RE: Expected Life of Epson Ink + Archival Paper??

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 




Gary,

I agree with everything you wrote. My disagreement with revolves around the
factual way she presented the answer to a question that at least in my mind,
isn't known yet. She may be right, but we simply do not know. According to
Wilhelm light tests, even archival inks vary widely in results with different
papers. Because of this and my own experience, I can't say that Epson's ink
formulation is the main culprit. Until it gets tested on the same papers that
the archival are tested on, we won't know how good than can be.

--- "Gary L. Hunt" <glh@srv.net> wrote:
> At 02:41 PM 1/23/2000 -0800, Michael Greer  wrote:
>   >I beg to differ. I think the question of longevity of Epson OEM ink on
>   >"archival" paper is very much up in the air. I have OEM ink prnints on
> Epson
>   >Photo Paper in my office that look great after almost 2 years. No signs of
>   >fading or the onset of fading at this time. They are exposed to no direct
>   >sunlight. Just ambient office light. Also, if my theory about air exposure
>   >being the main mechanism to fading, then the question of laminated (hot,
> cold,
>   >liquid) prints with OEM ink on archival paper is very much a question. I
> have a
>   >bunch of prints like this on various papers. The only ones that have
>   >unacceptably faded are those on Konica QP. This tells me that the paper
> choice
>   >is huge with OEM inks. 
> 
> Where the facts are not yet known, it's not surprising that a range of
> opinions
> is going to happen, and different experiences are going to support them in
> any case.  I think Laurie's answer is precisely the "commonly held" opinion
> at this point, and it's what I would probably say if someone asked me--but
> I'd much prefer your view to be the case.  Although what she actually SAID
> (5-7 years
> under best conditions, maybe 2-3 ordinarily) is not really disputable (or
> provable
> either) at this point, even by your examples.  
> 
>   >This might be the case. But I see no evidence that this is absolutely
> true. I'd
>   >love to see what OEM ink does on Concorde Rag in normal display
> situations. I
>   >think we might be surprised.
> 
> Perhaps more to the point than what any of us "think" here, is anyone
> actually
> pursuing this with even informal testing?  I haven't tried any of the other
> papers 
> because I'm happy with the Epson ones and no one seems to have shown (yet) 
> that the life of prints made on them with Epson inks is any better (or any
> worse) 
> than the all-Epson ones.  Even a small improvement (another year, say) would
> make them much more interesting as alternatives to me.
> 
> Gary Hunt <glh@srv.net>
> 
> -
> Please turn off HTML mail features. Keep quoted material short. Use
> accurate subject lines. http://www.leben.com/lists for instructions.
> 

=====
Visit my digital photography web site along with a lot of other interesting stuff at http://greer.simplenet.com. Also, Greer and Associates (http://www.greeraa.com) offers studio photography, digital imaging services, web site design/construction, and training. 

Mike Greer
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://im.yahoo.com
-
Please turn off HTML mail features. Keep quoted material short. Use
accurate subject lines. http://www.leben.com/lists for instructions.


[Index of Archives]     [Yosemite News]     [Yosemite Photos]     [Scanners]     [Gimp]     [Gimp Users]
  Powered by Linux