Need advise please

[keithbanham]

Hi guys,
I am a portrait photographer/digital artist in New Zealand. I have recently created a series of "chalk & charcoal" digital sketches and started looking at printers to print them. I have had a look at the IPF6300 and also the Epson 7900 and tommorrow will look at the HP3200. I am pretty confident they could all do great mono for my art but when I went to Canon (which is where I went first) the guy suggested we look at doing all our prints on the 6300 and forget about the pro lab we currently use. We did some costing and would save good money (from our calculations anyway) BUT the big thing in my mind is the uncertainly of inkjet prints lasting as long a the photo prints we currently use. I know they are better than they were 6 years ago but ...?

We offer 2 main products to our clients albums and wall prints. The albums are basically like an A4 artist portfolio with acid free clear sleeves to slip the A4 prints into. In theory the client never handles the prints and unless viewing are within the closed album. The wall mounted images are cold laminated and then artmounted onto a rigid foam core board 20mm thick.

I guess what I am trying to figure out is a comparable longevity to the photo prints we now use. If everything else is equal in the displayed environment will the injet prints last as long as photo prints? Any ideas what sort of life you could reasonably expect from either? We would print mainly on a satin/lustre photo paper around 250gsm.

The print salesmen are intimating that a lot of photographers are moving to injet printing and away from labs but to be honest I don't know any. It appears to me that those who do use injet are using for exhibition/gallery where longevity is not the prime concern. I don't personally know of any who are doing their everyday album and small prints on inkjet (A4). I would love to hear from anybody who is doing this and how they are finding it,

We are a relatively expensive studio so it is vital that we are not lowering our quality in terms of longevity from what we are already using. I am favouring the Canon at the moment as it is significanlty less expensive and the print quality seems to be at least as good as the Epson printing the same files to my eye anyway.

All advise / info to help me work out if this is a positive step forward is greatly appreciated.

cheers


Keith
www.keithbanham.com

[DarkPenguin]

What longevity are you getting now?  I would be stunned if a pigment on paper inkjet print's lifespan was lower than pretty much any traditional process.

http://www.wilhelm-research.com/

and

http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com/

[keithbanham]

What longevity are you getting now?  I would be stunned if a pigment on paper inkjet print's lifespan was lower than pretty much any traditional process.

http://www.wilhelm-research.com/

and

http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com/

Thanks for the reply. I have no idea what I am getting now as I have only had my studio for 6 years. I have seen traditional photo last a long time and a short time depending if they are in direct sunlight or not. I cannot seem to find much data on the benefits of laminating the wall prints  either which is why I am hoping to hear from somebody who is currently doing what I am looking at doing.

[BobFisher]

Photographers printing for exhibition/gallery aren't concerned about longevity?  Why do you feel that's the case?  Fine art photographers are looking to sell their prints and are most definitely concerned with longevity.  Probably moreso than any other genre of photographer - including portrait.

Quality pigment ink prints on proper media have extremely good longevity; longer than traditional wet prints in most instances.  Museums now accept pigment inkjet prints as part of their permanent collections and wouldn't do so if longevity were a concern.

[keithbanham]

Photographers printing for exhibition/gallery aren't concerned about longevity?  Why do you feel that's the case?  Fine art photographers are looking to sell their prints and are most definitely concerned with longevity.  Probably moreso than any other genre of photographer - including portrait.

Quality pigment ink prints on proper media have extremely good longevity; longer than traditional wet prints in most instances.  Museums now accept pigment inkjet prints as part of their permanent collections and wouldn't do so if longevity were a concern.

Hi Bob,
Thanks for your input. Most appreciated.

[Dave Carter]

You might look into using a series of carbon inks developed by Paul Roark.  paulroark.com
I understand they were designed and developed to have very long life and great for Black and White Prints.
I have not used them yet.  But I have attended a recent workshop by Paul and was very impressed by his prints using these inks.

Best of luck,
Dave

[BobFisher]

Further to your point, Keith, given the description of what you're doing with the 'chalk & charcoal' look; these will be b&w prints right?  Black and white with quality pigment inks has been tested to have incredible longevity.  Take a look at some of the free reports on the Aardenburg site.  You'll see the black inks fading much less even than the colour inks.  In some cases there's no fading at all over what would be a great many years in real time.  With the multi-grey/black inksets available from Canon, Epson and even HP now and the improved drivers, tonality and gradation are excellent.  Don't think you'll be disappointed if you make the move to a top end inkjet printer.