LL's iPF6100 review

[Ernst Dinkla]

A balanced report with one flaw in my opinion.

>>Canon's Lucia pigment inks have longevity comparable to that of Epson's K3 inks and HP's Vivera inks according to preliminary results from Henry Wilhelm (B&W only). We still are awaiting results from iPF printers in colour though.<<

>>There still aren't independent third-party longevity numbers available on Canon's Lucia pigment inks, but there's little reason to doubt, at this point, that they won't be competitive.<<

The Lucia pigment inks were tested on color fading by the independent German lab Image Engineering at least 9 months ago and published In Fine Art Printer, ColorFoto and on the pages of Image Engineering itself. The test was based on the Canon Desktop model 9500 and results compared to Epson and HP inks in the same test. More recent results on a variety of 50 papers are available at the Colorfoto site. From a test comparing the Canon 9500, Epson R2400, HP B9180 and the compatibility (on more aspects) of the papers with the 3 printers. Fade results by the same lab included but less specific as in the other publications. In German. The test can be downloaded for about 3 Euro. Same article is in the 2008 Febr. issue of ColorFoto.

http://digitalkamera.image-engineering.de/...apiere-Cofo.pdf

More documents on fade testing on that site.

The 50 paper test:

http://www.colorfoto.de/kameras/testberich...kern.155431.htm

1 HP, 2 Epson, 3 Canon is the fade resistance order of the pigment inks I observe in the numbers.

>>Discussing this with users of the first generation iPF printers, and from what I read online, head failures seem to be quite rare, and so only someone who is going to be doing very high volume printing over a several year period will likely find this to be problematic.<<

One example I know is an iPF9000 that runs 5 days a week almost 12 hours a day for a year now. The original two heads have been replaced by the one generation later guaranteed type. Given the volume produced an acceptable lifetime according to the owner and when the new ones fail in a year he assumes they will be replaced by Canon. Several years and very high volume may fit the new generation heads but may be asking a bit too much from the first generation. The iPF6100 has the new generation heads. Nobody who owns a HP or Canon will whine about the fact that heads can be replaced by the user and/or cleaned manually by the user. Combining long lifetimes and user replaceable is a huge advantage to other solutions.


Ernst Dinkla

try: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/

[nickdavis]

Also:

>>In June of 2006 I reviewed the then brand new Canon iPF5000, that company's first pigment ink printer

(from http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/...roducts_id=173)

I believe the ipf5000 is the third-generation of Canon's pigment line. The Wx200 series was first (and there might have been some before that, please correct me if I'm wrong), then Wx400 series, then the iPFx000 series, and now the iPFx100 series.

[Pete Berry]

A balanced report with one flaw in my opinion.

>>Discussing this with users of the first generation iPF printers, and from what I read online, head failures seem to be quite rare, and so only someone who is going to be doing very high volume printing over a several year period will likely find this to be problematic.<<

One example I know is an iPF9000 that runs 5 days a week almost 12 hours a day for a year now. The original two heads have been replaced by the one generation later guaranteed type. Given the volume produced an acceptable lifetime according to the owner and when the new ones fail in a year he assumes they will be replaced by Canon.

try: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=174489\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

With my almost year-old iPF5000, I had what seems to be the only premature printhead failure recorded in the Wiki, with both heads failing within a several week period after only about 1200 sq. ft. printed. Although these were 1st generation heads (PF-01), a five minute conversation with Cannon tech. support on each occasion had a new PF-03 head overnighted, no charge, and with a year's warranty each. I couldn't have asked for better.

I give John Hollenburg and his Wiki the credit for bringing the lack of more than a month's coverage on defective "expendables" such a printheads and carts, to light, as well as the defective RFU gear problem. Canon pays attention to this resource! Defective carts are not that rare, and as far as I know, even months down the line they have been replaced when the indicator chip fails.

Pete

[jpgentry]

I have the ipf8000 with 15082 square feet of media through it and it's still on the original printheads (PF-02.)  The PF-03's are out and I have a set sitting here if they ever need replacement but so far the original heads are going strong.

A question for Michael... When you mentioned the gamut size of the printers what type of paper were you comparing?  Matte or Glossy?  My experience is that Epson has the largest gamut on matte followed by Canon followed by HP, but on glossy they are all very similar with the Canon having the largest gamut with the exception of ONLY the 11880 from Epson.

With my almost year-old iPF5000, I had what seems to be the only premature printhead failure recorded in the Wiki, with both heads failing within a several week period after only about 1200 sq. ft. printed. Although these were 1st generation heads (PF-01), a five minute conversation with Cannon tech. support on each occasion had a new PF-03 head overnighted, no charge, and with a year's warranty each. I couldn't have asked for better.

I give John Hollenburg and his Wiki the credit for bringing the lack of more than a month's coverage on defective "expendables" such a printheads and carts, to light, as well as the defective RFU gear problem. Canon pays attention to this resource! Defective carts are not that rare, and as far as I know, even months down the line they have been replaced when the indicator chip fails.

Pete
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=174595\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

[John Hollenberg]

A question for Michael... When you mentioned the gamut size of the printers what type of paper were you comparing?  Matte or Glossy?  My experience is that Epson has the largest gamut on matte followed by Canon followed by HP, but on glossy they are all very similar with the Canon having the largest gamut.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=174661\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

On Luster type papers the K3 inkset and the Lucia Inkset were about equal in gamut volume (but different shapes).  The K3+VM on the 11880 is slightly larger (perhaps a 5% increase at most), but not at all clear that this would be visible in prints.  I don't know where the gamut volume for the 7880 falls.  Presumably it would be similar to the 11880, but there are enough differences that it may be less.  I wonder if Michael had color management in the driver turned on for the iPF6100 and thus got a much smaller gamut than he should have.  Happened to Wayne Fox (and has happened to others).  Would be interesting to see what gamut volumes he got for which papers.

--John

[jpgentry]

I just downloaded two profiles from Booksmart Studio for Hahnemule Fine Art Pearl created with MonacoProfiler 1728 patches.  The total volume of the Canon ipf5100 is 746136 and total gamut of the Epson 4880 is 773602.  This is an alphacelulos paper, so not really an typical photo paper and certainly not a straight matte.  This represents less than 3% larger gamut for the Epson in total gamut.  

Bottom line is there is not enough difference to say that one printer has a better gamut than the other without qualifying exactly what paper you are using as people may make purchasing decision based on that.  Michael rightly said the print quality is too close to call and I feel the gamuts of these printers are also.

-Jonathan

On Luster type papers the K3 inkset and the Lucia Inkset were about equal in gamut volume (but different shapes).  The K3+VM on the 11880 is slightly larger (perhaps a 5% increase at most), but not at all clear that this would be visible in prints.  I don't know where the gamut volume for the 7880 falls.  Presumably it would be similar to the 11880, but there are enough differences that it may be less.  I wonder if Michael had color management in the driver turned on for the iPF6100 and thus got a much smaller gamut than he should have.  Happened to Wayne Fox (and has happened to others).  Would be interesting to see what gamut volumes he got for which papers.

--John
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=174677\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

[Ernst Dinkla]

A balanced report with one flaw in my opinion.

>>Canon's Lucia pigment inks have longevity comparable to that of Epson's K3 inks and HP's Vivera inks according to preliminary results from Henry Wilhelm (B&W only). We still are awaiting results from iPF printers in colour though.<<

>>There still aren't independent third-party longevity numbers available on Canon's Lucia pigment inks, but there's little reason to doubt, at this point, that they won't be competitive.<<

The Lucia pigment inks were tested on color fading by the independent German lab Image Engineering at least 9 months ago and published In Fine Art Printer, ColorFoto and on the pages of Image Engineering itself. The test was based on the Canon Desktop model 9500 and results compared to Epson and HP inks in the same test. More recent results on a variety of 50 papers are available at the Colorfoto site. From a test comparing the Canon 9500, Epson R2400, HP B9180 and the compatibility (on more aspects) of the papers with the 3 printers. Fade results by the same lab included but less specific as in the other publications. In German. The test can be downloaded for about 3 Euro. Same article is in the 2008 Febr. issue of ColorFoto.

http://digitalkamera.image-engineering.de/...apiere-Cofo.pdf

More documents on fade testing on that site.

The 50 paper test:

http://www.colorfoto.de/kameras/testberich...kern.155431.htm

1 HP, 2 Epson, 3 Canon is the fade resistance order of the pigment inks I observe in the numbers.


try: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

There have been new threads commenting on this review but I have not seen a comment on what I observed about the fade testings done and what Michael writes in this review. I'm not that interested in gamuts today but in what that gamut will look like after some years on the prints I make for artists. Are there comments on the validity of the tests, is the outcome for all 3 pigment inks satisfying enough or isn't this a hot topic anymore ?


Ernst Dinkla

try: [a href=\"http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/]http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/[/url]

[Ernst Dinkla]

A balanced report with one flaw in my opinion.

>>Canon's Lucia pigment inks have longevity comparable to that of Epson's K3 inks and HP's Vivera inks according to preliminary results from Henry Wilhelm (B&W only). We still are awaiting results from iPF printers in colour though.<<

>>There still aren't independent third-party longevity numbers available on Canon's Lucia pigment inks, but there's little reason to doubt, at this point, that they won't be competitive.<<

The Lucia pigment inks were tested on color fading by the independent German lab Image Engineering at least 9 months ago and published In Fine Art Printer, ColorFoto and on the pages of Image Engineering itself. The test was based on the Canon Desktop model 9500 and results compared to Epson and HP inks in the same test. More recent results on a variety of 50 papers are available at the Colorfoto site. From a test comparing the Canon 9500, Epson R2400, HP B9180 and the compatibility (on more aspects) of the papers with the 3 printers. Fade results by the same lab included but less specific as in the other publications. In German. The test can be downloaded for about 3 Euro. Same article is in the 2008 Febr. issue of ColorFoto.

http://digitalkamera.image-engineering.de/...apiere-Cofo.pdf

More documents on fade testing on that site.

The 50 paper test:

http://www.colorfoto.de/kameras/testberich...kern.155431.htm

1 HP, 2 Epson, 3 Canon is the fade resistance order of the pigment inks I observe in the numbers.


try: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

There have been new threads commenting on this review but I have not seen a comment on what I observed about the fade testings done and what Michael writes in this review. I'm not that interested in gamuts today but in what that gamut will look like after some years on the prints I make for artists. Are there comments on the validity of the tests, is the outcome for all 3 pigment inks satisfying enough or isn't this a hot topic anymore ?


Ernst Dinkla

try: [a href=\"http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/]http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/[/url]

[Colorwave]

There have been new threads commenting on this review but I have not seen a comment on what I observed about the fade testings done and what Michael writes in this review. I'm not that interested in gamuts today but in what that gamut will look like after some years on the prints I make for artists. Are there comments on the validity of the tests, is the outcome for all 3 pigment inks satisfying enough or isn't this a hot topic anymore ?
Ernst Dinkla

try: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=176612\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Some of the interest may be tied to whether you own the brand ranked 1, 2, or 3 on your list.  Canon users are probably not interested in hearing about the relative archival rankings, as long as they qualify as archival grade in the first place (which is obviously a subjective term).  
Like the relative differences in the color gamut, I suppose that as long as the prints outlast the decade or two that most of us will care about them, the issue is less important to many.  Personally, I think that if the print quality is comparable, it can only be good to have the longest rated prints.  If both of the testing organizations prove to be wrong about longevity and our prints fade at a more rapid pace than predicted, the relative differences in rated lifespan are still likely to differentiate the three brands.
-Ron H.

[jpgentry]

Does not 70 years represent the average lifetime?  This will never be as important an issue for me as for others.  Once the rating surpases a certain threshold it really seems to be somewhat irrelevant.  Others will feel that this is THE issue and opinions will very, but the pigment inks of the big 3 seems to be in the same ballpark.

Some of the interest may be tied to whether you own the brand ranked 1, 2, or 3 on your list.  Canon users are probably not interested in hearing about the relative archival rankings, as long as they qualify as archival grade in the first place (which is obviously a subjective term). 
Like the relative differences in the color gamut, I suppose that as long as the prints outlast the decade or two that most of us will care about them, the issue is less important to many.  Personally, I think that if the print quality is comparable, it can only be good to have the longest rated prints.  If both of the testing organizations prove to be wrong about longevity and our prints fade at a more rapid pace than predicted, the relative differences in rated lifespan are still likely to differentiate the three brands.
-Ron H.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=176649\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

[Wayne Fox]

Does not 70 years represent the average lifetime?  This will never be as important an issue for me as for others.  Once the rating surpases a certain threshold it really seems to be somewhat irrelevant.  Others will feel that this is THE issue and opinions will very, but the pigment inks of the big 3 seems to be in the same ballpark.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=176698\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I've always believed that the life of 99.99% of all images produced will end from some factor other than fading due to exposure to UV light and various gases.

The truth is the physical print itself is far more fragile than the image on the print.  Eventually it will end up compromised, whether just thrown away because it has no meaning to anyone anymore, or accidently damaged while moving  .. the list could be quite long.  I actually have a print from early in my career that has been ruined by a bullet hole from a stray bullet that went through my offices front door, through the wall and picture hanging on it.

I value longevity, but they all have enough to satisfy me.

[Ernst Dinkla]

I actually have a print from early in my career that has been ruined by a bullet hole from a stray bullet that went through my offices front door, through the wall and picture hanging on it.

I value longevity, but they all have enough to satisfy me.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

We live in different places, with bullets coming through doors and walls I wouldn't ask for a life long fade resistance either :-)


Ernst Dinkla

try: [a href=\"http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/]http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/[/url]

[Colorwave]

We live in different places, with bullets coming through doors and walls I wouldn't ask for a life long fade resistance either :-)
Ernst Dinkla
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=176727\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Yes, in fact I might look into a kevlar based print material instead.
-Ron H.

[Ernst Dinkla]

Like the relative differences in the color gamut, I suppose that as long as the prints outlast the decade or two that most of us will care about them, the issue is less important to many.  Personally, I think that if the print quality is comparable, it can only be good to have the longest rated prints.  If both of the testing organizations prove to be wrong about longevity and our prints fade at a more rapid pace than predicted, the relative differences in rated lifespan are still likely to differentiate the three brands.
-Ron H.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

That's more or less my approach too. With more testing done and preferably with different but sound methods and the same ranking still holds you get at least some assurance of a right choice.

Checking the outcome of the ColorFoto 50 paper test more thoroughly I see that Canon scores at the same level with HP in general. That's a different result to the score published before by Image Engineering but that was only on one paper. The Epson 3800 scored lower than the other two in the 50 paper test.

Wilhelm has results for two papers and the 9500 with good numbers but no ozone testing results. Then there are the Canon published numbers that refer to Wilhelm but it is a bit confusing who did the test.

McCormick's testing program will be the next step for a wider base of test reults. Including the Fiber/Baryte papers.

[a href=\"http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com/news.html]http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com/news.html[/url]


Ernst Dinkla

try: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/

[Wayne Fox]

We live in different places, with bullets coming through doors and walls I wouldn't ask for a life long fade resistance either :-)
Ernst Dinkla

try: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=176727\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

To put this incident in context, it isn't my neighborhood.  For a short period of time a sports outlet specializing in guns was located across the street, with an indoor target range.  The bullet was from a careless customer that discharged it accidently while removing it from his car (at least that was their claim).

Within a week after this they eliminated the gun portion of their operation and enlarged their archery range.

The disappointment for me was this particular print was a duplicate of my first PP of A merit print, part of the 1977 PPofA Loan Collection, so there was some sentimental attachment.  It has at least 10 hours of hand artwork, and was pretty much impossible to restore or reprint.  Just last year, I found the negative, and am actually working on duplicating the enhancement work in Photoshop now ( again, just for sentimental reasons).