Thanks Mark. I read those internal results posted on their site as well and brought it up at the time. We were discussing it here and a week later the posting was removed. It wouldn't surprise me at all if we find out that they had them tested before release ( which would be the practical way of doing things) and decided not to make the results public. If the figures are going backward why would they. It certainly wouldn't be the first time a company did this ( Lyson ).
Their gamut was great in the original ex inks so the whole thing doesn't make any sense to me. But then a lot of things in this industry mystify me. I would be a big deal to me if I wanted a invest in their soon to be released 60 printer.
I wonder about the Epson yellow as well.
quote author=MHMG link=topic=117672.msg974963#msg974963 date=1493598660]
In previous years I have always posted very soon after any and all test results became available. However, cost cutting measures this year mean Aardenburg will have to publish less frequently from now on. The tests have only reached the 20 megalux hour mark with 30 megalux hours due very soon, but I don't want to read too much into the Aardenburg test results just yet. We will have better trend lines at the 50-60 hour mark which will occur later this year. I do intend to publish at that time.
That said, the data I have evaluated so far suggest Canon did not take the opportunity with the Lucia Pro 11 ink set to make any longevity improvements. In fact, it may not be quite as good as the older Lucia EX set which if it bears out in further testing testing would be consistent with Canon's own claims to date: see
https://support.usa.canon.com/kb/index?page=content&id=ART164634&actp=RSSCanon originally included these claims in the printer spec sheets, then mysteriously removed them from the printer spec sheets and buried them pretty deep at the URL listed above. The data behind these claims appears to have originated from internal testing at Canon, not any independent lab, but taken at face value when compared to earlier WIR test scores for older LUCIA ink sets, Canon's own ratings for Pro Luster and Platinum papers are very conservative and also suggest a step backwards in longevity compared to earlier LUCIA ink sets. My 20 megalux hour test results don't give me any reason to "hope it ain't so", but again, it's just too early in testing to draw any definitive conclusions.
Some trade show sources reported that Canon did finally contract with WIR to test the new Lucia Pro ink set with test results due to be released last fall, but I don't see the slightest indication on the WIR website that this was true or that any tests will be forthcoming any time soon at WIR. Hence, my earlier comment that Canon management may have simply decided in the absence of any image longevity improvements, new printer sales will be better served by a low key marketing approach to print longevity ratings.
kind regards,
Mark
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com[/quote]