I used to have a UV protectant lacquer spray that I used on photos which seemed to do a pretty good job. I'm wondering if something like that would protect either of those prints? That's pretty extreme degradation on the refilled inks. Not sure the spray is available any more.
TBerwick wrote:
I used to have a UV protectant lacquer spray that I used on photos which seemed to do a pretty good job. I'm wondering if something like that would protect either of those prints? That's pretty extreme degradation on the refilled inks. Not sure the spray is available any more.
I use UV glass on limited edition prints.
dsmeltz wrote:
I use UV glass on limited edition prints.
That’s a wonderful idea.
I started the test. I think I hit a small bump. I an a retired printing ink chemist (37 years) fading was a major problem all the time. WE used an instrument called a fadometer to that would accellerate long term fade in only days or weeks. My bump is that my printers are printing a little different; the canon ts5020 w/ canon ink is printing a little warmer and the the ts9020 uses an additional gray ink in its process (LD generic ink). I will show the monitor view, a side-by-side version and prints from each printer. I check the fade faster I will place them in a eastern facing window for most of the direct sunlight. I also have each print in an envelope put away for the standard. When ever I see a major change I will post the results. I will post photos from today for all to see the differences that I noted above.
monitor view
side-by-side; canon left, gen. right
ts 5020 canon inks
ts 9020 LD inks
My biggest question is that Bigfoot?
inclinerr wrote:
My biggest question is that Bigfoot?
Yes. He is watching D B Cooper set up a tent in the trees.
TriX
Loc: Raleigh, NC
Thank you Carter - very useful information.
MT Shooter wrote:
My refill ink test is now at 6 years. The pic on the left was printed on an HP Printer (dye ink) using Costco refilled ink cartridges. The pic on the right was the same printer using factory ink cartridges. Same Costco (Kirkland) paper for both.
These prints have hung in the same spot for 6 years this month, NOT exposed to direct sunlight, but in a well lit room. This is why I never use refilled cartridges in my printers.
(Notice the ink color under the Scotch tape on the prints as well, both show protection from fading by the tape!)
Both looked pretty darned nice when hung!
My refill ink test is now at 6 years. The pic on t... (
show quote)
Very good test, thank you for sharing.
It is IMPORTANT for anyone TO KNOW who wants a print of a picture to keep, YOU MUST use DYE INK and not refillable water based inks.
That is the reason for the difference in cost.
Since 2012 ALL original printer manufacturers STOPPED allowing second hand ink cartridge SELLERS to use THEIR original ink formulas of DYE based ink. At that time all ink cartridge manufactures installed electronic ink LEVEL software FOR the cartridge to alert YOU OF LEVELS OF INK INSIDE THE CARTRIDGE.
That idea helped the ink COMPANIES to make more money from you.
Generally cheap ink is water based ink instead of DYE ink because of the cost formulas.
DYE INK has a tendency to clog printer heads and needs cleaning or flushing when the printer sits unused for periods of time.
YOU pay for what you want. To learn about ink, click on the web page below.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inkjet_printing
MT Shooter wrote:
(Notice the ink color under the Scotch tape on the prints as well, both show protection from fading by the tape!)
Both looked pretty darned nice when hung!
So you suggest covering the picture with Scotch tape. Noted!
Finally feel justified in using only expensive Canon inks in my PIXMA Pro9000.
The first line in the displayed Wilhelm Institute data should have been the OEM HP ink and paper and instead, the text says that the OEM is 100 times better. OK! Sloppy presentation, show us the actual data, please.
OEM in my printers over the years is only those supplied with the printer, thereafter 3 party. I am looking at photos on my wall that were printed with non-OEM ink over ten years ago. I have also mentioned in previous discussions that UV protection additives are not expensive and very little provides UV protection. I do not light my home with Xenon Arc lighting! Nor do I have an Ozone generator in my AC system. Further, I do not display my prints to the outside in a SW facing window.
Note that many 3rd Party inks state UV ink... meaning they have additives.
My comments are based on my experience with dye base inks.
MT Shooter wrote:
My refill ink test is now at 6 years. The pic on the left was printed on an HP Printer (dye ink) using Costco refilled ink cartridges. The pic on the right was the same printer using factory ink cartridges. Same Costco (Kirkland) paper for both.
These prints have hung in the same spot for 6 years this month, NOT exposed to direct sunlight, but in a well lit room. This is why I never use refilled cartridges in my printers.
(Notice the ink color under the Scotch tape on the prints as well, both show protection from fading by the tape!)
Both looked pretty darned nice when hung!
My refill ink test is now at 6 years. The pic on t... (
show quote)
Thanks for sharing. I gave up on non-Canon cartridges for other reasons, but this takes away all doubts that I maybe should have tried those refills again. Fortunately (I guess) the cartridges I bought did not even print accurate colors, so I quit after one order. If they had been accurate, I guess I would be seeing the premature fading - yikes!
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.