palombian
Printer Master
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2014
- Messages
- 1,883
- Reaction score
- 2,261
- Points
- 297
- Location
- Belgium
- Printer Model
- PRO10,PRO9500II,MB5150,MG8250
in this thread: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4298123
>
No disagreement about the value of comparative testing. However, it should be understood that in a window fade test cycle, the temperatures at the print surface can soar above 60C at the print surface and severe desiccation occurs during the light cycles, i.e., moisture content in the prints go down to unrealistically low levels. Because the fading of the pigments is a photo-oxidation reaction where moisture and temperature levels should ideally be controlled during both light and dark cycles, an encouraging window test should actually be followed up by more controlled studies before a final conclusion can be confidently drawn. For example, Inks using polymer encapsulation techniques versus inks that don't have them can reverse course under the two differing sets of environmental conditions (i.e., different moisture/desiccation response at typical real world temperature cycling conditions versus high temperature cyclical conditions in a typical window fade test).
That said, I recently tested a third party pigmented ink set designed for Canon printers under a more controlled test for a private paying client. FWIW, I rarely do private testing because the test results cannot be added to the Aardenburg light fade test database, and besides, few parties wish to pay for them. This particular study didn't go to as high an exposure dose as I would have liked to accomplish because the client had only modest requirements for fade resistance, but I was pleasantly surprised to see this third party ink set hold its own against the OEM inks in all regards (initial image quality and light fade resistance) whereas most third party inks I have tested in the past would have already shown weakness compared to OEM at the total exposure dose completed in this test. I mention this result to underscore the fact that although many third party inks are nowhere near as good as OEM, in a few instances over the years I have tested some that are. However, the only way to know for sure is to conduct a properly instrumented and environmentally controlled test. Unfortunately, most ink and media combinations rarely get tested properly even for OEM let alone third party.
cheers,
Mark
<
We never will know wich ink, but it still must to be possible to make good 3th party inks.
>
No disagreement about the value of comparative testing. However, it should be understood that in a window fade test cycle, the temperatures at the print surface can soar above 60C at the print surface and severe desiccation occurs during the light cycles, i.e., moisture content in the prints go down to unrealistically low levels. Because the fading of the pigments is a photo-oxidation reaction where moisture and temperature levels should ideally be controlled during both light and dark cycles, an encouraging window test should actually be followed up by more controlled studies before a final conclusion can be confidently drawn. For example, Inks using polymer encapsulation techniques versus inks that don't have them can reverse course under the two differing sets of environmental conditions (i.e., different moisture/desiccation response at typical real world temperature cycling conditions versus high temperature cyclical conditions in a typical window fade test).
That said, I recently tested a third party pigmented ink set designed for Canon printers under a more controlled test for a private paying client. FWIW, I rarely do private testing because the test results cannot be added to the Aardenburg light fade test database, and besides, few parties wish to pay for them. This particular study didn't go to as high an exposure dose as I would have liked to accomplish because the client had only modest requirements for fade resistance, but I was pleasantly surprised to see this third party ink set hold its own against the OEM inks in all regards (initial image quality and light fade resistance) whereas most third party inks I have tested in the past would have already shown weakness compared to OEM at the total exposure dose completed in this test. I mention this result to underscore the fact that although many third party inks are nowhere near as good as OEM, in a few instances over the years I have tested some that are. However, the only way to know for sure is to conduct a properly instrumented and environmentally controlled test. Unfortunately, most ink and media combinations rarely get tested properly even for OEM let alone third party.
cheers,
Mark
<
We never will know wich ink, but it still must to be possible to make good 3th party inks.