Digital BW, The Print

This is extremely disappointing.  I'd been led to believe that the Nanos
were behind the UCs but "not that far behind".  This has dampened my
enthusiasm for coming generations but I remain open-minded and encourage
innovation. 2+ density on HPR really looks nice and is a very worthy goal.
(And I'm reminded of the whole densitometer discussion when people said
matte paper was technically disadvantaged by its matte surface - I know that
at least 2.05D is possible.) The quest for higher saturation longevity
continues.  I'm quite interested to see what InkVillage actually posts in
terms of longevity tests.


> From: Shilesh Jani <shileshjani@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 03:42:11 -0000
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: [Digital BW] NanoChrome South Window Fade Test
> 
> I am cross posting this message at the Epson Wide Format and Digital
> BW, The Print forums.
> 
> My fade test is at 18 days tonight. I live in the Mid South USA, and
> we have been fairly sunny these last 18 days, but I did not keep
> track. My original intent was to keep them exposed for 4 weeks prior
> to taking a peek. But this evening I noticed one of the print on the
> floor, and decided to take a quick measurement. I was not good, so
> what the heck, I measured them all.
> 
> My admittedly crude methodology was: I printed 100%, 75%, 50%, and
> 25% ink limit patches of pure color on various papers using QTR. Each
> 8.5 x 11 page contained 2 sets of colors. One set (Test) was was
> stuck on the south facing window, the other went in the drawer (Ref).
> My window is double glazed.
> 
> Due to other attributes of NanoChrome inks, I have whittled down my
> interest in these inks to using only the black ink (Dmax on HPR) in
> otherwise pigments inksets. So my reporting is rather narrow, but
> telling nonetheless.
> 
> I had origianlly intended to use a friend's I1 for detailed
> measurments. The limited measurements below were made with a Heiland
> PM Densitometer.
> 
> I am reporting the fade in density percent of the 25% ink coverage
> patch of the black ink.
> 
> Fade% = (1 - Test D/Ref D) x 100
> 
> I understand all the limitations of the test, so let us please not
> get into arguments. I am happy to provide clarification, if any is
> required.
> 
> The comparison were (1) Epson R220 Dye inks, (2) NanoChrome inks
> loaded on the R220 printer, and (3) Epson 4000 UC inks.
> 
> The reults for the 25 ink limit K patch:
> 
> Epson Premium Glossy - 5% Epson Dye, 5% Nano, 0% Epson UC PK
> Epson Enhanced Matte - 4% Epson Dye, 15% Nano, 0% Epson UC MK
> Hahnemuhle Photo Rag - 10% Epson Dye, 16% Nano, 0% Epson UC MK
> HPR Satin - Not tested for Epson Dye, 11% Nano, 0% Epson UC MK
> 
> Some observations - the black NanoChrome ink warm shifts
> significantly. I have not made meticulous measurments of the other
> pure colors, but the trend is that LM fades the most noticebly.
> 
> So in this rather limited test, the NanoChrome black ink is no better
> than Epson Dye black, and no where near Epson UC MK or UC PK.
> 
> I must say I am dissapointed because the Dmax sure was nice on
> Hahnemuhle line of papers.
> 
> Regards.
> 
> Shilesh