Papers to minimise fade with aftermarket dye inks.

[peter D]

Here is the first few results of the Boading Giant Image swellable paper verses Canon Semi Gloss microporous paper after over 4 months of exposure to light and the atmosphere. The printing in all cases was done using after market dye inks produced by Precision Colors.
The test was started 20-11-17 and I shut it down on 23-03-2018 ie. of 4 months duration with the images mounted vertically (backed with acid free card) inside a residential living room and receiving mainly indirect sunlight through lightly tinted window glass and varying amounts of a salt laden atmosphere common to a coastal location.

I have results for Giant Image swellable paper that has not been exposed to the atmosphere but exposed to light (behind glass) and the same paper not exposed to either ozone or light ie a control.
There are also a results for HP Premium Plus Gloss swellable paper for exposure to light and the atmosphere against a control image made on the same paper.
If anyone is interested I'd be happy to post the scans of these results as well.

To my eye the results for the Boading Giant Image paper are better than those achieved with HP Premium Plus paper but more extensive tests would need to be done to prove it because the control prints for both papers are different to look at with the greys being cleaner and darker for the Giant Image paper as it contains noticeably more optical brightners (OBA's) whereas the HP paper is more archival in that respect.
After 4 months of exposure to light the whiteness of the Giant Image paper is still noticeably greater than the HP paper and not noticeably different to Giant image paper that was shielded from light exposure.

Canon Semigloss - light + atmosphere. Giant Image Swellable Satin - light + atmosphere. Giant Image Swellable Gloss -atmosphere only.

The print on the right was shielded from exposure to most light but open to air circulation. This print compared favourably with one made on the same paper mounted under glass and completely shielded from light.
Prints made on Giant Image Satin and Gloss papers came in with virtually the same result when exposed to both light and atmosphere.
My conclusion is that over a two month period under domestic display conditions the swellable papers afford excellent protection from atmospheric induced fading and that the fading due to exposure to light under these circumstances has a much lower visual impact than that due to atmospheric exposure.

 

[Ink stained Fingers]

That's a really impressive test showing the dramatic improvements of ink fading which can be acheived with a swellable paper. I'm wondering why the inkjet printing industry - all together - printer manufacturers to paper producers - abanonded this paper type 10-15 years ago and did not develop it any further - some improved coating to make the handling somewhat easier, there are specialty papers on the market today which as sensitive as such swellable paper. The microporous coating eased the handling significantly at the price of very poor ink fading.

 

[peter D]

I do have a possible answer of sorts fresh in today from the manufacturer. Their swellable paper is susceptible to moist conditions (high humidity) whilst in storage prior to being printed on.
Once the paper has taken up moisture it is essentially ruined because that is what causes the swellable layer to seal over when it dries and protect the ink from oxidative attack (atmospheric exposure) any ink applied after that has happened cannot be absorbed properly by the swellable layer.

In particular the cut paper needs to be protected from moist air before use and this dictates a certain shelf life unless more precautions are taken, like plastic packs, silica gel drying sachets etc.
That said I never had any problem with three or four year old Premium plus paper from an opened packet when I made test prints from it for the fade test and humidity here runs over 90% quite frequently. The HP swellable printing paper packets I have do have an inner polythene bag for the paper though.

 

[Ink stained Fingers]

Once the paper has taken up moisture it is essentially ruined because that is what causes the swellable layer to seal over when it dries and protect the ink from oxidative attack (atmospheric exposure) any ink applied after that has happened cannot be absorbed properly by the swellable layer.

That explanation explains clearly why my old HP every day photo paper samples do not absorb any ink anymore and create funny prints. It is an environmental variable and effect no user is really aware off.
And this probably explains why the paper at the beginning of a roll prints differently than paper from the inner layers.

 

[peter D]

The paper is rolled so that the coated surface is innermost and then the roll is enclosed in a polythene sleeve which is crimped shut at each end by folding it back into the roll former tube and inserting the roll "spiders" which are plastic devices to hold the roll clear of the sides of the containing cardboard box.

I didn't encounter any problems with the paper at the start of the two rolls (satin and Gloss) but its possible that could happen over time if measures weren't taken to repack them properly each time after paper had been taken off. My apologies if I've mislead you there with observations I sent to you about another issue I was trying to solve.

I think it's likely that the Baoding factory where this paper is made has a climate controlled store room so that the humidity is held low. The factory is located in the city of Baoding which has the reputation of being the most polluted in China.

 

[peter D]

In case it wasn't noticed I provided sufficient resolution for the uploaded scans to be enlarged a lot so that the differences (particularly in the grey background curtain) between the middle one and the one on the right can be appreciated.
I don't know how that translates on the website but it seems to work on my monitor.

 

[Ink stained Fingers]

since inks fade with different speed - and as well saturated and non-saturated areas - composite colors like a gray - easily get a tint in this or that direction during exposure, and gray areas are a good indicator showing that. I'm doing my larger prints on matte paper, I don't like the reflections of the room, the lights etc so much on such prints, and I do smaller prints - up to A3 - on glossy papers - with dye or pigment inks - and 2 gloss opt. overprints.

 

[peter D]

The reflections especially behind glass are a factor in favour of satin paper but frequently I find that gloss prints will offer better shadow detail than satin or matte papers and the visual impact with gloss even when printing monochrome can be a deciding factor, somehow the blacks look blacker particularly with the swellable paper. In those instances I'll put up with the reflections even if mounted behind glass.

There is an unusual aspect that shows up with the Giant Image swellable paper (both gloss and satin) in very high saturation areas of the print in dark blues and blacks that faintly looks like bronzing but it isn't a surface effect more like a reflection coming from the dye underneath, hard to explain, a little like the dark verses the light reflections when you tilt the surface of a trademark hologram like Nikon use on their batteries.
I didn't notice this effect with the HP swellable but maybe the images I printed with my first 20 sheets didn't show it up although I doubt that is the case.

 

[Ink stained Fingers]

yes, glossy papers have a darker black point, visibly darker than matte papers - if I don't see the lamp or window behind me....
I have seen slight bronzing effects as well with dye inks, with the black and cyan inks, on glossy and semiglossy papers, it's a combined effect of the ink and paper , I must admit I see bronzing effects about everywhere since some time...but about nobody else, I'm not sure what that indicates. These effects go away with 2x GO overprints, but that's not their prime reason, it's the protecting effect against ozone etc , and 2x overprints look better than 1x overprint

 

[mikling]

Since the time Ink Stained Fingers had sent me some sample of the swellable paper he had acquired I have finally now had the time to open the package and take a look and compare them to the Ilford and Hp (Old) offerings. That was a long time ago, and I apologize but I had been THAT busy.

Here is my assessment. The Pearl Variety is too textured, the bumps are too sharp on the surface leading to refractive effects and causing excessive image blur. I am not enthusiastic about it.

The Glossy variety is acceptable. The surface is not as smooth as the old HP (Ilford) variety. In a pinch, it will do especially if you like Glossy but it has hills.

The Satin variation is possibly the best offering. It is not as pearl looking as the Ilford but it is a good compromise for portraits, for which these swellable papers are well suited.

I will be posting ICC profiles for these papers in my very very soon to be released Signature Edition Inkset for the Pro-100. The Signature Inkset has taken a long time to put together and tune. One aspect was seeking the best reasonably priced aftermarket inks that was more durable than current as well as having the vibrance I was looking for to improve over the old. The Gray inks were custom made. Attempts using similar dyes for the Black was not fruitful leading to bronzing and metamerism. So the next best was selected. It has been nearly 5 years since the current inkset 42G existed and the 42 Signature Edition improves the color and durability. Even a novice refiller would achieve truly excellent results without knowing a thing about custom profiles! BTW along the way , I uncovered what Canon's OIG system was all about and I will tell you the work they put into selecting paper and inks must have been intensive indeed to optimize each combination.

So the swellable papers in combination with these newer inkset should provide a fantastic combination for someone seeking near archival durability with this new Signature inkset.