Differences between dye/pigment technologies

[Paul Verizzo]

@Smile: "Well I like the perfect round dots that piezo heads make, blows canon away." Ummmm..... and this shows when you look at a print? I hardly think so. One and two picoliter droplet sizes are impossible to discern the shape of.

Brother doesn't make the printer you want because they aren't in that marketplace. Epson, Canon, and HP have is sewn up, and the latter is a weak third. Third paper paper manufacturers will often provide ICC profiles for Epson, usually for Canon, and coming in third, HP.

 

[Smile]

@Smile: "Well I like the perfect round dots that piezo heads make, blows canon away." Ummmm..... and this shows when you look at a print? I hardly think so. One and two picoliter droplet sizes are impossible to discern the shape of.

Sure but the black dots are larger size too. So those can be seen.

Brother doesn't make the printer you want because they aren't in that marketplace. Epson, Canon, and HP have is sewn up, and the latter is a weak third. Third paper paper manufacturers will often provide ICC profiles for Epson, usually for Canon, and coming in third, HP.

But Brother does not buy heads from EPSON like everybody else, their heads are different optimized for fast printing, Russians call them turbo piezo heads.

 

[martin0reg]

...The only advantage of pigment printing is print lifespan in bright light. In the meantime, dye inks keep getting better and better in terms of "real world" life span. By that I mean, how many people will want a print on their wall for over fifty years? In the dark, dye inks are good for 200-300 years. Good enough.

Yes, dye inks and their printers tend to be far less problematical every regard than pigment printers, especially Epsons with their piezo technology.

I would like to prefer dye over pigment - but the fading is really an issue.
As we all know there is fading in light AND in air/ozone. Both can be very different.
Just found a pdf
http://www.image-engineering.de/library/articles/wie_lange_haelt_ein_foto.pdf
http://www.image-engineering.de/library/articles/pp_2007_9_10_36.pdf
quote:
canon pixma OEM: lightfading 13years / ozone fading 2years !
canon lucia OEM: lightfading 30years / ozone fading 80years

 

[Ink stained Fingers]

yes, the fading performance of dye inks depends much more on the ink/paper combination than for pigment inks which generally are less receptible to ozone. And people putting their dye prints away into the cabinet should be aware of formaldehyde emanating from the chipboards used in the furniture. Formaldehyde is as much aggressive as ozone. O.k., its level today is much lower than long time ago but still is measurable in older cabinets even from 20 - 30 years ago. The problem for the individual user is that he cannot measure the amount of pollutants around him, even less the congrgate amount over a longer time.

 

[Paul Verizzo]

o.k., but that would be the least reason for me to buy a Canon printer. I could put some nozzle cleaner into refill cartridges and let every printer hibernate that way.

I completely agree. It's why I said to someone, I wouldn't buy a printer because of this.

Them's bonus points.

 

[Paul Verizzo]

@martin0reg: Just you wait until I publish more on my Florida sunshine tests! Coming up soon.

Yes, the CLI-42 inks are definitely superior to the CLI-8 by 2:1, although sure, far short of pigment.

Some unexpected surprises that I've not sorted out yet. For instance, where the clear packaging tap - cheap, thin, presumably PET/mylar - held the opaque black strip in place,there was half the fading compared to the untaped part. Not true where cellophone based "Scotch" tape held it in place. Is PET/Mylar somewhat a UV barrier? It's the base material for all window tints.

For instance 2: Glad brand food wrap, which is LDPE, spray adhesived into place, shows almost no degradation after a month in the sun! Is it the lack of moisture at the image surface or is it an unacknowledged UV barrier? Don't know yet.

If you can find the Canon blurb on the Chromalife 100+ inks, it's obvious that they are far more susceptible to gas fading than UV light, yet the latter is what everyone concentrates on. Gas fading can be reduced or stopped by any barrier that prevents either air movement over the image, think glass or acrylic, or an impermeable barrier like lacquer, shellac, or less so, poly films.

Nothing is as simple as most simpletons think it is.

 

[martin0reg]

Tests of longevity are always welcome - if the comparison is well done and reproducible..
On my wish list would be: canon cli-8 and cli-42 - longevity and color matching - OEM vs IS vs OCP

 

[PeterBJ]

I would also like to see a such test, and may I be allowed to wish for the test also to include a comparison of Canon OEM paper vs the popular Sihl paper for fade resistance using both OEM and aftermarket inks?

 

[The Hat]

I would love to see a test like that done but unfortunately I don’t have many of the items mentioned, so I‘ll have to decline on this one.

But if some kind sole would send me a Pro 100 with a set of new OEM CLl-42 carts, a set filled with I.S. inks and a set filled with OCP inks then I’d gladly carry out every test known to man and a few that aren’t.

P.S. O’ I forgot I’d also need a box of OEM photo paper and a profile to match if necessary, I do have the Sihl paper dough..

 

[Ink stained Fingers]

well, in the Florida sunshine you shouldn't ignore the impact of ozone fading, so laminating, overcoating etc is probably as much an ozone barrier as an UV shield. And please be aware that it's not just the UV part of the radiation, the blue visible part of the light contributes to the fading as well, and that's something you wouldn't want to filter away. The difficulty is to separate those effects in these tests when you are not able to measure any of those at all. But comparative tests will give at least some information which shield works better than another. And when you study the WIR test results you'll find comments that high humidity in combination with microporous papers will make the situation worse , so the laminating , coating may not just protect against ozone but as well against high humidity, and don't forget the temperature......so have fun with your tests in the Florida sunshine.....