Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Printing: Printers, Papers and Inks => Topic started by: Yvan Bedard on March 07, 2017, 12:51:40 pm
-
Hi,
I've been printing my own photos and selling to art galleries for several years. I mostly use Breathing Colors OBA-free archival products with my Epson 7900.
BC have been offering an aluminum photo panel for several months now. I could use it on my Epson 7900 printer to offer the popular metal print. See here (https://www.breathingcolor.com/allure-directprint-aluminum)
However, I was waiting for some reviews or tests before committing into this product since it would require buying a laminator and sheer cutter for non-standard height/width ratio. After several months, I find no real test of review on the web.
Has any of you tried it ?
Thanks
-
This website will be publishing my review of this product, along with some other printing media in the near future. Stay tuned.
-
This website will be publishing my review of this product, along with some other printing media in the near future. Stay tuned.
Fantastic, this is exactly what I'm looking for. Any timeframe? I'm preparing two important solo exhibitions in addition to the increasing demand for aluminum prints at the art gallery.
Yvan
-
I was advised to expect publication within the current two week time frame.
-
We tested Allure extensively when it was first introduced. The ability to use high quality pigment inks using profiles and under my own control is appealing. I'm also skeptical of Chromaluxe dye sub processes because their fade testing shows the magenta layer fading faster than the other two layers, indicating the panel may turn green. Chromaluxe fading tests better than unprotected chromogenic processes, but thats not particularly impressive because unprotected chemical prints are problematic. They don't compare them to pigment inkjets, probably because they really aren't in the same league.
There are a few challenges, one being the need to use a shear to cut the print after printing. Good news is they've addressed that issue, and as long as you can stay in standard sizes, the new panels are contained within carrier which eliminates the shearing after printing (so much better for DIY). I haven't tried them yet, but plan on bring some of them in soon.
Larger panels are challenging to load, as the weight tends to make them skew. I successfully printed 20x30 panels with my p9000 but have difficulty printing them on my older 11880 (which may have lost some of its' gripping power over the years).
To us the real challenge was the laminating step. Even with a good laminator (Seal 54) it is difficult to get the image clean enough to not have flaws, which with the glossy laminate are obvious and distracting. Also the laminate is easier to scratch than the scratch resistant moniker implies. I had a difficult time getting a perfectly laminated print.
Regarding final print quality, Mark will offer a much more thorough analysis, but I will say the ability to use pigment inks on a very solid inkjet receptor product offers control and quality which to my eye is superior to chromaluxe dye sub panels. There were some profiling issues, but working directly with BC we came up with a solid profile for the p9000 so I was getting exactly what I was expecting out of the product. I didn't have side by sides to compare the claim that they are "sharper" because they are printed at 1440 dpi vs 720 for chromaluxe followed by perhaps a slight "diffusion" of the dots as they are sublimated onto the aluminum sheet. But I did feel they were quite sharp, with nice transitions and gradations similar to a high quality inket print.
We are going to try them again, as we sell a lot of aluminum panels which are made by a 3rd party and frequently have small color and density variances that make them somewhat of a compromise for customers. I would really like to have the Allure panels available as an option for those wanting better print quality on the panels. We now have a "clean" room of sorts we designed for our face mounted acrylics, so perhaps this will make it easier to get a good laminate on the Allure product.
I look forward to Mark's review as well.
-
I was advised to expect publication within the current two week time frame.
Cannot be better !
Many thanks for your work !
Yvan
-
Very helpful commentary Wayne, as I did not cover Chromoluxe, the largest panel I worked with for my review is 12*15 inch, and I don't have the laminating equipment for the gloss coat; so I cover the specs and results obtained on the matte panels up to 12*15 inches which feed through an Epson P-800. Once mine is published, readers will have two complementary sets of information - yours and mine to work with.
-
Thank you Wayne for your detailed comments. My Epson 7900 is only 4 years-old and I imagine it would feed properly the 20x30 panel (this is the size I'm interested in).
I have a free room in my house, next to my lab, because my youngest daughter graduated last year and now has her own appartment. This is where I want to instal the laminator.
Questions:
- what is the success rate with metal prints at the beginning, and then after having experience (i.e. if you make 10 prints, how many come out as expected)?
- same question for laminating?
- what are the main issues about having a clean laminate? Dust? Sand? Air bubble?
- Do your clients prefer mat or glossy laminate? (I'm a landscape photographer)
Thanks,
Yvan
-
I tried the panels and found them to be less than spectacular printing on them with an Epson Pro 4800. There is also the issue of trimming the panel after printing on it because the printer leaves a border around the panel which is larger on the last edge out of the printer. Trimming this edge is a problem because the machine to do it properly is very heavy and expensive. There is also the need to laminate the panel after printing requiring another machine called a cold press. The manual cold presses are very cheap but have a manual crank and the powered versions are very expensive. One thing to keep in mind is with a manual cold press you'd have to use one hand to crank and the other to make sure the laminate is going on smoothly with no air bubbles. This process can be unwieldy with prints larger than 8 x 10. I'd say if you want metal prints just have one of the commercial labs do it unless of course you love being frustrated.
-
I'd like to know if there are any OBAs present on this substrate, particularly with the coating used on the metal plates. I'll place bets that longevity may be better than traditional dye sub metal prints, but still might not be as "archival" as other "fine art" substrates. I look forward to your review, Mark.
When I tried the Allure panels on my P9000, I found details to be noticeably better than with traditional dye sub metal prints. (I compared using the same print files from a Phase MFDB). A metal shear is extremely large, onerously heavy, and poses its own short learning curve. I have a fairly large printing area so this was not an issue. If limited to standard sizes as Wayne mentions would be easier to avoid dedicating a large space to an expensive industrial metal shear. Lamination can be an issue and I found it a challenge to achieve regular and consistent results. Orange peel is an issue generally caused by the wrong pressure settings, and slight changes whether from settings, environment, user error, etc. are extremely noticeable on the glossy laminate. The finished product remains delicate to handling. The finished print has excellent detail, color, and gloss, but still not quite the pop or dimension of a traditional dye sub metal print. I decided not to offer the BC Allure option for my clients.
Ken
-
We have been teaching alternative printing medias since 2010.
Here is my take on the subject. Chromaluxe Metals are ready for prime time and in our opinion are the absolute best quality bar none if you are reselling.
Nothing even close.
Everything else, BC Allure, Booksmart Metals and Inkaid coated metals are at best a craft fair sell.
If you insist on giving this a try. Do NOT buy a shear or laminator it is not necessary.
Finishing
Instead of laminating buy several cans of Premier Print Shield. Several light coats and you are good to go.
We have 2 laminators here and using the hi-gloss polyester over laminate have gotten a success rate of about 2 out of 10.
Do not offer it for sale at all. Failure rate does not make it financially viable.
Trimming
No shear required.
3 options here. Crop your image so that you have an even border on all 4 sides.
Pick an edge border from Photo Frame and use that as your border instead of a square edge, looks really nice.
See samples below.
Lastly make up several print boards and tape your metal into the cutout with tape from the back side.
Set up your printer to over print a bleed of about a 1/4" on all 4 sides.
In larger printers like my 9900 the larger metals always wanted to skew a little or slide because of the extra weight.
With your printer now gripping the paper board instead of the metal you have a much firmer grip.
The easiest way to get a borderless print from any non borderless size metal.
The last 2 framed metal prints are metals coated with a Krylon spackle paint topcoat with 3 over coats of Inkaid.
Printed with Epson 3880 and Photoframe border. Top coated with 2 coats of print shield.
2 sky prints are printed on Booksmart Metal aluminum with a 1" border coated with hi-gloss Print Shield.
In closing I would invest very little in the Allure product other then several samples to fool with, no equipment.
See if they sell then decide.
-
I'd like to know if there are any OBAs present on this substrate, particularly with the coating used on the metal plates. I'll place bets that longevity may be better than traditional dye sub metal prints, but still might not be as "archival" as other "fine art" substrates. I look forward to your review, Mark.
According to Breathing Color the inkjet receptor coat is the same as they use on their Lyve canvas and Elegant Papers which I believe they claim are OBA free. Ernst might have those two products in his database. Longevity will certainly be better than dye sub aluminum.
Now that it no longer requires a shear to print standard sizes, the remaining hurdle of adequate laminating remains a big challenge. Like Ken mentioned our success rate was extremely poor, and the quartz laminate was much more delicate than we expected.
The challenge with dye sub aluminum to me besides possible longevity issues is consistency in output related to the same image printed on a good printer and paper combination, which is what customers are expecting. I just see too many issues with slight color variances, highlights and shadows blocking up etc. Most of them look OK, but just don’t look as good as a good inkjet print on good paper. I made the decision not to use aluminum for my own work because I just don’t feel it offers the quality I want to deliver to my buyers.
-
Wayne,
CMYK or 8 color dye sub? I have the 8 color and the results are pretty darn good.
Then again I am not reproducing my personal photography. Mostly travel, family and pet photos sold to a much less critical group.
Still if you compare dye sub metal next to the inkaid and booksmart metal prints the difference is pretty substantial.
As always YOMV
Here is the real tell tale, I have sold (dye sub) 265 to (Inkaid coated)2
-
we've sold hundreds of chromaluxe prints as well, and as you mentioned most for people to put on their own walls etc. Currently they are being printed with the Epson F series dedicated dye sub printer (CMYK), good enough for most customers. And as you mentioned far superior to the inkaid and booksmart products. We've also had some printed by services using Sawgrass inks (6 and 8 color), in some cases we see less problems with light tones, highlight and shadow blocking, etc.
And to clarify, results are usually pretty sweet.
But there is that select group of discriminating shooter who actually sells some of their work for a decent price that expect the aluminum to look as good as a print on Epson or Canson Baryta. I can get closer to that with the the Allure product, but the kill rate (mainly from the laminate) and work required makes it a no go.
I've settled on face mounted inkjet on TruLife acrylic or high quality paper (currently using Epson Legacy Baryta) for the work I sell. I just don't think the aluminum is as sharp as I would like and the subtle color issues I don't want to try and resolve. I've also quit selling on canvas ... the texture just affects the micro detail more than I would like.
-
This process can be unwieldy with prints larger than 8 x 10. I'd say if you want metal prints just have one of the commercial labs do it unless of course you love being frustrated.
I tried MPix metal print and it came out well, but I don't sell prints I've not done myself. I only sell photos I have produced myself 100% and clients appreciate it very much. It is a value-added characteristics of my offer. In fact, printing my own photos with the best products around for archival quality is one of the strongest selling arguments to convince people it is worth $400 to $1100 per photo depending upon size.
Thanks for your feedback, laminating is the kind of trouble I wasn't sure about and one of the reason I have not ordered Allure photo panels yet. The other reason is image quality, I need feedbacks from several users.
Yvan
-
I'd like to know if there are any OBAs present on this substrate, particularly with the coating used on the metal plates.
I decided not to offer the BC Allure option for my clients.
Ken
I assume they would have written it if it was OBA-free. So, I believe it is not.
Thanks a lot for your final decision of not offerint it to your clients, it tells a lot !
Yvan
-
we've sold hundreds of chromaluxe prints as well, and as you mentioned most for people to put on their own walls etc. Currently they are being printed with the Epson F series dedicated dye sub printer (CMYK), good enough for most customers. And as you mentioned far superior to the inkaid and booksmart products. We've also had some printed by services using Sawgrass inks (6 and 8 color), in some cases we see less problems with light tones, highlight and shadow blocking, etc.
And to clarify, results are usually pretty sweet.
But there is that select group of discriminating shooter who actually sells some of their work for a decent price that expect the aluminum to look as good as a print on Epson or Canson Baryta. I can get closer to that with the the Allure product, but the kill rate (mainly from the laminate) and work required makes it a no go.
I've settled on face mounted inkjet on TruLife acrylic or high quality paper (currently using Epson Legacy Baryta) for the work I sell. I just don't think the aluminum is as sharp as I would like and the subtle color issues I don't want to try and resolve. I've also quit selling on canvas ... the texture just affects the micro detail more than I would like.
Considering how tricky most people seem to think face mounting a print to acrylic is I'm stunned that your results laminating are so much worse. I was thinking about trying to use Glossy and Matte laminating films on paper inkjet prints with a low end manual roller but, unless there is something specific about laminating Allure, it sounds like that would just be a waste of time and money.
-
We have been teaching alternative printing medias since 2010.
Here is my take on the subject. Chromaluxe Metals are ready for prime time and in our opinion are the absolute best quality bar none if you are reselling.
Nothing even close.
Thank you for your detailed and well-supported opinion! It is very informative and convincing!
Yvan
-
I made the decision not to use aluminum for my own work because I just don’t feel it offers the quality I want to deliver to my buyers.
It is very likely what I'm going to decide as well. My clients are used to top archival quality with BC Lyve canvas and Pura Smooth and Pura Velvet fine art papers + Timeless varnish. Highest quality print is a great selling argument for an art collector, even for home deco.
Yvan
-
We do know how to improve the results when laminating acrylic and here is what it takes.
Mount your roll of laminate on the machine and make all your sample runs and adjustments.
Laminating from a properly webbed machine will improve the results drastically.
For one offs and workshop demonstrations we cut an oversize piece of laminate and send it through the machine like that.
You are pulling the liner back and holding the proper laminate tension over the roll. Can be done just a little more work with less then stellar results.
-
My article including analysis of this media is now published on this site.
-
My article including analysis of this media is now published on this site.
Surprised to see the OBA issue, as they claim it's the same coating with slight changes as Lyve canvas which is OBA free.
-
Considering how tricky most people seem to think face mounting a print to acrylic is I'm stunned that your results laminating are so much worse. I was thinking about trying to use Glossy and Matte laminating films on paper inkjet prints with a low end manual roller but, unless there is something specific about laminating Allure, it sounds like that would just be a waste of time and money.
Face mounting to acrylic is tricky and challenging, but we've invested some time and equipment (including a pseudo clean room) to make the process reliable.
the problem with laminating the Allure is even the smallest tiny spec of dust will cause a visible bump in the high gloss surface and is much more problematic than simple laminating of an inkjet print which we do all the time. We haven't tried laminating the allure since we setup the clean room. Even without any issues with the small bumps, the scratching is still problematic. It's really much more delicate than it sounds like it should be.
As far as Marks' review, well done, although I would mention that the allure product while it looks pretty good after printing (nice matte print), the surface of the unprotected print is extremely delicate (more so than matte paper), so it really isn't suitable to deliver without laminating or protecting the inkjet surface after printing in some way.
Here's the first face mount (7 feet long) after we setup the new "clean room".
-
Surprised to see the OBA issue, as they claim it's the same coating with slight changes as Lyve canvas which is OBA free.
Yes, it would appear that what they claim and what Figure 17 clearly shows do not cohere. So either those magenta spikes in the tell-tale region are valid evidence of OBAs at work, or there is some other explanation for it I'm not aware of.
-
As far as Marks' review, well done, although I would mention that the allure product while it looks pretty good after printing (nice matte print), the surface of the unprotected print is extremely delicate (more so than matte paper), so it really isn't suitable to deliver without laminating or protecting the inkjet surface after printing in some way.
Thanks Wayne, and useful complementary information. My sense of the product is that in its really finished form the intent is that it should be laminated with their PET product to give it that metallic gloss look and feel, in which circumstance the sensitivity of the unprotected surface would probably cease to be an issue; but if the process for doing that is as delicate and tricky as you suggest, that adds another layer of challenge to get it all right.
-
Face mounting to acrylic is tricky and challenging, but we've invested some time and equipment (including a pseudo clean room) to make the process reliable.
the problem with laminating the Allure is even the smallest tiny spec of dust will cause a visible bump in the high gloss surface and is much more problematic than simple laminating of an inkjet print which we do all the time. We haven't tried laminating the allure since we setup the clean room. Even without any issues with the small bumps, the scratching is still problematic. It's really much more delicate than it sounds like it should be.
As far as Marks' review, well done, although I would mention that the allure product while it looks pretty good after printing (nice matte print), the surface of the unprotected print is extremely delicate (more so than matte paper), so it really isn't suitable to deliver without laminating or protecting the inkjet surface after printing in some way.
Here's the first face mount (7 feet long) after we setup the new "clean room".
So doing a gloss laminate film of an ink jet print might be a feasible do it yourself project for the advanced hobbyist?
Beautiful print. Do you provide face mounting as a service or is it just for you own prints that you sell?
-
we've sold hundreds of chromaluxe prints as well, and as you mentioned most for people to put on their own walls etc. Currently they are being printed with the Epson F series dedicated dye sub printer (CMYK), good enough for most customers. And as you mentioned far superior to the inkaid and booksmart products. We've also had some printed by services using Sawgrass inks (6 and 8 color), in some cases we see less problems with light tones, highlight and shadow blocking, etc.
And to clarify, results are usually pretty sweet.
But there is that select group of discriminating shooter who actually sells some of their work for a decent price that expect the aluminum to look as good as a print on Epson or Canson Baryta. I can get closer to that with the the Allure product, but the kill rate (mainly from the laminate) and work required makes it a no go.
I've settled on face mounted inkjet on TruLife acrylic or high quality paper (currently using Epson Legacy Baryta) for the work I sell. I just don't think the aluminum is as sharp as I would like and the subtle color issues I don't want to try and resolve. I've also quit selling on canvas ... the texture just affects the micro detail more than I would like.
Have you tried this as an alternative to a laminate:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RndnubrNQRo&index=26&list=PL4TwTEPWSmle5_5ep-EfptTkG6r7sMpEu&t=12s
Also if you want to print on a canvas with almost no texture then try Canson's new Museum pro:
https://www.itsupplies.com/Canson-Museum-ProCanvas-Matte-385gsm-24-x-40-Roll-400053306
-
My article including analysis of this media is now published on this site.
Wow, incredibly limited gamut volume. That plus the high OBA content make it a non starter for me. Thank you very much for the review, it has saved me a lot of time and expense doing my own experimenting.
-
Have you tried this as an alternative to a laminate:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RndnubrNQRo&index=26&list=PL4TwTEPWSmle5_5ep-EfptTkG6r7sMpEu&t=12s
Also if you want to print on a canvas with almost no texture then try Canson's new Museum pro:
https://www.itsupplies.com/Canson-Museum-ProCanvas-Matte-385gsm-24-x-40-Roll-400053306
I have spent the last two weeks experimenting with various resin coating options for photos. I haven't tried ArtResin yet. I have tried a resin called SC110 that claims similar UV resistance to ArtResin as well as Envirotex Lite and Castin Craft. I have also tried thinning the SC110 with Lacquer thinner and Isopropyl alcohol. So far I haven't been able to achieve satisfactory results for critical applications such as selling or gallery displays although the results are good enough for hanging on your wall at home. Uneveness in the surface, small dust particles, and micro bubbles between the photo and the resin just seem to be the norm no matter how careful you are. I suppose I will try ArtResin next since they claim it is a special formulation although I am skeptical about that. If anybody has achieved results that are good enough for sale I would love to hear how they did that.
-
I suppose I will try ArtResin next since they claim it is a special formulation although I am skeptical about that. If anybody has achieved results that are good enough for sale I would love to hear how they did that.
Well, I'll tell you in 2 wks about whether the Art Resin coated image sells---that's the first show I'm going to have one in. It's quite a nice look, similar to a face mount, and I'm pleased with it.
Been experimenting with it for a little bit. Just long enough to get a couple that I'm happy to exhibit. Not long enough to pose as an expert but enough to tell you things that do and don't seem to be issues.
It's as finicky in its own way as any coating or laminating. The main things are
- Bubbles
- Dust
- Edge bleed
It bubbles like crazy but playing a chef's torch (like for creme brulee) over the surface pops them nicely---and scares the crap out of you the first time you shoot a high temp flame onto the surface of a good print. Trick is that the bubbles reaccumulate and you have to go over it again after about 10 min. A good light is critical.
Dust will find it---more than standard print coatings. The resin takes overnight to cure although I don't know how long it will pick up dust. I do know it starts right away so you need to work in the cleanest space you've got and then
immediately cover the print with a close-fitting box (the interior of which you have previously varnished and then blown clean in another area just prior to use). You can pick out fresh dust bits w needle or xacto blade sometimes---the resin will flow into a defect for a good 30 min. I've not been able to make a completely dust free 16 x 20 yet but I've no prob with seeing 1 or 2 little ones. If you do, then you need a clean room.
There's some odd faint edge bleed that is visible only on light colored edges (borderless of course). It looks like resin getting under the mounted print. Have tried to seal edges (eg, w polyurethane) but haven't gotten the right process yet (if your sealant gets on the print, the resin may not play nice). A standard rabbeted frame covers these.
Getting a smooth, even coating is not a problem. Just spread it reasonably carefully and it self-levels. It's THICK
Get proper 1:1 weight mix using accurate scales. Although there's no pump for their bottles, this is not a biggie
Not cheap compared to a couple coats of Clear Jet.
Worth trying if you want that super high gloss look
[/list][/list]
-
Well, I'll tell you in 2 wks about whether the Art Resin coated image sells---that's the first show I'm going to have one in. It's quite a nice look, similar to a face mount, and I'm pleased with it.
Been experimenting with it for a little bit. Just long enough to get a couple that I'm happy to exhibit. Not long enough to pose as an expert but enough to tell you things that do and don't seem to be issues.
It's as finicky in its own way as any coating or laminating. The main things are
- Bubbles
- Dust
- Edge bleed
It bubbles like crazy but playing a chef's torch (like for creme brulee) over the surface pops them nicely---and scares the crap out of you the first time you shoot a high temp flame onto the surface of a good print. Trick is that the bubbles reaccumulate and you have to go over it again after about 10 min. A good light is critical.
Dust will find it---more than standard print coatings. The resin takes overnight to cure although I don't know how long it will pick up dust. I do know it starts right away so you need to work in the cleanest space you've got and then
immediately cover the print with a close-fitting box (the interior of which you have previously varnished and then blown clean in another area just prior to use). You can pick out fresh dust bits w needle or xacto blade sometimes---the resin will flow into a defect for a good 30 min. I've not been able to make a completely dust free 16 x 20 yet but I've no prob with seeing 1 or 2 little ones. If you do, then you need a clean room.
There's some odd faint edge bleed that is visible only on light colored edges (borderless of course). It looks like resin getting under the mounted print. Have tried to seal edges (eg, w polyurethane) but haven't gotten the right process yet (if your sealant gets on the print, the resin may not play nice). A standard rabbeted frame covers these.
Getting a smooth, even coating is not a problem. Just spread it reasonably carefully and it self-levels. It's THICK
Get proper 1:1 weight mix using accurate scales. Although there's no pump for their bottles, this is not a biggie
Not cheap compared to a couple coats of Clear Jet.
Worth trying if you want that super high gloss look
[/list][/list]
Thanks for the tips. My results have been hit or miss when it comes to dust and sometimes bubbles seem to appear well after the 30-45 minute window when you can run a torch over the surface. But the biggest thing that I can't figure out how to get right is a kind of waviness in the surface of the cured resin. It looks fine viewed straight on but from a slant reflecting a bright light source the surface isn't as flat as I would like. On a good attempt it is slightly wavy, on a bad one it looks like an orange peel. How have your results been from that perspective?
-
My article including analysis of this media is now published on this site.
Thank you very much for your great work !
-
You are welcome.
-
Thanks for the tips. My results have been hit or miss when it comes to dust and sometimes bubbles seem to appear well after the 30-45 minute window when you can run a torch over the surface. But the biggest thing that I can't figure out how to get right is a kind of waviness in the surface of the cured resin. It looks fine viewed straight on but from a slant reflecting a bright light source the surface isn't as flat as I would like. On a good attempt it is slightly wavy, on a bad one it looks like an orange peel. How have your results been from that perspective?
Haven't had that problem. The finished surface seems quite flat---reflections are razor sharp. I have sometimes gotten waves within 1/2 cm of the edge where the resin appears to have dripped off unevenly. Never gotten orange peel (which I manage to do with most other coatings >:(). Are you using the full amount of resin specified (I believe 4 oz resin + 4 oz hardener for 1 sq ft). This looks like way too much but it's not, and too little coating might not self-level adequately and give you orange peel.
-
Haven't had that problem. The finished surface seems quite flat---reflections are razor sharp. I have sometimes gotten waves within 1/2 cm of the edge where the resin appears to have dripped off unevenly. Never gotten orange peel (which I manage to do with most other coatings >:(). Are you using the full amount of resin specified (I believe 4 oz resin + 4 oz hardener for 1 sq ft). This looks like way too much but it's not, and too little coating might not self-level adequately and give you orange peel.
I haven't tried ArtResin yet. I've experimented with a few other resins with mostly unsatisfactory results. The ArtResin site actually specifies 5 oz total for 1 sq foot. And my experiments with the other resins to suggest that having enough is important. If you are getting a perfectly flat surface with no micro bubbles or waviness then I guess ArtResin's high price would be justified.
-
Back nine months ago I did a review of the Allure product and posted it in the Dpreview printer forum (https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/57963696). My findings were that this product was not yet ready for prime time and that you would have the same if not better results mounting your favorite paper prints on a sheet of aluminum or composite material such as Dibond. As well, it was extremely disheartening to see how soft the coating was. I literally drug the corner of a print on enhanced matte over the print and the surface became scratched or marred. This defect then was enhanced when the laminate was put on. As far as color was concerned, I did not have enough material from their sample pack to produce a profile, so I ended up just guessing what profile to use on my Epson 9890, but in reality with the other inconveniences of the product it became apparent that color was not going to matter.
As for the quality and consistency of Dye Sub metal prints on Chromaluxe, I have produced prints on this medium for a few years now and have had very consistent results with very high quality prints. Like anything in life, the output is purely dependent on the input provided. The quality of output that i can get from a high quality file on a Chromaluxe Dye Sub print can be seen in the attached sample image taken by Alexander Flemming with a Phase One XF 100mp. This is an 11x14 crop of a 30x40 metal print. It was scanned on my desktop scanner, so color is not accurate, but evidence of detail produced on a Dye sub print is shown.
Ben Gasser
Metal Mouth Prints
Kansas City
-
I assume they would have written it if it was OBA-free. So, I believe it is not.
Thanks a lot for your final decision of not offering it to your clients, it tells a lot !
Yvan
To clear up any confusion as to whether these panels have OBAs, the answer is yes, they do. An examination of the panels with a UV light confirms the presence of OBAs. In addition, I posed this question to the Breathing Color support manager in response to one of their blog posts entitled Aqueous vs. Dye Sub Metal: Round 2 – White Point and Contrast.
https://www.breathingcolor.com/blog/aqueous-vs-dye-sub-white-point/
Check the Disqus comments below the post to read his response to my comments. He confirmed the presence of OBAs in the coating, but noted that dye sub metal panels also contain OBAs. :-\
This comparison seemed a bit strange to me, as one of the main benefits is supposed to be the use of longer lasting pigment inks compared to dye sub inks. Obviously the benefit of using pigment inks will be offset by the presence of optical brightening agents over time, depending on display conditions. It is doubtful the laminate film offers much in the way of protection.
Hopefully we will see some data on lightfastness tests in order to compare them to the reformulated ChromaLuxe aluminum sub photo panels which, according to Wilhelm, are now rated at 65 years (display permanence rating).
Breathing Color informed me they were conducting internal lightfastness tests on these panels; however, no results are yet available. Hope this helps.
-
To clear up any confusion as to whether these panels have OBAs,
There was never any confusion to start with. I said so in my review of this product on this website. There are very simple tests for detecting OBAs and I implemented one of them. See Figure 17 in this article: BCAllure OBA (https://luminous-landscape.com/specialty-papers-review-special-papers/)
-
To clear up any confusion as to whether these panels have OBAs, the answer is yes, they do. An examination of the panels with a UV light confirms the presence of OBAs. In addition, I posed this question to the Breathing Color support manager in response to one of their blog posts entitled Aqueous vs. Dye Sub Metal: Round 2 – White Point and Contrast.
https://www.breathingcolor.com/blog/aqueous-vs-dye-sub-white-point/
Check the Disqus comments below the post to read his response to my comments. He confirmed the presence of OBAs in the coating, but noted that dye sub metal panels also contain OBAs. :-\
Thank you Renée. I listened all of your podcasts at BC since their beginning and love them! You provide very useful information based on a rich experience. Very helpful ! I'm a big fan of BC products but not ready yet to commit to Allure. Aluminum photos and acrylic photos don't sell very well here, art buyers prefer canvas and fine art paper which are considered a better investment in art.
-
Thank you Renée. I listened all of your podcasts at BC since their beginning and love them! You provide very useful information based on a rich experience. Very helpful ! I'm a big fan of BC products but not ready yet to commit to Allure. Aluminum photos and acrylic photos don't sell very well here, art buyers prefer canvas and fine art paper which are considered a better investment in art.
Thanks so much, Yvan. Happy to hear you've found them useful. There is always so much more to learn, and this forum is an invaluable source of information for all of us.
In terms of the metal panels, I'm hoping we'll see some lightfastness data to compare the Allure with ChromaLuxe. I did recommend BC have Aardenburg test the panels prior to their release. My understanding is that once a product is on the market, any testing data from Aardenburg, whether favorable or unfavorable, is made public.
Thanks again and best wishes.
-
Thanks so much, Yvan. Happy to hear you've found them useful. There is always so much more to learn, and this forum is an invaluable source of information for all of us.
In terms of the metal panels, I'm hoping we'll see some lightfastness data to compare the Allure with ChromaLuxe. I did recommend BC have Aardenburg test the panels prior to their release. My understanding is that once a product is on the market, any testing data from Aardenburg, whether favorable or unfavorable, is made public.
Thanks again and best wishes.
I don't understand BC's desire to add so much OBA since they recommend applying a laminate that presumably would contain a UV blocking agent thereby negating the OBA.
-
I don't understand BC's desire to add so much OBA since they recommend applying a laminate that presumably would contain a UV blocking agent thereby negating the OBA.
The reason for adding OBAs is likely the same as it has been since these chemicals were introduced into wet darkroom papers many decades ago. I don't think one can presume upon what the laminates contain to mitigate OBA fading until the chemical composition of the laminate is known and the results of the lamination tested for this property - especially by Aardenburg. Especially with this medium, it's not paper and it's quite new, so we don't even know what visual impact to expect if/when the OBAs do fade.
-
We do have a proposed metal prints project posted on the Aardenburg Website:
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com/portfolio/chromalux-metal-prints/
Funding any Aardenburg research is always a challenge, but our metal prints project proposal seems to have generated little if any interest to date. Perhaps the printmaking community's apparent lack of interest in Metal Print longevity is because many customers for metal prints consider them more for modern home decor to be swapped out occasionally for other images rather than heirloom prints to be passed down for generations. Or perhaps the Wilhelm Imaging Research ratings for the Chromaluxe panels have already satisfied folks who are interested in print longevity ratings.
I personally found it interesting that WIR tested the Chromaluxe panels with two uniquely different dye sets, one a 4 channel setup (CMYK), the other with 8 channels (c,C,m,M,LlK, LK, and K) yet rated the two different processes as having no statistically significant difference in outcome, i.e., as stated in the WIR/Chromaluxe press release "65 years for its ChromaLuxe aluminum sublimation photo panels when printed with Epson UltraChrome DS inks, and 64 years when printed with Sawgrass Sublijet-HD Pro Photo XF inks". In my experience, 4 channel versus 8 channel systems almost always show a uniquely different fading signature. Also, because the WIR/Chromaluxe press release draws a distinct competitive advantage for Chromaluxe metal prints over Silver Halide Color papers, the WIR testing begs the question but doesn't answer "How do Chromaluxe metal prints actually fade and/or discolor over time compared to conventional chromogenic color prints like Fuji Crystal Archive II?"
Hopefully, we will be able to fund a study at Aardenburg Imaging & Archives that can answer these questions in the near future.
cheers,
Mark
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com
-
Mark, that's great if you can get it going for Chromaluxe, but correct me if I'm wrong - Chromaluxe is a dye-sublimation process, whereas a unique feature of BC Allure is that it is inkjet directly printable onto the coated metal sheet if the inkjet printer has a flat media pass-through feed, so different chemistry from Chromaluxe with perhaps completely different fade characteristics. And then, as I mentioned above, just wondering what we could expect the OBAs to fade to, as we are not dealing with a paper substrate. Seems like "uncharted territory". I too hope you can get funded to implement such tests.
The furthest I can go for appreciating factors possibly affecting longevity in a paper product review is to mention whether or not there is an OBA presence based on evidence read off the paper white from the i1Pro2 (which I routinely try to remember to do), but more than that is not my area, and I appreciate the special focus you bring to it.
But getting back to the main lines of this thread, of which OBAs is but one, if I had to summarize in a nutshell what I think of my experience testing it, it would be something like this: without laminating it, expect to see prints that look pretty much like Epson Enhanced Matte prints. The finish and brightness are quite similar, and so are the image properties it displays. Put a nice laminate on it however, and it's really much enhanced by virtue of the improved reflectance; I've seen samples of the same photo in both states (laminated versus non-laminated). But the laminate is another process requiring the right machinery and expertise, which I am informed is expensive, so a job casual users would farm-out rather than do in-house. For those wanting a metal substrate for an inkjet print, the most readily useful alternative that comes to mind is dibond-type mounting, which I reviewed on this website in a dedicated article quite some time ago. Also requires special machinery and expertise, hence one uses a service. With "Dibond", we can print on our favorite papers and get them mounted.
So whether to use the one or the other really boils down to a few key factors: (1) either process means ordering-up part of it from a service provider, (2) which is cheaper, depending on the costs of the Allure panels and the lamination versus the cost of an inkjet print and the "Dibond" mount in one's neighbourhood, (3) whether one values the flexibility of paper types if going the "Dibond" route, (4) what one thinks of the image quality with/without lamination compared with one's favorite inkjet papers, and (5) last but not least, the longevity risk, which until better information becomes available we don't know for Allure, but we do know more or less for standard inkjet papers. So to answer the O/P's question directly: yes, obviously I have, but to recommend Allure over Paper+Mounting on metal, hard to say - as some of the key factors I mention here would vary from place to place and person to person.
-
Mark, that's great if you can get it going for Chromaluxe, but correct me if I'm wrong - Chromaluxe is a dye-sublimation process, whereas a unique feature of BC Allure is that it is inkjet directly printable onto the coated metal sheet if the inkjet printer has a flat media pass-through feed, so different chemistry from Chromaluxe with perhaps completely different fade characteristics. And then, as I mentioned above, just wondering what we could expect the OBAs to fade to, as we are not dealing with a paper substrate. Seems like "uncharted territory". I too hope you can get funded to implement such tests.
Right, Chromaluxe Metal prints are printed with a Dye-sub inkjet process and apparently at this time there are only two logical ink sets available for Dye-sublimation transfer printing on the Chromalux panels, whereas Allure is printed more conventionally with an aqueous inkjet printer, so there is much greater variety of inks that could conceivably be chosen to print the Allure panels. Add to this greater variety any laminated or roll-on or spray coated top coating, and the Allure product would need to be tested specifically as its sum total of chosen ink and top coat components dictate. Many combinations are possible, so light fade testing the Allure panels would also involve trying to figure what would be the most likely "best practices" and printer/ink/coating combinations for folks wanting to use the Allure product. BTW, both laminates and aqueous acrylic coatings can impact light fade resistance either way, sometimes helping but sometimes hurting. The UV protection aspects of post coatings is highly overrated. When coatings help with light fade resistance it's largely due to the fact that they impede oxygen and moisture mobility into the image receptor layer. When they hurt longevity, it's because their own solvent chemistry can degrade the ink encapsulation polymers and/or image binder polymers or also trap other residual solvents from the inks themselves that would be better evaporating faster from the media. Hence, the Chromalux metal prints are more of a "known" entity, differing only by the choice of the two currently available ink sets, and their abrasion resistance is such that they don't need any further top coat choices. When I put together the Aardenburg metal prints project proposal, I pretty much had only the Chromaluxe panels and the Epson and Sawgrass dye-sub ink sets in mind to keep the total costs of the project reasonable. There's no reason Allure panels couldn't be tested as well...just a project with more moving parts :)
As for OBAs in the Allure product, the OBAs undoubtedly have to be incorporated directly into the microporous ink receptor layer on this product. This is typically the most vulnerable location for OBA fading. Somewhere in this discussion or another recent one on LULA, I recall someone citing a b*= -9 value for the Allure product. If that figure is correct, then Allure is a high OBA content product which is unlikely to test well in the Aardenburg light fade testing. The lower CDR limit will be reached most likely before 20 Meglux hours no matter what pigmented ink set is used to print the panel. Adding a post spray coat of Premier Print Shield(this coating formula has been shown to help not hurt light fade resistance) might extend the lower CDR to 30 or 40 Mlux hours. That said, a formal test in the only way to know for sure.
cheers,
Mark
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com
-
Yes the b*-9 is from my article, which I obtained from reading the BCAllure OEM profile in ColorthinkPro; however not clear what to make of it. When I measured the 9 extended B&W patches from my target print made in my Epson P800 using their profile (i1Pro2 M condition - M0), I didn't obtain anything so bluish. In fact it was quite neutral across the tonal range, as it also turned out for my custom profile in both M0 and M2 conditions.
-
Yes the b*-9 is from my article, which I obtained from reading the BCAllure OEM profile in ColorthinkPro; however not clear what to make of it. When I measured the 9 extended B&W patches from my target print made in my Epson P800 using their profile (i1Pro2 M condition - M0), I didn't obtain anything so bluish. In fact it was quite neutral across the tonal range, as it also turned out for my custom profile in both M0 and M2 conditions.
If you have an Allure sample handy, measure the i1Pro2 M0 and M2 conditions on the media white surface. If the Delta b* value (i.e., absolute value after calculating M0 minus M2 values) is 0.3 or less then no OBAs, if >0.3. to 2.5 Low OBA, >2.5 to 5 moderate OBA, >5 high OBA.
Usually when M0 b* value gets to be -5 or less (i.e., more strongly negative) on its own reading, then it's likely to have moderate to High OBA content even when not considering the M2 reading which is why I made note of the -9 value cited in your article. M1 readings lower the b* value, i.e., negative b* value becoming even more negative when OBAs are present owing to more UV energy output in the M1 illuminant specification, but are generally quite proportional to the M0 readings between various media. The delta b* guidelines I noted above using legacy M0 readings were developed for the Aardenburg testing protocol over 10 years ago. Moderate and high OBA content samples nearly always take a significant hit on the Conservation Display ratings that don't accrue to low or no OBA media. That's the reality of today's OBA content in modern media.
best,
Mark
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com
best,
Mark
-
Yes, I had already done all that for the review; but I need to clarify a statement just above. There is a nuance. Reading the "paper white" alone, in M0 it is b*-9; however from L* 95 downward what I said above holds: the chroma channels are quite neutral by the numbers. In M2 (UV Cut), even at "paper white" the value of b* is 0.24 and the remainder of the scale quite neutral.