Hello all,

I have just started to print photgraphs and have seen lots re expected
lifetime of a print etc. Many folk are also refilling there
cartridges.

Is the longevity of a print based on the paper used or the ink or
both? In which case, is it therefore worth sticking to a
manufacturers own inks if longevity is a major consideration?

Regards.

Howdy

> Is the longevity of a print based on the paper used or the ink or
> both?

Both.

Right now, the BEST longevity comes from the Epson
pigment printers (for example, the 2200 or 7600).

In dye-printers, Epson/Canon/HP have claims of up
to 30 years for some models, but those prints will need to
be kept out of the open air (e.g., framed behind glass
or in albums) to reach those times.

Stan

"Stan Krute" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:CS%Ma.2201$(E-Mail Removed)...
> Howdy
>
> > Is the longevity of a print based on the paper used or the ink or
> > both?
>
> Both.
[snip]
> In dye-printers, Epson/Canon/HP have claims of up
> to 30 years for some models, but those prints will need to
> be kept out of the open air (e.g., framed behind glass
> or in albums) to reach those times.

Some of the HP printers are rated at 49 years open air or 73 years under glass.
It is correct that both ink and paper contribute to lightfastness. You can see
some results for lightfastness from Henry Wilhelm's site:
http://www.wilhelm-research.com/ I also see that he has a new 700+ page book
that is available (free) for download in PDF format from his site. I have not
read it, but looking at the chapter index it appears that it could answer many
of your questions. The individual printer data is available on the left hand
pane under Desktop results and Archived Data.

Regards,
Bob Headrick, not speaking for my employer HP