My Ink fade test results are IN
Jun 17, 2019 14:25:08 #
As you may remember back on February 22 of this year I committed to an ink fade test of EOM (Canon) inks versus some generic inks (LD). I now have the results: It is very apparent that the Canon OEM inks are far more fade resistant than the generic inks (in this case). I pulled my test prints from my western facing window last week (June 12). It was exposed in that window for 110 days, as you can see the generic inks faded considerably. AS far as I am concerned Canon OEM are far more fade resistant than the generics. Nothing else to say, use at your own risk. This is proof enough for me. Please examin my test results
Jun 17, 2019 15:12:24 #
Good to know... similar tests can be had with Epson photo inks vs generic third party ink.
...can’t git sumpin’ fer nuttin’.
Now you can listen to Frank Zappa’s “Cheepnis” and gloat about not taking the cheap way out. (I, too, won’t buy off-brand inks.)
https://youtu.be/BiAepXOSjrE
...can’t git sumpin’ fer nuttin’.
Now you can listen to Frank Zappa’s “Cheepnis” and gloat about not taking the cheap way out. (I, too, won’t buy off-brand inks.)
https://youtu.be/BiAepXOSjrE
Jun 17, 2019 15:14:37 #
To check fade resistance of most all ink/paper combinations, go to wilhelm-research.com
Wilhelm Imaging Research in Grinnell Iowa is an authority on archival and preservation for the photographic, digital, and printing industries.
Wilhelm Imaging Research in Grinnell Iowa is an authority on archival and preservation for the photographic, digital, and printing industries.
Jun 17, 2019 15:33:05 #
Thanks Dave.
Another reason why I use OEM ink.
I primarily have Costco print my images so I don't go through a ton of ink at home at $75 a set.
Another reason why I use OEM ink.
I primarily have Costco print my images so I don't go through a ton of ink at home at $75 a set.
Jun 17, 2019 15:50:56 #
Jun 17, 2019 16:44:34 #
what 3rd party ink did you use for the test
Jun 17, 2019 18:38:35 #
Jun 17, 2019 19:28:48 #
The major problem I see with your test is that you are only applying it to a single brand of third party ink. There are many of them out there, and they are most definitely not all the same. Some third party ink cartridge brands are better than others. Some may even be using the same ink supplier as Epson, Canon, HP or whatever.
Jun 17, 2019 23:21:31 #
I agree, just look on Amazon there are probably nearly 100. If you go back to February check the original post, it may shine a little bit more on what the original discussion was about. I recall that we were looking at generic inks as a group. I have used generics for some time it wasn't until that I saw the light, no pun intended.
Jun 18, 2019 07:00:48 #
DaveD65 wrote:
As you may remember back on February 22 of this ye... (show quote)
You got that close to Bigfoot???
Loren - Baguio City
Jun 18, 2019 07:21:14 #
DaveD65 wrote:
As you may remember back on February 22 of this ye... (show quote)
Yes, that makes sense, but most of my printing is text.
Jun 18, 2019 08:02:25 #
Thanks for your research......Sunlight is the harshest exposure over time to almost everything.
Jun 18, 2019 08:18:01 #
All color fades sooner or later depending upon the amount of light they are exposed to. The brighter the light the quicker it fades. A blacktop road fades from black to grey. Thats just one of the reasons museums don't allow flash. I use inkFarm and have prints that havenot faded after 5 years, but it' only a matter of time and light ujntill they fade.
Jun 18, 2019 08:18:58 #
I agree that for the particular ink tested and facing ol' sol in the west or in a room lighted by zenon arc the data is true... but in my living room i have 10y old prints and they still look good. The prints using third party ink are Paraffin coated and/or under frame glass.
Ink is not a complicated substance and can be analyzed by modern technology or the formulation from the OEM ink contract suppliers is there to be copied by a "Xerox" machine and duplicated by 3rd party suppliers. The UV stabilizing chemicals are not expensive and very little is needed to impart stabilization.
Get practical... big $ diff between OEM and after market. Does DaveD65 hope his prints done this year will be in a musem and admired in 2119... a hundred years from today. Sanatra sang a song about Dave's prints.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nNVcmNNR7Vw
Ink is not a complicated substance and can be analyzed by modern technology or the formulation from the OEM ink contract suppliers is there to be copied by a "Xerox" machine and duplicated by 3rd party suppliers. The UV stabilizing chemicals are not expensive and very little is needed to impart stabilization.
Get practical... big $ diff between OEM and after market. Does DaveD65 hope his prints done this year will be in a musem and admired in 2119... a hundred years from today. Sanatra sang a song about Dave's prints.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nNVcmNNR7Vw
Jun 18, 2019 10:34:06 #
Thankyou dpullum, I agree 100%. I was an R & D printing ink chemist for 38 years; printing ink is not rocket-science. I will agree that today's digital printing is a little more complicated than when I started in the off-set business in 1979, especially the current inkjet technology. I'm sure the inkjet formulators are doing exactly what we were doing by comparing the competition's samples to their own product and making adjustments, so they work as good.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.