Inkjet photo "fixer"?
John Laninga
HP, Kodak and Epson paper. I think they all look pretty good. I am
concerned in archiving these pictures, though. Is there some kind of
fixer to help set the image? I think I've seen people advocating hair
spray but that seems too crude to me. Someone would make a decent
spray-on fixative, I would guess...
Anyone know of such a product? And where to get them?
Thanks!
John
Dennis
provided excellent results and was easy to use. The only thing that was ever
a problem was dust getting on the print when the spray was still wet. I
don't remember the name of the stuff as I ran out and have not needed to
preserve any pictures lately, but some of the pictures done over a year ago
still look as sharp as the day they were printed.
hope this helps.
Dennis
John Laninga wrote in message ...
Bill Ringler
Grumbacher. I got it at A.C. Moore craft store, but I think
you can probably find it at any art supply store.
Seems to work well but I have only been using it for a few
weeks and can't report on how well it will preserve the
photos.
Bill Ringler
On Sat, 2 Jan 1999 06:18:38 -0600, "Dennis" <dlu...@bytehead.com>
wrote:
Randy G.
You might try using hair spray. We use to use this on pastel drawings
in college when we couldn't afford the name brand fixatives at the art
store. We used the cheapest we could find- Aquanet I think, that was
available for about $1 for a huge can (yes, it was a long time ago).
It worked quite well.
From Randy.... AKA "-ED" at the....
Feather River Canyon News - "Fruit Of The Plume"
http://www.quiknet.com/~frcn
The opinions expressed Remove the ¿NOSPAM?
here aren't necessarily in the E-mail address
those of the FRCN to reply by E-Mail
Jpmcneece
wrote
> Is there some kind of
>fixer to help set the image?
There have been several posts in this group over the last few months on this
subject. Suggest you go to dejanews and do a search. I use Krylon clear #1305
spray. This is a product made especially for coating artwork. You can get at
most any craft supply store, K-mart, etc. Costs about $3 a can.
Rene Bilodeau
I suggest taking a look at ...
http://www.tssphoto.com/sp/dg/top_coat.html
The least cost of getting some permanency out of your prints is the coating.
I sure wouldn't trust this to hair spray!
Cheers, René
Randy G. wrote in message <368e4c28...@news.quiknet.com>...
Mark
Looks nice unless you tilt it and see the airborne particles that got
trapped.
Has anyone heard of a spray by the name of Macdonalds? (I'm serious. It was
suggested to me and I asked twice thinking I didn't hear the guy right the
first time)
GEORGE DAY
1 year old and still show no signs of fading. Until I see any first-hand
fading, I'm not spraying my prints with anything!
Paul Laughlin
>
> I've got an Epson Stylus Color 800 and have printed digital images on
> HP, Kodak and Epson paper. I think they all look pretty good. I am
> concerned in archiving these pictures, though. Is there some kind of
> fixer to help set the image? I think I've seen people advocating hair
> spray but that seems too crude to me. Someone would make a decent
> spray-on fixative, I would guess...
Almost any store that sells Art supplies will carry a spray fixative for
charcoal and pastels. Can't guarantee the result on inkjet printing.
Paul in Portland OR
Paul Laughlin
>
> Is the fading problem real? I have prints from my Epson 800 that are over
> 1 year old and still show no signs of fading. Until I see any first-hand
> fading, I'm not spraying my prints with anything!
I am with you, George. Especially after looking at the proce of that
stuff Rene is touting. I am currently running a small study on the
fading of prints with my Canon BJC-7000. ie---one stored inside of a
book and the other laying where it will get bright light with full UV.
Paul in Portland OR
Rene Bilodeau
The fact that your print hasn't changed in 1 year, certainly doesn't qualify
as archival. Besides there are outfits doing testing on archival qualities
of products far more scientifically than what you're doing. You still can't
say that your prints are going to be there in 5 or even 3 years, now can
you?
The stuff I suggested he check out is somewhat pricey. But think of the
alternatives and the related costs. Can go with archival inks/paper which
comes out pricer. Personally, I use Seal laminate in my drymount press,
which cuts 85% of the UV. Don't have any idea how long these prints will
last? Epson has recently released a new photo paper that is purported to be
"longer lasting".
Somehow I just wouldn't trust depending on hair spray to try and get
archival prints.
Cheers, René
Paul Laughlin wrote in message <368F7A09...@spiritone.com>...
GEORGE DAY
are going strong at 1 year and I have no idea if they will EVER fade. Nobody
ever claimed inkjet prints were "archival quality" to start with, but some
people have "claimed" that their prints fade after a few months. I visited a web
site where the guy claimed his prints were almost gone within a few months.
Somehow that strikes me as very suspect.
If you're really worried about the life of the print, just save the file to a
floppy disk or CD and print it again in a few years. At the rate of developement
of the printer industry, I can't even imagine how much better the
printers/ink/paper will be in a few years. I'm pretty sure they will be better
than they are right now. :)
I back-up my images on Zip disks just in case.
Rene Bilodeau
I guess it hasn't crossed your mind that some people print images on their
inkjets for sale to others. Sure, if it is for your personal amusement, you
can go back and reprint it a year later if you have to and you've saved the
digital information. If someone purchases a photo done on an inkjet, you
pretty much have to make sure that image is going to be there for a
specified time.
As for trusting your precious images to a ZIP disk ... geez, have you got
alot to learn. I hope the learning process doesn't end up being too heart
wrenching. Here's a free tip ... "don't trust any important data you have to
a ZIP disk!" May the "click of death" never sound in your ears. ;-)
Go to ... http://w-3productions.com/bbs/iomegabboard.hts to read about
how much you should trust your data to ZIP disks.
Cheers, René
GEORGE DAY wrote in message <368FC3DE...@home.com>...
dc...@inet.ca
>I back-up my images on Zip disks just in case.
Careful..zip drives/disk have their problems too.
Somehow I don't trust magnetic media for archival
purposes. (Just hoping that my CD-R's will still be
ok in 10 yrs).
HRosita
>>alot to learn. I hope the learning process doesn't end up being too heart
I sure love the pesimists in the world. They sure help to sell hardware.
Every device, being mechanical or electronic or magnetic will fail sometime.
The important thing to consider is the "mean time to failure".
Having worked in the computer world for a long time, I know well the risk of
hard drive crashes, tape malfunction, etc.
Real critical data, such a payroll and databases were backed up daily and
several generations were retained. We also used to do disaster recovery
exercises.
My suggestion to all concerned about recovery is to use both belts and
suspenders.
Back up your computer data to tape once every month and then do incremental
backup to either CD or Zip. Keep two or three generations of backup media, and
keep one generation in a safe deposit box just in case of floods, earthquake,
huricanes,or other disasters.
By the way, if you sell your pictures, you owe it to the buyer to have them
printed by a lab on photo paper. Then you don't have to worry.
As for myself, I will have fun with the "inexpensive" inkjet prints and if I
sell a picture will guarantee a reprint in the case of fading.
Just my two cents.
Rene Bilodeau
PhotoShopper wrote in message <36918217...@news2.new-york.net>...
>
>
>Geez, I hope you never get the 'click of death' either, but damn..
>I'd trust a bad ZIP disk over an inkjet print for longevity anyday..
>
That's why there's been a discussion here on seeking ARCHIVAL results from
inkjet printers. A properly archival inkjet print should far outlast one of
these poorly built ZIP drives.
>I've had Zip drives since they were in Beta. I've had Bernouli drives
>and disks since long before the Zip was thought of. (The Bernouli is
>a larger, earlier version of the Zip and Syquest type drives) I'm now
>up to my 7th Zip drive (that I bought personally) and I've installed
>hundreds of Zip drives over the years.. and I've NEVER experienced
>this 'click of death' that people like to talk about.
>
You just proved my point! Up to your 7th ZIP drive, when they haven't been
around that long, says it all. Don't trust critical data to a ZIP disk. The
Bernouli drives were far more dependable, but not cost effective any longer
with the size of data files created with digital imaging.
>I'm not saying it doesn't happen, but there's no need to scare people
>like that. You're far more likely to suffer a floppy drive error or
>hard disk crash, yet nobody is talking about those here..
>
I never suggested trusting one's data to a floppy disk. Geez, why don't you
read the thread before jumping in? The original question was on the ways to
get archival prints from an inkjet printer. There are ways to accomplish
this and I stated a few that I'm aware of. It was in answer to someone who
suggested using hair spray!
My intention was not to scare anyone. But if you're going to trust your
creations that may not be replaceable to a ZIP drive, you're playing dice.
Hard drives are much much more dependable than ZIP disks by the way. You
should know this. Exercise a ZIP drive like you do a hard drive and you'll
know what I'm talking about.
I also stated that it isn't always an option to just ignore archival
solutions and print a new print when the old one fades.
>But to compare inkjet prints to Zip drives when talking about
>longevity.. geez.. inkjets can fade in weeks. I'd sooner trust a Zip
>than an inkjet print.
>
Wasn't comparing the two. Simply suggesting that one wasn't a substitute for
another in all circumstances. But unless you're going to backup every hi
resolution image you create with the idea of reprinting it at a later date
when the original print fades, is just too costly! I'd rather create a print
that's going to last (within acceptable time frames for color prints
generally) and be done with it than finding the original data file and
reprinting it time and time again.
Originally inkjet printers were developed as proofing systems. They were
designed to be throw-away prints. Some smart souls have been figuring ways
to take the printouts from inkjets and make them true prints. (the end
product, not just a proof for another printing system) That is what the
discussion of making archival inkjet prints is all about.
Cheers, René
Rene Bilodeau
HRosita wrote in message <19990104090458...@ng-cf1.aol.com>...
> By the way, if you sell your pictures, you owe it to the buyer to have
them
>printed by a lab on photo paper. Then you don't have to worry.
>As for myself, I will have fun with the "inexpensive" inkjet prints and if
I
>sell a picture will guarantee a reprint in the case of fading.
>Just my two cents.
There's a reason some of us choose to use an inkjet over a photo lab. I have
much much more control over the final output when I do it myself than
relying on the eye of a lab technician. Having been into photography for
over 30 years, I can tell you that you shouldn't expect that great a
longevity out of regular silver color prints. The average rating is around
17 years. I have color prints that are 20 years old (and spent all that time
in albums) and the only way to reclaim them was to scan them and try to
adjust the color digitally. There are archival methods available now for
inkjet printouts that will far exceed 17 years.
Check into it.
Cheers, René
Rene Bilodeau
Here's the press release on the exciting new archival inks and media
from Luminos:
Long Lasting Inkjet Inks and Media from Luminous
By Joseph Meehan
December 21, 1998
The Luminos Photo Corporation of Yonkers, New York, has announced a
new line of desktop inkjet
photographic media and inks that have been specifically "matched"
to produce prints that will resist the detrimental
effects of indoor display lighting. According to Luminos, the new
Lumijet Fine Art Preservation Series Media uses
"an ink-receiving layer that does not impair the fade resistant
characteristics" of their new Lumijet Fine Art
Preservation Inks. The new color Preservation Inks are available in
two different sets. Preservation Platinum,
which is said to have a fade resistance of 65-70 years when used
with the Preservation Series Media under
"average display conditions," while the Preservation Silver set
offers an average display life of 25-30 years. These
inks come as factory sealed cartridges for use in Epson inkjet
printers only.
The new media surfaces are: Gallery Gloss, which has the look and
feel of conventional glossy photographic
paper; Soft Suede, a soft matte finish paper; Classic Velour, a
matte paper with a velvet-like feel; Flaxen Weave,
said to replicate the fabric used in Renaissance wall hangings; and
Museum Parchment, which resembles
parchment paper. Most media are available in sizes from 8.5"x11" to
17"x22" in 10 and 50 sheet boxes.
Telephone: (914) 965-4800. Website: www.luminos.com.
Keith Clark
The Kodak CD-R discs are rated at 100 years and cost about a dollar each...
Keith Clark
;>
Rene Bilodeau
products. Keep checking. ;-)
Cheers, René
PhotoShopper wrote in message <36a3fbde...@news2.new-york.net>...
>On Mon, 4 Jan 1999 10:07:40 -0800, "Rene Bilodeau" <rb...@island.net>
>wrote:
>
>>
>>Here's the press release on the exciting new archival inks and media
>>from Luminos:
>>
>>Long Lasting Inkjet Inks and Media from Luminous
>>By Joseph Meehan
>>December 21, 1998
>
>Rene.. thanks for this info!