- Joined
- Dec 27, 2014
- Messages
- 6,056
- Reaction score
- 7,228
- Points
- 363
- Location
- Germany
- Printer Model
- L805, WF2010, ET8550
I hve received a newsletter by Aardenburg Imaging that they have uploaded a range of new test reports which are running already since quite a while - most for more than 2.5 years. (you need to register as a member to get access to the data but it's free).
https://www.aardenburg-imaging.com/light-fade-test-results/
@mikling with Precisioncolors submitted several inks for testing which I appreciate very very much since this is the first time to my knowledge that a non-OEM refill ink supplier is doing this. But this directly shows the limited use with this action - no other company - from discount to (claimed) premium refill ink suppliers - Lyson, ConeColor etc - you name it - are not willing or interested - to publish comparable data of their offerings , marketing claims about superiority is one thing, decent data to compare with would be much better . We have discussed this here in detail already, that the majority of refill ink users goes by the lowest price first, and performance is last. You can compare as well OEM to non-OEM inks with the Aardenburg data but that totally excludes an assessment of the price/performance ratio. I have done quite a lot of fading tests (as per my limited measures) just for this reason - there is no decent data available from any of such ink suppliers, and magazines don't have any interest either; digital stuff, cameras etc are tested down to the last one of millions of pixels, several times by different magazines, good printer tests are quite rare already on the internet and tests of inks don't exist, comparing them by pricing, gamut, longevity, gloss etc so that an interested user could make his own decision.
Aardenburg is addressing another issue - detrimental effects of optical brighteners which fade as well under UV exposure and react with the TiO2 causing a yellowing effect which is a commonly used whitener in paper coatings. The high exposure UV lamps during the fading tests bleach away stains from the reaction of the OBA's with the TiO2 and introduce errors to the fading results. I cannot judge the validity of these concerns, I just see that most of the inkjet papers come with OBA's with varying amounts which one exception - the HP Premium Plus Photo Paper Glossy is free of OBA's and this paper has an as good white level as many other papers with OBA's.
I don't need OBA's, I have seen them fading faster than lots of inks during my fading tests, so they are gone after some exposure, and if prints are viewed inside - living rooms etc - there is no UV radiation to excite the OBA's at all - so what - they are not needed under normal circumstances.
https://www.aardenburg-imaging.com/light-fade-test-results/
@mikling with Precisioncolors submitted several inks for testing which I appreciate very very much since this is the first time to my knowledge that a non-OEM refill ink supplier is doing this. But this directly shows the limited use with this action - no other company - from discount to (claimed) premium refill ink suppliers - Lyson, ConeColor etc - you name it - are not willing or interested - to publish comparable data of their offerings , marketing claims about superiority is one thing, decent data to compare with would be much better . We have discussed this here in detail already, that the majority of refill ink users goes by the lowest price first, and performance is last. You can compare as well OEM to non-OEM inks with the Aardenburg data but that totally excludes an assessment of the price/performance ratio. I have done quite a lot of fading tests (as per my limited measures) just for this reason - there is no decent data available from any of such ink suppliers, and magazines don't have any interest either; digital stuff, cameras etc are tested down to the last one of millions of pixels, several times by different magazines, good printer tests are quite rare already on the internet and tests of inks don't exist, comparing them by pricing, gamut, longevity, gloss etc so that an interested user could make his own decision.
Aardenburg is addressing another issue - detrimental effects of optical brighteners which fade as well under UV exposure and react with the TiO2 causing a yellowing effect which is a commonly used whitener in paper coatings. The high exposure UV lamps during the fading tests bleach away stains from the reaction of the OBA's with the TiO2 and introduce errors to the fading results. I cannot judge the validity of these concerns, I just see that most of the inkjet papers come with OBA's with varying amounts which one exception - the HP Premium Plus Photo Paper Glossy is free of OBA's and this paper has an as good white level as many other papers with OBA's.
I don't need OBA's, I have seen them fading faster than lots of inks during my fading tests, so they are gone after some exposure, and if prints are viewed inside - living rooms etc - there is no UV radiation to excite the OBA's at all - so what - they are not needed under normal circumstances.