Digital BW, The Print

Window fade testing after about 30 days in the winter gray (some might
call it Sun). Double pain low E glass, South facing window. Measured
with a Spectroscan/Spectrolino with the black background, clear filter.
Notice the paper white (where the lines all cross)

Epson Enhanced matte:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v329/Greg_E/fade/eem30.gif

Epson Heavy Weight Matte:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v329/Greg_E/fade/HWM30.gif

Merlin Natural:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v329/Greg_E/fade/MerlinNatural30.gif

Epson PGPP:
[IMG]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v329/Greg_E/fade/PGPP30.gif[/IMG]

I'll put them back in the window on Monday for another 30 or so days. 

Hopefully Yahoo won't slaughter the links.

Greg wrote:
> Window fade testing after about 30 days in the winter gray (some might
> call it Sun). Double pain low E glass, South facing window. Measured
> with a Spectroscan/Spectrolino with the black background, clear filter.
> Notice the paper white (where the lines all cross)
> 
> Epson Enhanced matte:
> http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v329/Greg_E/fade/eem30.gif
> 
> Epson Heavy Weight Matte:
> http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v329/Greg_E/fade/HWM30.gif
> 
> Merlin Natural:
> http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v329/Greg_E/fade/MerlinNatural30.gif
> 
> Epson PGPP:
> [IMG]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v329/Greg_E/fade/PGPP30.gif[/IMG]
> 
> I'll put them back in the window on Monday for another 30 or so days. 
> 
> Hopefully Yahoo won't slaughter the links.

The last link has problems. Too rich in text.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v329/Greg_E/fade/PGPP30.gif

On Merlin there's no shift at all, the rest little fading and 
a bit yellowing of the paper, PGP green increasing but not a 
shift to green. It could all be well within the fluctuation of 
the method used.
Is that the correct summary ?


Met vriendelijke groeten,Ernst


|  Dinkla Grafische Techniek  |
|     www.pigment-print.com    |
|             ( unvollendet )            |

I haven't compared the measurement files yet, so yes the PGPP might be
within the device's error envelope. The Merlin actually shows a very
slight change in paper white, going toward blue, which again could be
measurement error. But the change in EEM in definitely not measurement
error. To my eye EEM is exactly the same color paper white on both
sides now, just proving why some many of us will not use it for
important images. It should be noted that the EEM change in whiteness
seemingly has changed the over all gamut with a yellow shift. Not too
surprising, but I have never really seen what happens when the paper
yellows. To the eye they all look about like you would expect an
profile target to look, and from the gamut plots, nothing really jumps
out as being worng. So Claria (so far) really is lasting pretty well.
I'll carry the test out until I get bored, or I get a bunch of
hatemail like Mr. Livick did.

Greg, Is all the paper printed on? Perhaps a few blank sheets or strips from
different rolls or package might be useful. You data will or may stand for
those inks and that paper. What about other batches? Do they all get the
same relative heat and environmental issues? Anybody willing to take this on
get a high five from me. I am just asking question to see how those variable
are being addressed if at all. 

 

And since EEM is showing it's true color, I once again why one would use it
at all or for testing? 

 

 

Eric Neilsen Photography

4101 Commerce Street, Suite 9

Dallas, TX 75226

214-827-8301

http://ericneilsenphotography.com

 

Skype : ejprinter

  _____  

From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Greg
Sent: Saturday, January 20, 2007 9:10 AM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Claria fade test

 

I haven't compared the measurement files yet, so yes the PGPP might be
within the device's error envelope. The Merlin actually shows a very
slight change in paper white, going toward blue, which again could be
measurement error. But the change in EEM in definitely not measurement
error. To my eye EEM is exactly the same color paper white on both
sides now, just proving why some many of us will not use it for
important images. It should be noted that the EEM change in whiteness
seemingly has changed the over all gamut with a yellow shift. Not too
surprising, but I have never really seen what happens when the paper
yellows. To the eye they all look about like you would expect an
profile target to look, and from the gamut plots, nothing really jumps
out as being worng. So Claria (so far) really is lasting pretty well.
I'll carry the test out until I get bored, or I get a bunch of
hatemail like Mr. Livick did.

 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

How about a picture of the test conditions? Both from inside and out

 

Eric Neilsen Photography

4101 Commerce Street, Suite 9

Dallas, TX 75226

214-827-8301

http://ericneilsenphotography.com

 

Skype : ejprinter

  _____  

From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Greg
Sent: Friday, January 19, 2007 7:06 PM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Digital BW] Claria fade test

 

Window fade testing after about 30 days in the winter gray (some might
call it Sun). Double pain low E glass, South facing window. Measured
with a Spectroscan/Spectrolino with the black background, clear filter.
Notice the paper white (where the lines all cross)

Epson Enhanced matte:
http://img.photobuc
<http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v329/Greg_E/fade/eem30.gif>
ket.com/albums/v329/Greg_E/fade/eem30.gif

Epson Heavy Weight Matte:
http://img.photobuc
<http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v329/Greg_E/fade/HWM30.gif>
ket.com/albums/v329/Greg_E/fade/HWM30.gif

Merlin Natural:
http://img.photobuc
<http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v329/Greg_E/fade/MerlinNatural30.gif>
ket.com/albums/v329/Greg_E/fade/MerlinNatural30.gif

Epson PGPP:
[IMG]http://img.photobuc
<http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v329/Greg_E/fade/PGPP30.gif>
ket.com/albums/v329/Greg_E/fade/PGPP30.gif[/IMG]

I'll put them back in the window on Monday for another 30 or so days. 

Hopefully Yahoo won't slaughter the links.

 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I don't own the printer (R260). I finally found someone that was
willing to send me some 4x6 with a 135 patch profile target on them.
So I tested what he used. I was most concerned with the matte papers
ratings that Wilhelm gave because flat out I didn't believe them. So
far I have to say that these inks are lasting well, much better than I
had thought. Too bad the dmax is so poor in two of the three matte
papers tested.

As far as the conditions, it is a commercail building built to New
York State codes in 1998. Double pane low E glass. this window also
has a black out shade about 2 inches away from the papers. All papers
are in the same (due South) window, so should receive the same amount
of light. Air flow is negligible (sp?) with the shade covering the
window. TEmps. are low to moderate since it's winter, and I can't
really say there has been much Sun, mostly gray rainy/snowy days.

BTW, I traded some free custom profiles for the expense of the testing
for the guy that printed and sent the test papers. I offered the same
here but no one was interested. And the profiles were not made from
the 135 patches, I offered the choice of either 729 patches or 1728
patches.

I'll carry the test out until I get bored, or I get a bunch of
hatemail like Mr. Livick did.


You're a brave man! So let me the first one ;-). Seriously though, 
Greg, how does this compare to the old fugitive dyes? A control, i.e.

Keep 'em fading buddy.

Shilesh

from a new member...

My fade tests are more brutal...  south facing single pane window in southern california, 
elevation 4500 feet, sunshine direct about half the day, temperatures from 40 to 110 F... I 
don't have a sophisticated curve drawing photometer, but measure patches manually with 
an X-rite 408.  My tests are limited to my favorite papers, like photo rag, and inkaid on 
lanaquarell...  fade with UC inks on my R800 and 4000 have been impressive, about 5% 
density drop in 4 month, summer.  The color remained relatively neutral, with some loss 
of light Cyan on the 4000 test.  am enjoying earning on this site, will have questions 
soon... trying to get decent B&W from the 4000/UC on silver rag...  so far, no luck, as 
others have reported.  

I did run control with dyes, on the 960.... about one week in the environment showed 
visible fade... both in the black only and colors...

chuck

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Shilesh Jani" <shileshjani@...> 
wrote:

>
> I'll carry the test out until I get bored, or I get a bunch of
> hatemail like Mr. Livick did.
> 
> 
> You're a brave man! So let me the first one ;-). Seriously though, 
> Greg, how does this compare to the old fugitive dyes? A control, i.e.
> 
> Keep 'em fading buddy.
> 
> Shilesh
>

I didn't put up a control, but they seem to be doing better than the
last inks that tested. If Epson had been able to get better dmax on
matte papers, the game might be over, but dmax is very similar on two
of the three matte papers to pigment PK on those same papers.

And actually someone over at DPReview was already starting to give me
grief. But now it's down on the second or third page, and no one there
is motivated enough to go past that first page for anything.

Thank you, Greg. I think the issues left to resolve for inkjets (color 
or b/w) are: (1) greater Dmax (~2.0 is good enough for me) on matte 
papers, and (2) dye-like transparency (no brozing, GD) on RC papers. I 
would settle for (1) and never bother with RC papers again because I 
hate reflections of any kind.

Shilesh

> If Epson had been able to get better dmax on
> matte papers, the game might be over, but dmax is very similar on two
> of the three matte papers to pigment PK on those same papers.
>

i agree 100% Shilesh, a 1.9-2.0 on matte paper and i
would be in heaven.
john e


--- Shilesh Jani <shileshjani@...> wrote:

> Thank you, Greg. I think the issues left to resolve
> for inkjets (color 
> or b/w) are: (1) greater Dmax (~2.0 is good enough
> for me) on matte 
> papers, and (2) dye-like transparency (no brozing,
> GD) on RC papers. I 
> would settle for (1) and never bother with RC papers
> again because I 
> hate reflections of any kind.
> 
> Shilesh
> 
> > If Epson had been able to get better dmax on
> > matte papers, the game might be over, but dmax is
> very similar on two
> > of the three matte papers to pigment PK on those
> same papers.
> > 
> 
> 
>

Hi Shilesh,

>I would settle for (1) and never bother with RC papers again because I 
> hate reflections of any kind.

Same here.  I'd be happy as a pig in a mud hole, happy as a possum in
the garbage, happy as a ...well, you get the idea.


Regards,
Clayton


Info on black and white digital printing at    
http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm