- Joined
- Jan 18, 2010
- Messages
- 15,820
- Reaction score
- 8,851
- Points
- 453
- Location
- Residing in Wicklow Ireland
- Printer Model
- Canon/3D, CR-10, CR-10S, KP-3
So Canon paper has a fine nose..Canon Photo Paper Pro has a particular smell,
So Canon paper has a fine nose..Canon Photo Paper Pro has a particular smell,
I have noticed that for example Canon Photo Paper Pro has a particular smell,
I see excellent results and report of the Epson 114 inkset from the 8550 printer over lots of sources.I kept this fading test running for another 2 weeks - now a total of 4 weeks of outside exposure, the test is just confirming previous statements that OEM inks perform best on OEM papers....
Delta E on GI-53 Black apears pretty low on your tests. Does this indicate that black ink is pretty resistant to fading? Aarenburg Project was reporting that the biggest difference between original Chromalife 100 and Chromalife 100+ was more fade-resistant black. Based on your test, is it reasonable to guess that GI-53 is likely using the newer Chromalife 100+ black ink? If so, would it be reasonable to expect fade resistance more similar to chromalife 100+ than chromalife 100?I kept this fading test running for another 2 weeks - now a total of 4 weeks of outside exposure, the test is just confirming previous statements that OEM inks perform best on OEM papers. This test does not include 3rd party dye inks like InkTec nor any pigment inks - no OEM pigment inks nor 3rd party inks. I'm closing this test now.
View attachment 16248
Being a non-professional in this field, I am having a bit of hard time interpreting this data in evaluating whether GI-53 is a good enough ink to be comparable to Pro-100 dye inks? Is there any way to even roughly estimate Aarenburg-style megalux-hours for GI-53 from this data (assuming continued linear fading)?I kept this fading test running for another 2 weeks - now a total of 4 weeks of outside exposure, the test is just confirming previous statements that OEM inks perform best on OEM papers. This test does not include 3rd party dye inks like InkTec nor any pigment inks - no OEM pigment inks nor 3rd party inks. I'm closing this test now.
View attachment 16248
I'm placing the test targets into the outside environment with a varying amount of sun, humidity, temperature and UV radiation which all I don't measure so I can't even come close to Aardenburg numbers, not to talk even about issues with the reciprocity approach Aardenburg and Wilhelm Research take. I just run the test to compare a known ink - in most cases the Epson 106 ink - with other inks under test - and this on a few papers which are easily available as OEM papers by Epson, Canon or HP. And even this small number of papers in the test show that just one number as an performance indicator for an ink does not cover the complexity of such tests.Is there any way to even roughly estimate Aarenburg-style megalux-hours for GI-53 from this data (assuming continued linear fading)?