Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Printers > Photo Inkjet

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Nov 22, 2003, 12:22 AM   #1
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 41
Default CANON owners worry about picture longevity???

man, I was so ready to pull the trigger on a canon i900d or i960, BUT the more I read about the fading pictures, the more I wonder why I would by a product to have the results ONLY last a short time.

Am I alone in this thinking????

I am not to found of having to spray a protective spray over the pictures, has anyone found another solution (print paper) to this problem?????
rodH is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Nov 22, 2003, 2:17 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 235
Default

Short time? The question being, just how short? Has anyone been able to determine e.g. run their own test?

The upside is that should a photo fade, if you burn your photographs to CD (as I do, to archive) you can always reprint your photographs.

It has been said to keep your printed photos protected either behind glass or in an acid free photo album.

I wouldn't think photographs would fade so quickly that you would have to reprint often. I would think there would be a great deal more complaints out there if it were the case.

I've decided on also picking up a HiTi printer (a dye sub, not inkjet). With this printer I can print 4x6 that are sure to last longer...and I also like the thought of being able to do a little creative work with this printer.
Check out their site: http://www.hitouchimaging.com/photoprinter.asp?lid=360 (as well as their downloads).
They also have a "where to buy" for many states.

With this printer, I will use it to also send prints to friends & family and not have to worry so much about fade or water damage.
I did receive one of their sample photos, ran it under water and didn't detect any damage. Nor any fingerprints.

The lowest priced model being the 630PL which can be had for around $110.-$135.

I still intend to purchase an i960 for general/larger photos. Keeping an archive of my photo's, I feel at ease with possible fade though I intend to perserve the photos as long as possible by protecting them the best I can.

You might be interested in looking at Steve's printer reviews as he has reviewed dye sub printers as well.
informativetoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 22, 2003, 3:32 AM   #3
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 39
Default

Howdy- I have the Canon i950 that was highly recommended before purchase and can't say enough good about the quality of prints this machine delivers. I started off using Canon papers of various types except for the most costly ones. The Canon paper I used mostly was the glossy type. After several packages I noticed that many of the prints had changed colors after even only a couple of weeks. I had allowed over 24 hours for "drying" before handling or filing etc. and later noticed many of the darker areas had taken a reddish brown tone. Not acceptable!
Did some looking within these forums and found that several folks on these forums recommended papers by Red River, so I ordered a package of their 68LB Ultra Pro Gloss and a pack of their sample sheets. This paper produces absolutely the best looking prints I have seen from my Canon printer. Excellent color, crisp detail, and no color changes what so ever. Just received another 100 sheet pack and also a pack of the 62Lb Ultra Pro Satin.
Stick with Canon if you can. Good luck- Mike
Mike Haywood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 22, 2003, 10:08 AM   #4
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 41
Default

MIKE, that is great news. How long are your oldespics with the new paper (I am curious to see how long they have lasted so far).

I do NOT want to buy another printer (dye-sub) if I do not have to, I do not wanna go into this thinking that I am going to buy a printer now and another printer soon after. I want to do it right the 1st time. I also do NOT like the idea of saving (which I do anyways) them on a disc ONLY to re-print them later. My wife uses the pics on the wall and in albums, so I am not so sure how thrilled we would be to do yearly (or whatever) repints just because they have faded, this is UNACCEPTABLE to me.

I love this discussion, hopefully we get some other opinions
rodH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 22, 2003, 10:49 AM   #5
lg
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 823
Default

I don't want to burst your bubble, but any dye-based inkjet printer will produce prints that fade over time, largely dependent upon the amount of light they are subjected to. Prints on a wall indoors will last much longer than ones that receive direct sunlight, and the amount of fading varies greatly by manufacturer, but if you want much longer lasting prints, you can try one of the pigment based inks (epson is one manufacturer) or any of the dye-sublimation printers.

I had the best inkjet printer Canon printer made years ago, and prints exposed only to fluorescent lighting fades substantially over a period of a year or two. You may even want to consider having your heirloom photos printed at a photo lab-- many do prints from digital; Sam's, for example, can do 4x6 prints for as little as $0.20/print.

Good luck, and I hope you find a satisfactory solution. I don't have one of the HiTi printers, but folks here really like them. You should be very pleased with that route if you so choose.
lg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 22, 2003, 12:30 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 235
Default

Quote:
I do not wanna go into this thinking that I am going to buy a printer now and another printer soon after. I want to do it right the 1st time
I understand your feelings on that one. For me, I have to consider affordability. Perhaps later and when technology advances, I can pick up a "higher -end" printer. In the meantime, it's about doing plenty of research and picking the best that I can, that will fit within my budget. I think that applies to most people.

The higher end dye sub printer out is the Oly P-440, which can print 8x10 . On amazon it is selling for $450. As for pigmented ink printers, there is the Epson 2200 which sells for over $600. The Epson R800 is slated to hit the market 02/04 which will have 8 (pigment) ink tanks. The price market at about $400.

Beings paper was mentioned (thank you) I will look into that, also. I see that there is a forum dedicated to paper and such.

Anyway, I think the bottom line will be all in what you can afford and the choices that fall within your budget.
informativetoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 22, 2003, 1:17 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 235
Default

Quote:
I don't want to burst your bubble, but any dye-based inkjet printer will produce prints that fade over time, largely dependent upon the amount of light they are subjected to.
I realize that any print can fade, especially when exposed to sunlight. I have seen numerous (now old )photographs, behind glass, near windows/french doors that have faded over the years, giving you that nice vintage look-NOT! :shock: These folks were lucky if they happened to have kept the negative.

Quote:
You may even want to consider having your heirloom photos printed at a photo lab
This is a good suggestion which also would allow for larger print sizes. The cost not being too much, considering.

There are debates about the costs/quality of home printing versus having your photos printed at pro labs. Well, my thought is; that yes, you can find some home photo printers that will print photos that appear (to the eye) to be just as good as prints made at a photo lab but I do think quality will always be better in using the photo processor. Costs? Not too expensive.

I'm opting for a home photo printer because it is about convenience and control .
Too often I have found the labs printer producing colors/saturation etc. that were "off the mark".
I have my own editing software and like the idea that I can print any photo to my liking.
Our photo lab is anything but professional.

Just as there are debates about printers, so are there debates about digital versus 35mm film.
Just as I can't expect my 4mp Canon to produce photos that a 35mm SLR will produce, neither can I expect a $300. printer to match a photo lab's $xxxx.xx printer.

In the meantime, we demand technology to advance. While we wait in the wings for improvements, it boils down to what we can afford and what is out there that will fit within our budget.
I have my reasons for going digital but I can't expect more than what currently is. Neither can I afford the current "best".

Just my .05 (.03 added to reflect inflation)

:mrgreen:
informativetoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 22, 2003, 1:22 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 235
Default

Mike,

Thanks for the information and the paper suggestion, it has given me something to consider/look into. It's good to know what I should expect.

Later, I think to pose a question regarding paper (in the appropriate forum) and see what suggestions pop-up. It's good to hear of possibly better alternatives as far as paper goes. Thanks again.
informativetoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 22, 2003, 1:24 PM   #9
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 39
Default

Hi Rod: I have had prints on the Red River Paper around now for 6 months. The prints on the Canon paper turned within 2 weeks.
I agree with LG that ink jet prints will fade eventually.
The recommendation to take them to a place that prints on actual photo paper sounds like it is worth trying. Good luck.
Mike Haywood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 23, 2003, 7:53 AM   #10
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 9
Default

The fading issue was a concern of mine as well. My reasoning is similar to that of other posters:

1) You can always reprint - future inks/printers will only be better

2) A printed picture behind glas should last a very long time - I have several that are ove two years old that have not faded at all (printed with Epson 785EXP)

3) Labs are available for reasonable cost

4) For under $200, the i960 can't be beat!

Just imagine what $200 will buy in 3 years - and my photos will not have changed on CD! Fading photos is not much of concern when I consider the above factors.

That's my two cents worth - hope it helps.

Tom :idea:
tnj4uga is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 9:28 PM.