Archival digital inkjet printing........

[Kirk Gittings]

In case you missed this developement-I did. The numbers below are for an inkset developed by Paul Roark on a No OBA mat cotton paper. The significance, as I understand it, is that these numbers approach the test results of traditional silver prints processed archivally. Thats after 120 megalux hours of exposure-like some 51 years. No shit. Now this is not a Wilhelm test-this is Aardenberg the gold standard.


For the the most lightfast inkjet prints, specify maximum carbon content, matte paper, and no third party color including blended gray inks. See http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com/ for comparative fade testing. While ultimate longevity is not the most important factor for most prints, where it is critical, do the research. As a benchmark, see test ID#144 (click on AaI_20091208_SN003Lf) and note the average delta-e of 0.3 after 120 Mega Lux hours of exposure. Not all 100% carbon pigment inks and prints do quite as well as this, but the real trouble may be from the colors in gray inks that can fade differentially, causing a print tone shift, sometimes to greenish. It takes a lot of good R&D to match the fade rates of color pigments that are used to cool carbon, with HP Z3200 gray/PK pigments probably being on top of that list and what I use. Also not that it generally takes more color to cool carbon on glossy paper than on the best matte papers.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com
http://www.paulroark.com/BW-Info/

[paulr]

Ink on paper has been around a long, long time. I'm not surprised.

I think the biggest wildcard is the paper coatings. We don't what those are or how they'll behave.

Of course we have no idea what crap our gelatin silver are made out of, either! At least the inkjet paper companies give us some clues about the contents of the paper base, the acid neutrality, if there are OBAs or not, etc ...

[Kirk Gittings]

Aardenberg"s tests includes testing of uninked paper base. On this paper its color/tone shift etc. fell in that same delta-e .3 shift-virtually the same shift silver paper base shows.

[Kirk Gittings]

Of course we have no idea what crap our gelatin silver are made out of, either! At least the inkjet paper companies give us some clues about the contents of the paper base, the acid neutrality, if there are OBAs or not, etc ...

so true.

[Peter De Smidt]

I think the biggest wildcard is the paper coatings. We don't what those are or how they'll behave.



I agree with this, and so does Paul Roark. With that in mind he regularly prints on Arches water color paper, a paper with no inkjet coating. I've tried it, and the results are pretty good, but not as good in side-to-side comparison with a print made on, say, Epson Hot Press Natural. (Kirk can comment on that as he has sample prints on both papers.)

How much does all of this matters to print buyers? Sure, no one wants a print that looks bad after a few months or years, but if we're good to beyond 20 years or so before obvious degradation occurs, do buyers care?

[paulr]

Another wildcard is resistance to atmospheric pollutants. In general, oxidants are the enemy of silver prints the way UV light is the enemy of dyes and pigments … but there could be exceptions, and I don't hear much about people testing for them.

The truth is, we never know for sure. Even if we see a print that's lasted 150 years, those exact materials are not available today. And we can only speculate about the exact processing. Painters at least benefit from a technology that evolves slowly if at all. The same pigments are available today that were available in the renaissance. They can see, for example, what white pigments will yellow less than titanium dioxide if they hang their painting in a castle for 400 years.

[Kirk Gittings]

How much does all of this matters to print buyers? Sure, no one wants a print that looks bad after a few months or years, but if we're good to beyond 20 years or so before obvious degradation occurs, do buyers care?

I believe in my case, in my price range, that this does matter to collectors.

[Brian K]

I've been using Aardenberg's reviews for a few years now. You should see just how badly Fuji Crystal Archive does.

[Ken Lee]

Has anyone here used this solution ?

I am a bit confused by the web site. Perhaps I have overlooked some important pages or documents. Are only late-model Epson printers supported ? Since this solution depends on the Quadtone RIP, is there a list somewhere of papers and printers which have already been profiled ?

When Paul Roark says "It takes a lot of good R&D to match the fade rates of color pigments that are used to cool carbon, with HP Z3200 gray/PK pigments probably being on top of that list and what I use.", does that mean he actually uses the HPZ3200 printer - or only their pigments ? If so, why not just get an HPZ3200 printer ? (Aside from the fact that it costs several thousand dollars and makes prints much larger than many of us will ever need.)

For the upcoming show at the Valley Photo Center I printed entirely on Canson Rag Photographique, a matte 100% rag paper with no OBAs. Under glass, as Paul Roark mentions, the difference in density range between glossy and matte papers is diminished, and with matte paper there is no bronzing, no appreciable metamerism, and... no glare.

So for some of us, there's no problem with matte paper. I'd like to know what options are available. It sounds great.

[Kirk Gittings]

I have asked him to jump in here, but haven't heard back from him. I believe he is using a custom mix of his pure carbon inks which are warm tone (as all pure carbon ink is) cooled down with the best OTC ink (which is the HP) custom mixed and profiled in his Epson printers.

[Peter De Smidt]

Paul's come up with a bunch of ink sets, including ones that can print on both glossy and matte, but as far as I know, his main inkset is still dilutions of Eboni. On the right papers, a pure Eboni ink set can give a pretty neutral print, one with a max Lab B of about 3. It's a look I really like. If you need even cooler prints, or if for some reason you must print on a paper that gives warmer results than EHPN, then you can use HP Vivera PK, and dilutions of it, as a toner to cool down the print. HP PK inks are, as far as I know, the blended pigment with the best archival qualities, although they aren't as good as pure carbon. Using them as a toner should have only a small effect are the archival attributes of the print, since the print is still predominant carbon, and the HP PK is good in it's own right. I used to use this mixed system, but since Epson's HPN came out, I've found no need to.

So, in answer to Ken's question, the reason to use Eboni + HP PK is to get very long lasting cool toned prints. The prints should last longer than a print from an HP printer, and the greater number of grays leads to higher quality.

Glossy, though, is much tougher, as Eboni won't work with them. You can use a set of HP PK dilutions, but you'll have to use glop or another coating to get rid of gloss differential. For glossy prints, Paul has moved to an inkset using Epson Claria Dye on metallic paper. According to Paul, the prints have tremendous impact, and they sell very well, but they are unlikely to be near as archival as a carbon pigment system, although supposedly they're not shabby. If Fuji Crystal Archive is good enough for you, then it's likely that the Claria dyes would be too.

[Ken Lee]

If we try this solution and want to use a printer/paper which has not been profiled, do we need a sensitometer ?

Around 1 year ago I tried in vain with QTR to make profiles for Pt/Pd printing. I found the QTR curves adjustment interface to be inscrutable and poorly documented (there were at least 2 tutorials on using it, each with a different approach) - and that you don't quite get what you specify via the user interface. What made it worse of course is that I was profiling Pictorico transparency material and making Pt/Pd prints under UV, a slow and inconsistent process. I found that the profiles generously shared by others were not really linear on my printer and required endless guesswork and tweaking. All I was trying to do was print a step wedge with 20 steps, but I never got all the steps: fixing one part of the curve invariably broke another part.

Even with a comparatively mature technology like inkjet printing with ICC profiles, we have to be very careful about getting the monitor turned down to "paper-brightness". Paper brightness varies with the intended brightness of the viewing room. One RIP I recently sampled provides different profiles depending on the color of the intended lighting: incandescent, flourescent, mixed.

Rather than trial and error with QTR, hhy not just put the inks in the printer, use the Epson or Canon or HP drivers, print some targets and send the results out to someone who makes real profiles with a really good sensitometer ? Then we'd be able to work in Photoshop (or some other photo editor that supports soft-proofing with ICC profiles) and see what our print will look like all along, no ?

Has anyone actually used this approach from beginning to end ?

If the HP HPZ3200 system solves all those problems right out of the box and gives prints with high longevity, it's beginning to sound like a real bargain.

[Peter De Smidt]

Ken, it sounds to me that you know the route that you should follow. In my case, I rehabilitated an old 7600 printer. I mixed up a version of Eboni-6, and I made my own QTR profiles using a Datacolor spectrocolorimeter to take measurements. I'm very happy with the prints I'm making. The image tone is very pleasing. I get a dmax of 1.71. The prints are as archival as anything else printed on a quality inkjet paper, the inks are inexpensive, and it's been the most trouble free ink set I've ever used. It does take awhile to make a good QTR profile. (It took me a day of work.) After that, though, it's very easy to use.

Btw., Paul Roark usually has regular driver instructions for using his ink sets. That works for most papers with the exception of printing on Arches water color paper.

[Kirk Gittings]

And I must say that Peter's print quality with that outfit are outstanding.

[Peter De Smidt]

Thanks, Kirk!

[paulr]

Peter, how did you choose this path over piezography?

[Peter De Smidt]

Paul,

I chose it for two main reasons. First, I wanted a more neutral image tone than Cone's Carbon, which Cone used to call "Sepia", while still using a pure carbon pigment ink. Second, I didn't have the money for Cone's system.

For instance, when I bought the 7600 for $200, I called up Inkjetmall and asked for advice. The gentleman there (not Mr. Cone) suggested that I pay about $450 for a set of their refillable cartridges and more for their cleaning fluid, but he expressed doubt that I'd get the printer working. Instead I bought some refillable cartridges for about $120 and mixed up my own cleaning fluid, with a recipe similar to what you posted earlier. It took over a month, but I was able to clean out the printer and get it working...So far! The biggest downside to my approach is that there was no guarantee that the printer could be revived, although it did look like it had very little use.

I don't mean this as a criticism of Inkjetmall! I've seen Mr. Cone on many forums, and he's always been friendly and helpful. I've used Piezography in the past, and was quite happy with it, and I've no doubt that his solutions are very high quality.

Here's a link to where Paul keeps the info on his approaches: http://www.paulroark.com/BW-Info/
If you're thinking about one of the options, send Paul an email outlining what you're thinking of doing. He's incredibly friendly and helpful! If you use one of his standard approaches, you should be able to use his settings with the OEM driver or his profiles with QTR. If you want to make your own QTR profiles, then it's helpful to have a reflection densitometer or a spectrocolorimeter, the latter is required if you want to make profiles for soft proofing in Photoshop. In any case, Paul recommends that people start out with his settings in the OEM driver. That's easy, and it gives great results with most materials.

[Ken Lee]

Ken, it sounds to me that you know the route that you should follow.

I'm glad someone thinks so :) It's not clear to me yet.


It does take awhile to make a good QTR profile. (It took me a day of work.) After that, though, it's very easy to use.

You use the QTR tools, take some measurements, and just enter them in ? The Datacolor spectrocolorimeter is affordably priced: less than a box of some papers.


Btw., Paul Roark usually has regular driver instructions for using his ink sets. That works for most papers with the exception of printing on Arches water color paper.

Do you mean that once you make a profile for a given paper, the instructions still apply in a general sense ? You just choose your new paper on the interface and proceed as normal ?

Thanks a lot !

[Peter De Smidt]

The best thing to do is to go to: http://www.paulroark.com/BW-Info/ and read the info there. Paul does a better job outlining his approaches than I could.

With most of his ink sets and paper combinations, you don't have to use QTR at all. You simply use Paul's settings and the OEM driver. All of this is outlined in his pdfs on the various ink sets. You don't have to do any profiling with this approach, but you do have to follow Paul's instructions. Paul highly recommends this approach for people starting out with his ink sets.

If you want more control, then you can use QTR. If you use one of Paul's setups, then you can simply use his curves. You can always tweak them a bit if needed. This is much simpler than making your own curves from scratch. Paul is a QTR master. I am a padawan.

Finally, if you modify the system enough, which you should avoid if you can, then you'll have to do your own curves. (Paul's curves are still very useful to make extrapolations from.) I followed the procedure on the QTR tutorial included with QTR. Even with a spectro, it's not as simple as simply entering the numbers, although that does really help, you'll still probably need to modify the curves a bit, run a test strip, adjust... For instance, I wanted a profile to give me A) the highest dmax I could get, and B) the most neutral print I could get. With the first run through the process, I got about 85% there. With a few adjustments, I got 95% there, and the rest of the time was spent trying to eek out even more. If I remember correctly, it took me 14 curves to get what I wanted. If 1.69 dmax was enough, then I could've stopped after 5 or so.

Addendum: I wasn't just after a higher d-max, I also tried to get my grayscale ramp to match ideal densities as well as I could get them before I linearized the curves.

[Tyler Boley]

It's very difficult to make general conclusions from specific tests, for example about uncoated cotton papers. I have two tests there, using Epson inks, one color, and mark requested an ABW test as well. The results so far are not as positive as we'd expected.
While some common sense conclusions can be drawn from compared common tests, the most reliable conclusions from a test is for that paper, that ink, that method of printing, under those conditions.
Marks efforts continue to be invaluable, I hope he can persist in the face of lack of concern by the larger photographic community.
Tyler

[sanking]

I am personally very pleased with the Piezography K7 ink set with the Epson 7600 and have gotten a lot of personal support from Jon Cone. Having worked with QTR for many years in making digital negatives I love the control that is possible with QTR, and although the number of papers supported for the 7600 by Cone is somewhat limited it is very easy to run a linearizing curve for other papers with either a scanner or spectrophotometer. At this time QTR has a Java Script for use with a scanner, and some people who make digital negatives have been using for several years a Java Script that can be downloaded from http://www.davideisenlord.com/?p=229.

Learning to use QTR to make digital negatives for an alternative process like carbon or pt/pd is somewhat more complicated than using it to make inkjet prints because you must first have process control. But it is by no means an impossible task, even with a very complicated process like carbon transfer.

Sandy

[MHMG]

Ink on paper has been around a long, long time. I'm not surprised.

I think the biggest wildcard is the paper coatings. We don't what those are or how they'll behave.

Of course we have no idea what crap our gelatin silver are made out of, either! At least the inkjet paper companies give us some clues about the contents of the paper base, the acid neutrality, if there are OBAs or not, etc ...

Yes, ink sets are easier to characterize on "general light fade performance" properties than are the media we choose to print on. If that weren't the case, I'd have quit doing light fastness testing some time ago because it's pretty easy to cover the major OEM and third party inks on the market. Far harder to tackle all the OEM and third party branded and rebadged media that exist today plus all the ink interactions with those media. So, just a heads up on what's on my research agenda for the next few years.... light induced dark storage staining. Basically, after some exposure to light, many coatings that contain TiO2 (100% guaranteed in Resin Coated papers) develop a stain or discoloration in dark storage that well exceeds what happens to the same media if always stored in the dark. Hence, it's "light-induced dark storage staining", and it is frequently reversible with additional light exposure to some extent but not necessarily in total. However, this problem is a new issue in modern media (mentioned only once AFAIK but not explored in any detail in the technical literature) and the exposure reciprocity characteristics are totally unknown at this time. TiO2 was never used as the whitening pigment in traditional fiber base silver gelatin print media nor in traditional artists' watercolor papers, but it was introduced and is used 100% of the time in RC photo papers since they were introduced in the late 1960s. TiO2 is now showing up often in inkjet "traditional fiber" media as well, plus perhaps in matte fine are inkjet media, too. Lots of research needed. The manufacturers have been totally silent on this issue perhaps because they have not been looking for it in their testing. I stumbled on the problem after revisiting some of the samples that I'd discontinued in light fade testing some months after the testing ended. I'm just beginning to get a handle on the scope and seriousness, but it's a pretty serious issue, IMHO, for print makers who want exceptional long term stability in their printed images.

best,
Mark
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com