhelm's tests did
not reveal the problem. However, it should also be noted that the vast
majority of people who bought and used those printers and their inks had
NO problems whatsoever with this fading, and that is why it was missed
by Wilhelm. There is still not absolute consensus on what caused the
cyan failure, although it appears to have been related to high humidity
and air flow while the print dried during the first 24-48 hours, and the
use of microporous papers. The 4 color dye printers did not manifest
this problem, and even the 6 color models that did, kept some people up
at night trying to figure out HOW to make the ink fade. In other words,
the problem was hardly universal, and that is indeed why it got missed.
Personally, although I have done no tests, I suspect their are other
environmental issue than simply air movement and humidity involved. AT
one point, some suggested ozone levels might been the culprit, but I
believe that has since been put into the "unlikely" category.
However, more importantly, the problem has been resolved through
reformulation of the inks and papers, and again, these were dye inks.
No one has found Epson's pigment color inks to fail prematurely,
including the Durabrite and Ultrachrome inks. Those inks are used in
most of the C and CX printers (the early C6X series didn't), and the
2200/2100, and in the R800, R1800 and some RX printers.
Also, there are dozens if not more pigment and hybrid inks that are
available as 3rd party inks that work in Epson printers.
The newer HP dye inks have good fade resistance if used with swellable
polymer papers. Epson found the same thing, and introduced Colorlife
paper using the same technology for their dye printers, for those
wishing that technology, but it is vulnerable to wet. On the other
hand, some of the microporous papers Epson produces makes their dye inks
waterproof, or very nearly so, once dry.
Art
Caitlin wrote:
> "David Chien" <chiendh@uci.edu> wrote in message
> news:d2a5qg$nuo$1@news.service.uci.edu...
>
>>the best thing about this is that it uses the 'same' (hopefully) 8-ink set
>>as the regular sized printer (R800 was it? or R900?) with the clear-coat.
>>
>>Following notes for those looking at this printer from the archival end of
>>things --- since this printer is supposed to make long-lasting prints.
>>
>>------
>>
>>That model was tested by Digital Camera magazine in Japan in both indoor
>>and outdoor conditions. the most recent tests show that this 8-ink Epson
>>has the lowest color shift of the printers tested (Epson & Canon latest +
>>Fujifilm Pictrography). This means that hopefully, prints from the R1800
>>will last a decent number of months in open display, and longer (decades)
>>in cold storage. (You never know... but hopefully....)
>>
>>Most other inkjet printers, forget it - search Yahoo on the POV Image
>>Epson Inkjet Orange Fading mess that also applies to almost all
>>non-pigmented inkjet prints made today. basically, dye = fades quickly
>>because UV + enviromental hazards break the chemical bonds quite easily
>>and quickly.
>>
>>http://members.cox.net/rmeyer9/epson/
>>
>>For archival prints, see also the Epson 2200, and other archival print
>>products from www.inkjetmall.com.
>>
>>In the end, don't expect prints to last all that long -- all of the ones
>>I've printed over the years and stuck up on my work walls have faded in a
>>few months. Really have to protect them a lot more than most other medium
>>because these are all water soluble-based inks.
>>
>>Also, note, in Japan, the same model numbered PX-G5000 notes that it's
>>30/80/200 years for open display/lighted/album lifespans... but again,
>>don't expect them to hang around that long!
>>
>>The optimal display condition lifespans can also be seen at this place
>>(different set of tests vs Epson)
>>http://www.wilhelm-research.com/
>>
>>Keep in mind Wilhelm imaging is also the site that posted a lot of
>>optimistic numbers for the Epson 870/etc. series before POV Image and
>>http://members.cox.net/rmeyer9/epson/ appeared and showed that their tests
>>didn't reflect reality by a dozen or so years (basically, they said it
>>took years, people saw their prints fading in weeks/months).
>>
>>Why else would Epson offer a full 100% buyback on the Epson 870s and
>>others to so many people out there, including myself at that time? They
>>basically realized that their claims didn't match up with reality, and the
>>lawyers knew that, too.
>>
>>On the other hand, it's not to say you can't have prints that'll last --
>>here, i've got prints goign all the way back to the HP Paintjet days (10+
>>years ago) stored in a folder in cold storage in my room, and they all
>>look very good/great! Basically, stop air & light (UV/IR) from attacking
>>the print surface, and you'll be fine! (ie. treat it like the Mona Lisa
>>or Constitution stored under whatever they use and you'll be okay)
>
>
> Curious to know what you mean when you say cold storage? In the Archive work
> this generally means sub-zero (Celsius). Do you store your prints in a
> freezer in your room? 'Fine' is relative of course. Some photos you might
> want to keep for a hell of a lot longer than 10 years!
>
>
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram