CLI-8 refills - Ink permanence vs. accuracy vs. gamut

[martin0reg]

.. many photographs are given to friends .. who are taping it to refrigerators ..

 

[marceltho]

martinOreg wrote
.. many photographs are given to friends .. who are taping it to refrigerators ..

wilko wrote
Longevity is no longer a problem. Digital photos are stored on hard drives or recordable media. So what if print outs fade after a few years. Just print out further copies.

Be careful not to compare your own usage of photos with some other ( very experienced ) people here in the forum. I think there are different kind of people, with different kind of needs:

If you are a professional photographer, who makes and sells family pictures at a price of $100.00 each, you need longevity, as these pictures are on the wall for many, many years. He can't say to his customer, if the image starts to fade in 2 years, just come back, and I will print you a new one.....

For myself, I need accurate colors, and as my 500 brochures a year, end up in a drawer ( if I am lucky that is...), longevity is less of a problem for me.

Then there are the people who just print a lot for themselves, and they found the forum, because of the " tan " on their images, after starting with 3rd party ink and paper. They take the effort to optimize refilling, after they realize that refilling can come at a small ( color ) cost.

Then there are the people who do nothing and know nothing. They buy a cheap inkjet and just print away. After that they buy cheap refilled carts on Ebay, and probably don't even notice any difference. And if they do, they probably accept it, as they will say : but what can you expect from a $ 60.00 printer ?

I just wanted to say, that not everyone's need is the same, but we all need input from the more experienced professionals here on this forum.

 

[tony22]

I just wanted to say, that not everyone's need is the same, but we all need input from the more experienced professionals here on this forum.

I agree, Marceltho. In my case, while new to this forum, I've been printing in a color managed workflow for many years. Since moving to a Canon Pro9000 Mk.II I've found this site as a means to learn how to make best use of this new printer. I don't sell my work, but as an enthusiast photographer I am quite critical of the photos I produce for friends and family. I want them to look right and last a while.

 

[strobemonkey]

@marceltho - well said!
As a photography enthusiast, I need colour accuracy and longevity. So far I've never been happy with 3rd party inks.

 

[pharmacist]

@marceltho - well said!
As a photography enthusiast, I need colour accuracy and longevity. So far I've never been happy with 3rd party inks.

Then I think you should have a look at Epson printers using pigment inks: aftermarket pigment inks like Image Specialists/Inkrepublic/OCP do perform very well in longevity. I have tested both Inktec CLI-8 and Hobbicolors UW-8: Inktec faded rapidly in weeks considerably. Hobbicolors UW-8 will last about half a year before noticable fading when exposed to full sun and in free air. I have made prints with Image Specialists IM-K4 on my Epson Pro 3800 and some prints have been exposed towards the sun and in free air and not a single amount of fading to be seen now about 2 years ago: not a single amount of fading to be seen, but the cheap paper containing OBA's (optical brigthener agents) tends to become a bit yellowish, but the prints a fresh and no sign of fading at all.

 

[Grandad35]

.... I need colour accuracy and longevity.

If you need longevity, go with pigmented OEM inks and quality paper, coat them with a UV absorbant coating, them mount them under museum glass after they are completely dry. If you need "color accuracy", I'm afraid that you're facing a real struggle. The word "accuracy" means "the quality of being near to the true value". I have a friend who shoots artwork for a museum so that they can document the work and also sell prints (not low cost versions) in their museum shop. This is a case where they truly need "accurate colors". I can't disclose his lighting and processing tricks of the trade, but in general:

1. You need to shoot under lighting conditions with a reproducible color temperature light source and to have your camera profiled for exactly those conditions, since the image that a camera captures very much depends on the light source. Getting an accurate image also assumes that all of the colors fall within the camera's ability to record them (it's color gamut). There are colors that our eyes can see that a camera will not record accurately.
2. You cannot use any editing software to change the color values in the least. Since the real world color is seldom as pleasing as the "punched up" colors that we like to look at, most photos will appear as slightly washed out and desaturated when compared to how we are used to seeing photos. Note that when you have a photo printed by a printing service, they usually "adjust" the lighting and colors to make the image more pleasing - make sure that you tell them to turn all automatic corrections off.
3. You must print using the Absolute colorimetric rendering intent, or the colors will be modified by the printer driver. If any colors fall outside the printer's gamut, they will be clipped at the edge color, so all of the colors in the image must fall within the gamut of the printer/ink/paper combination that you are using. This may or may not be a problem. Note that traditional (wet chemical) prints usually have a smaller gamut than a good inkjet.
4. Not critical, but a point to consider - most good cameras can capture colors out of the gamut of printers and monitors. Some colors may fall within the gamut of the printer, but out of the gamut of the monitor. Even though these colors will print correctly, they will not appear correctly on your monitor.

I know that this is probably "over the top", but I wanted to make the point that what most people refer to as "color accuracy" is really "the color that I remember in my mind's eye", and that each of us will have a different idea of what those colors are.

I have been using 3rd party ink to refill for several years with a custom printer profile, and am quite pleased with the results. Without a custom profile, this would not be the case.

 

[RMM]

I agree with everyone that has posted so far here.

I use dye inks because of their low cost and ease of use.

If I was concerned about print longevity or if I were a professional selling prints I would be using pigment inks.

 

[mikling]

Do not forget that many of the OEM dye ink ratings have specific conditions attached to them i.e. read the fine print. They last longer for sure and have wider gamut tuned to the specific printer RIP. But at the end of the day, using aftermarket ink is because of one's desires to save money. If one can afford OEM and want the best; it is pointless to compare aftermarket refilling and OEM. They are worlds apart on relative costs.

The question of " is it worth it? " will vary to each individual's personal situation and what they are willing to pay for that extra bit of performance. For many on this forum, the answer is known. OEM is not worth it for them but again that is not a global truth.

There is an alternative that is readily available. Keep a set of OEMs on the side. Whenever you think you need OEM, just change the cartridges! Simple enough? That way you get the best of both worlds. Economy when you can live with the limitations of aftermarket and want to save money or longevity with OEM and that tiny extra gamut at the extremes when you want the best. Do note though that tiny extra gamut might not be even noticeable to most after the proper rendering intent is applied and the adaptive process of our eye brain combination kicks in.

There is no need to be twiddling the thumbs and wondering; you can have both.

If longevity is an issue then you should be aware of this aspect. Printing with aftermarket inks on swellable papers like the Ilford Galerie CLASSIC line or HP Premium Glossy will likely last much longer than printing with OEM inks on microporous papers. Using OEM inks on swellable will tilt the balance again.

I think the above scenario is good food for thought and in the end it is up to the individual how much they are willing to pay to get the extra performance that OEM offers.

Now as an aside, if you had a printer that can use both dye ink and pigment then there are even further options. Take for example the Epson SP1400. Every time I see this printer for sale at $149 at Epson clearance store I am left wondering why more people have not adopted this wide carriage printer yet. In comparison to the Pro9000 which prints better but is dye ink only the SP1400 can use dye and pigment. With dye ink, the 9000 is superior but only in critical side by side comparisons. For most, the prints are indistinguishable. With a good pigment inkset, the SP1400 I think moves ahead by a little bit with better subtlety of tones with a similar trait of the R2880. What is interesting about the 1400 is that it actually does not waste as much ink as the more expensive models. Even refills with pigment ink will cost a fraction of what an OEM cartridge costs for the Pro9000 and will offer superior longevity than using OEM dye ink and papers. Also a similar strategy can be employed with the dye only printers where one can keep dye ink ink cartridges as well as pigment ink cartridges and switch them out as needed. The only con to this is that the SP1400 is a slower printer than the Pro9000.

There are options, choices and each one offers pros and cons. However, in the end value to the user is based on each individual's situation as affordability varies.

 

[Grandad35]

As to the color capability of 3rd party vs. OEM inks, I compared the Canon profile for their ink and paper with my custom profile for my ink and Kirkland paper. The following is a comparison the the color gamuts. The canon gamut has about 10% more volume, and that corresponds to an average of 3% more width in each of the 3 dimensions.

 

[tony22]

There is an alternative that is readily available. Keep a set of OEMs on the side. Whenever you think you need OEM, just change the cartridges! Simple enough? That way you get the best of both worlds. Economy when you can live with the limitations of aftermarket and want to save money or longevity with OEM and that tiny extra gamut at the extremes when you want the best. Do note though that tiny extra gamut might not be even noticeable to most after the proper rendering intent is applied and the adaptive process of our eye brain combination kicks in.

Now this is a great idea! A question though: is there an effective way of flushing the remains of the ink currently being used so as not to contaminate the other?

As to the Epson 1400, I seriously considered it but in my own case after 10 or so years using Epson printers I just got tired of the clogging problems from infrequent use. What happens in my case is that I may not use the printer for quite some time, and then when I have a bunch of content I'll be printing away for a while. I'd found this kind of behaviour not ideal for Epsons IME. I decided to try the Canon since, at least if it happens with this printer, I can remove and carefully clean the head.

Grandad, you are absolutely right of course. In a relative sense when I said accuracy and longevity it was not with respect to true absolute or archival extremes. I've done very careful controlled photgraphy of my sister's artwork so I can appreciate what you've said (and that is not an easy job!). In this case my comments were with regard to optimizing the use of a dye based printer to achieve the best that can be had from it. I have no problem considering a 3rd party ink and developing profiles, if that will garner an output with an equivalent (or even better) gamut and longevity as the OEMs on a paper which would take advantage of these non-OEM inks.