Topic: Dye Ink Longevity in wedding albums (Read 7700 times)

rito · « **on:** March 24, 2017, 01:35:51 am »

Hi, This is my first post in LL forum. I am a printmaker for last 2 years. I use Epson 7900 for my job with original Epson ink and Innova Olmec papers(Luster and satin mostly).

I also make wedding albums(printed photo books) using the same media and ink.

Lately I was looking for a low production cost alternatives for high quality photo prints is when I came to know about dye inks. Epson and HP both has launched large format dye ink printers in Asia(Epson B6070 and HP D5800). Both produce excellent photo prints in RC coated media. Where the ink cost is a fraction of price than the pigment ink printers.

I know that the dye inks are more susceptible to fading than pigment ink. But the researches also say that the fading occurs mostly due to ozone, UV and light. Now, since my only use will be for wedding albums(printed photo books) and the prints will be over laminated using film lamination, hence there is no chance of Ozone and UV fading. So I was thinking of considering one of these printers for my wedding album work.

I could not find anyone who has tried the same before. and there is no information in the HP and epson websites regarding the lightfastness of the prints. If anyone has the experience of storing dye ink prints in dark/over laminations, then please share the same here.

What I am not not looking for is Dye vs Pigment type comments. I know the pros and cons of them. I am strictly looking for informations and experiences with Dye ink users only.

Thanks,

Landscapes · « **Reply #1 on:** March 24, 2017, 02:06:49 am »

I'm sorry but I can't resist a number analysis. I have a Canon iPF6400, and the big carts cost around $135 for 300ml, so lets say 50 cent per ml. You're probably only using about 1ml for an 8x10 picutre. This is 50 cents in ink for the page! I can't imagine how much cheaper you need this in order to make a profit. Its true that dye inks look better cause they don't have the gloss differential, but I certainly wouldn't switch to dye inks for cost reasons if I was turning a profit on my work. The paper is always like 3-4x the cost of the ink, so if you want to save some money, this is where you save it.

rito · « **Reply #2 on:** March 24, 2017, 03:28:12 pm »

As I have already mentioned in my post, I am not here to discuss about pigment. If anyone have any information about Dye ink print permanence after lamination or potential use in printed photo books, then Please share it. It would be a real help for me. No pigment vs Dye please.

enduser · « **Reply #3 on:** March 24, 2017, 09:36:34 pm »

There are some results for the HP 57 dye ink on Ardenberg's site. HP claim much improved dyes lately but they don't give anything definite. My own hunting around the internet produced a few possibly "authentic" quotes of around 35 years for HP inks. All the three major brands have worked hard to get some extra life out of dyes but hard evidence is pretty hard to find.
Red River Papers say about 20 years. http://www.redrivercatalog.com/infocenter/articles/dyerorpigmentink.htm

rito · « **Reply #4 on:** March 25, 2017, 04:03:22 am »

Thanks for this info. I am good if the prints does not show considerable amount of fading in 25 years.

What I have read in the in various forums that the reason for fading are mainly Light, UV and Ozone. In My case there are no chances for any of them. People hardly take out their wedding album once in a year.

Also I would be applying an over laminate.

I would wait for some expert comment here who can pinpoint the reasons for ink fading and if they would fade at all in my case.

GrahamBy · « **Reply #5 on:** March 25, 2017, 07:54:31 am »

Quote from: enduser on March 24, 2017, 09:36:34 pm

There are some results for the HP 57 dye ink on Ardenberg's site.

Also for the Canon inks in the Pro-100. However one thing that stood out there was the strong dependence on the paper, it seems that dye+coated paper needs to be evaluated more as a system than is the case for pigment.

BTW, I doubt anyone could distinguish my B&W prints from the pro-100 (dye) and the pro-1000 (pigment) except by looking at unrealistic angles with peculiar lighting, given both on gloss paper. It might be possible with colour, but even then...

rito · « **Reply #6 on:** March 25, 2017, 10:44:38 am »

Quote from: GrahamBy on March 25, 2017, 07:54:31 am

Also for the Canon inks in the Pro-100. However one thing that stood out there was the strong dependence on the paper, it seems that dye+coated paper needs to be evaluated more as a system than is the case for pigment.

BTW, I doubt anyone could distinguish my B&W prints from the pro-100 (dye) and the pro-1000 (pigment) except by looking at unrealistic angles with peculiar lighting, given both on gloss paper. It might be possible with colour, but even then...

Thank you for your valuable input Graham. May i know your experience with dye ink. I mean since how long have you been using it and anything on print permanence/fading

mearussi · « **Reply #7 on:** March 25, 2017, 11:56:30 am »

My only experience with dye inks is in using the Epson 1400 with Claria inks which have been rated by Henry Wilhelm at 200 years in dark storage. So if you can find out if the Epson printer you're considering is using Claria inks then you should have no trouble with dark storage.

http://www.wilhelm-research.com/epson/800.html

unesco · « **Reply #8 on:** March 25, 2017, 02:02:19 pm »

rito,

I don't think that mentioned Epson printer is suitable for photo printing, it is fast machine designed for other purposes incomparable to your 7900 (it has only 4 CMYK inks).

As for dyes, it cannot be generalised if their longevity is long or short. Some dyes longevity (those whose particles are encapsulated) is of the same order of magnitude as pigments, some are one or two orders worse. The best are Epson Claria (1400, 1500W etc, also used in some Noritsu dry-lab solutions in large tanks) as well as Canon ChromaLife 100+ (Pro-100). But it does not make sense to use them since these are only A3+ printers and cartridges per ml are more expensive than yours 7900.
Some, like Epson L800 are much worse (gsearch at wilhelm) or like Epson L300 worse than worse. I don't know what kind of ink is inside of these new machine, but I would not expect any spectacular medium.

You can use third party (dye) inks in Epson printers, more-less encapsulated (eg. InkThrift series, available also for x880 Epsons) but a lot of effort is needed to linearise and profile the printer properly (dyes have different behaviour than pigments, even when 1:1 match is "assured", and the driver is not designed for that use - for the best quality you would need to use some advanced RIPs).

All in all, I think it is not worth to go dye path today for your applications. Maybe dry-lab (usually dyes are used) would be an option, but format could be too small. Hope it helps.

Peter McLennan · « **Reply #9 on:** March 25, 2017, 05:26:32 pm »

Quote from: unesco on March 25, 2017, 02:02:19 pm

rito,

I don't think that mentioned Epson printer is suitable for photo printing, it is fast machine designed for other purposes incomparable to your 7900 (it has only 4 CMYK inks) dye path today for your applications. Maybe dry-lab (usually dyes are used) would be an option, but format could be too small.

That's not correct. The Epson Stylus Photo printer uses six inks. CMYKLCLM

https://epson.ca/i/C11C655001F

I nearly bought one, but chose an L-805 instead. The prints from it are gorgeous.

GrahamBy · « **Reply #10 on:** March 25, 2017, 05:43:06 pm »

Quote from: rito on March 25, 2017, 10:44:38 am

May i know your experience with dye ink. I mean since how long have you been using it and anything on print permanence/fading

No where near long enough to see fading. The Pro-100 I bought about 2 years ago. Prior to that I had a Canon S9000... I guess I bought it in 2002, not long after it was released. It was fairly hopeless for printing B&W, but I still have some of the colour prints I made with it and they are perfect. However, they have been in boxes...

unesco · « **Reply #11 on:** March 25, 2017, 06:28:26 pm »

Quote from: Peter McLennan on March 25, 2017, 05:26:32 pm

That's not correct. The Epson Stylus Photo printer uses six inks. CMYKLCLM

https://epson.ca/i/C11C655001F

I nearly bought one, but chose an L-805 instead. The prints from it are gorgeous.

it is correct, I was referring to Epson B6070 mentioned by rito in the first post

dhachey · « **Reply #12 on:** March 25, 2017, 11:53:59 pm »

There is a huge amount of information on the Wilhelm Research Institute web site mentioned above, probably the best source available on the topic. I didn't see anything specifically about laminated prints (it may be there), but you can roam around to get a general sense of what's available. My sense is that modern inks and papers will last a lot longer than most people expect, just choose well.

Wayne Fox · « **Reply #13 on:** March 26, 2017, 12:45:42 am »

There are some dye ink sets that perform quite well, superior to silver haiide prints, but still falling short of pigment inks. The Claria inkset in dark storage according to Wilhelm is rated at over 200 years, and reading Aardenburgs results in dark storage I would guess its over a 100 years as well.

However, the Epson printer you mentioned is specifically for the sign and banner market, isn't using the Claria inks as far as I can tell and may easily be using cheaper inks since most of the products made by such a printer are short life. I'm not familiar with the HP printer mentioned, but it could be a similar issue.

I believe the Noritsu Green printer uses the Epson Claria inks and is designed for high volume photo production. Also I've seen printers from Fuji Frontier Dry mini labs, which are dye based inks. Both printers produce images very similar to silver halide prints, with no gloss differential and great dMax.

I don't know the ink's used in the Fuji printer, but guessing they are sourcing from Epson or HP with a high quality inkset. In an album, fading will most likely not be the issue that ends the life of the prints, more likely the album itself will be lost to history through lack of interest, neglect, fire, flooding, etc.

Ernst Dinkla · « **Reply #14 on:** March 26, 2017, 09:38:12 am »

Quote from: Wayne Fox on March 26, 2017, 12:45:42 am

There are some dye ink sets that perform quite well, superior to silver haiide prints, but still falling short of pigment inks. The Claria inkset in dark storage according to Wilhelm is rated at over 200 years, and reading Aardenburgs results in dark storage I would guess its over a 100 years as well.

However, the Epson printer you mentioned is specifically for the sign and banner market, isn't using the Claria inks as far as I can tell and may easily be using cheaper inks since most of the products made by such a printer are short life. I'm not familiar with the HP printer mentioned, but it could be a similar issue.

I believe the Noritsu Green printer uses the Epson Claria inks and is designed for high volume photo production. Also I've seen printers from Fuji Frontier Dry mini labs, which are dye based inks. Both printers produce images very similar to silver halide prints, with no gloss differential and great dMax.

I don't know the ink's used in the Fuji printer, but guessing they are sourcing from Epson or HP with a high quality inkset. In an album, fading will most likely not be the issue that ends the life of the prints, more likely the album itself will be lost to history through lack of interest, neglect, fire, flooding, etc.

There is a source for the better Epson dyes in Epson printers;

http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=82703.0

I would not recommend it for the HP model though, thermal heads may not cope with inks for piëzo heads. The quoted Epson B6070 is a CMYK model so not optimal for photography, variable droplet sizes but no minimum droplet size indicated. The HP Vivera dye inks have a good reputation too but it looks like they are not used in the D5800 mentioned by the OP, the printer falls roughly in the same class as the Epson. No indication of the droplet size more than that it is half that of the D5100.

Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst

http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
March 2017 update, 750+ inkjet media white spectral plots

Garnick · « **Reply #15 on:** March 26, 2017, 10:07:56 am »

Quote from: dhachey on March 25, 2017, 11:53:59 pm

There is a huge amount of information on the Wilhelm Research Institute web site mentioned above, probably the best source available on the topic. I didn't see anything specifically about laminated prints (it may be there), but you can roam around to get a general sense of what's available. My sense is that modern inks and papers will last a lot longer than most people expect, just choose well.

Unfortunately the Wilhelm site has a rather tainted reputation as far as their testing procedures are concerned, as well as the numbers they publish, something that has been widely known for many years. It's also unfortunate that some of the most familiar Large Format Professional Printer manufacturers are still using Wilhelms number to sell their products. In my opinion the best site for such information is this one -- http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com/. I also believe that the majority of the knowledgeable contributors to LuLa pay much more attention to the Aardenburg numbers than to those published by Wilhelm. I may be mistaken in that assumption, but I don't believe that's the case. The way I see it, if you need to have that warm, fuzzy feeling about the archival nature of the products you are using, go to Wilhelm. However, if you want a more accurate assessment, Aardenburg is the where you will find it. And again, this is my opinion only. Others will undoubtedly disagree.

Gary

Paul Roark · « **Reply #16 on:** March 26, 2017, 11:23:25 am »

Quote from: Ernst Dinkla on March 26, 2017, 09:38:12 am

There is a source for the better Epson dyes in Epson printers;

http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=82703.0

I would not recommend it for the HP model though, thermal heads may not cope with inks for piëzo heads. The quoted Epson B6070 is a CMYK model so not optimal for photography, variable droplet sizes but no minimum droplet size indicated. The HP Vivera dye inks have a good reputation too but ...

As noted at the end of the previous thread, I used and still use the Noritsu-sourced "Claria" dyes in Epson printers. The last wide format printer I used them in was an old Epson 4000. See http://www.paulroark.com/BW-Info/4000-Noritsu-2K.pdf, which is a full color system. I reverse engineered the dilution base, so dilute colors and K are easy to mix. Today, however, the dyes are in my every-day Epson WorkForce 1100 only, and I doubt I'll ever sell prints made with these dyes in galleries again. They may win the beauty contest, but they also are not, in my view, lightfast enough to be sold as "fine art."

Last year I took apart a print that had been framed for the 2013 show. It already showed a visible difference between the areas under the frame and the areas that were exposed to light. The print was on Red River metallic paper, sprayed with Lascaux, and displayed without glazing.

Unlike our pigment inksets where the carbon based black inks are tougher than the color pigments, with the Claria/Noritsu dyes the black is the weakest, and I think that weakness is not being measured in the Wilhelm tests. In the Aardenburg-Imaging testing, the 100% K does OK, but look at the next darkest patch, which is where the highest concentration of the black ink would be. It shows more fade.

I'm a B&W printer, so using as much of the black dye as possible was to avoid the metamerism of the color dyes, but it was a double edged sword.

As to the HP dyes, I tested those in one of my Epson printers and found that they were not compatible with the Epson and third party carbon inks I also use. They also had metamerism that was much worse than the Claria dyes.

So, I'm a fan of the Claria/Noritsu dyes for non-fine art purposes, but while they are a huge step up over the older Epson dyes, they are not in the pigment class when it comes to longevity.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

rito · « **Reply #17 on:** March 28, 2017, 05:36:01 am »

I Thank you all for your valuable inputs.

I would like to provide some more info here.

1. I have taken test prints from both the printers which I have mentioned (Epson B6070 and HP D5800) and both produced excellent image. Though not as good as my Epson 7900, specially not for Black and whites. The BnWs had a little green shift to them. I think which can be corrected using a RIP. And they had a little more grains to both color and BnWs as compared to 7900. But I can't really complain when it comes to print cost. Shadow to highlight transition in smooth and skin tones are excellent. Greens are not that good to my eyes.

2. The media used were Innova Olmec luster. it's a RC coated paper and is one of my favorites. It produces excellent prints for very low cost which are fairly good scratch and scuffing resistant.

3. Both the companies are marketing the printers for short run indoor signage use. And there is no information on the ink formulation and light-fastness of the ink. So we have no information on that.

Now, can we all agree on the following facts?

A. Prints fade mostly due to UV, light and Ozone.

B. If we use RC coated paper and then laminate the dye prints using a film over-laminate and use them for wedding photo book inner pages, then the fading will not occur in 25-30 years.

Request opinion on that.

unesco · « **Reply #18 on:** March 28, 2017, 05:56:16 am »

Quote from: rito on March 28, 2017, 05:36:01 am

Now, can we all agree on the following facts?

A. Prints fade mostly due to UV, light and Ozone.

B. If we use RC coated paper and then laminate the dye prints using a film over-laminate and use them for wedding photo book inner pages, then the fading will not occur in 25-30 years.

A. ...and paper itself.
B. no one, without appropriate measurements can give you exact numbers to guarantee that life span.

my two comments:
1) personally, I wouldn't like to have such a wedding photos...
2) please let me express my feeling, sorry for being direct - it looks like, that you've already made a decision based on costs and now look for its justification...

Ernst Dinkla · « **Reply #19 on:** March 28, 2017, 06:44:11 am »

Quote from: unesco on March 28, 2017, 05:56:16 am

A. ...and paper itself.
B. no one, without appropriate measurements can give you exact numbers to guarantee that life span.

my two comments:
1) personally, I wouldn't like to have such a wedding photos...
2) please let me express my feeling, sorry for being direct - it looks like, that you've already made a decision based on costs and now look for its justification...

I agree with your observations. A 190 grams paper with a high OBA content, another dye to shift color. I have no idea what the lamination itself will do in time and I guess this product is for a tropical climate given the distribution of the printers discussed.

Olmec 61 is worse on OBA BTW, see attached spectral plot.

Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst

http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
March 2017 update, 750+ inkjet media white spectral plots

Author Topic: Dye Ink Longevity in wedding albums (Read 7700 times)