archival-quality gilmp prints

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
9 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

archival-quality gilmp prints

Helen Etters
I'm using an HP Deskjet 5550, on good-quality photo paper.
My prints lose color in less than a year.
Is there a way to prolong the life of a print, other than an
extremely expensive giclee printer?
Thanks,
Helen
_______________________________________________
Gimp-user mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: archival-quality gilmp prints

Adam Cooper
AFAIK, the length of time that a print lasts is almost completely
dependant on the ink used. I don't know what the quality of HP ink is
like compared to others so I can't really comment. Although I did pull
out some 4 year old Lexmark prints from a cupboard the other day and
they haven't faded or discoloured (Possibly due to the darkness of a
cupboard?).

It's possibly worth looking into the different inks available. I imagine
Google will have something to say on the matter.

Regards
Adam


_______________________________________________
Gimp-user mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: archival-quality gilmp prints

KenHTanaka
In reply to this post by Helen Etters
I use an Epson C-84 at home, so far the DuraBrite inks Epson uses for
prints are holding up well (about a year old). Their previous generation
of inks did fade with time, noticeably over 2 years. Look for acid-free
on the paper too. If you are picky, you might archive the image files
you like on CD-ROM and keep that with the pictures, hopefully that will
outlast the paper and allow you to reprint to verify or replace paper
photos at a later date.

-Ken

Helen wrote:

>I'm using an HP Deskjet 5550, on good-quality photo paper.
>My prints lose color in less than a year.
>Is there a way to prolong the life of a print, other than an
>extremely expensive giclee printer?
>Thanks,
>Helen
>_______________________________________________
>Gimp-user mailing list
>[hidden email]
>http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
>  
>

--
= Enterprise Data Services Division ===============
| CIRES, National Geophysical Data Center / NOAA  |
| 303-497-6221                                    |
= [hidden email] =============================

_______________________________________________
Gimp-user mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: archival-quality gilmp prints

Andreas Waechter
In reply to this post by Helen Etters
Helen wrote:
> I'm using an HP Deskjet 5550, on good-quality photo paper.
> My prints lose color in less than a year.
> Is there a way to prolong the life of a print, other than an
> extremely expensive giclee printer?

Just an idea - photo shops (online or real shops) can do
prints on real photo paper (the stuff real photos are done
with) - for these shops it doesn't matter whether the
picture comes from a digital camera or from a graphic
program like GIMP.

I don't know what the costs are where you live - here it is
a few Euro-cents per 10cm*15cm (4" by 6") print.

Andreas
_______________________________________________
Gimp-user mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: archival-quality gilmp prints

BandiPat
In reply to this post by KenHTanaka
On Thursday 09 June 2005 06:18 pm, Ken Tanaka wrote:

> I use an Epson C-84 at home, so far the DuraBrite inks Epson uses for
> prints are holding up well (about a year old). Their previous
> generation of inks did fade with time, noticeably over 2 years. Look
> for acid-free on the paper too. If you are picky, you might archive
> the image files you like on CD-ROM and keep that with the pictures,
> hopefully that will outlast the paper and allow you to reprint to
> verify or replace paper photos at a later date.
>
> -Ken
>-----------------------
> Helen wrote:
> >I'm using an HP Deskjet 5550, on good-quality photo paper.
> >My prints lose color in less than a year.
> >Is there a way to prolong the life of a print, other than an
> >extremely expensive giclee printer?
> >Thanks,
> >Helen
================

Ken brings up some good points about backing up the pictures to CD for
later use, but he also hit upon a point that gave me a thought.  The
ink has certainly improved in all the printers since so many are doing
photos from them now, but the paper is equally as important.  HP, of
course, recommends HP photo paper for the best results and longest life
with their inks, as does Epson with their papers & ink.  The papers all
work good in any printer, but have been tested to work best with their
own inks.

So, in other words, you will probably get the best life out of your
printed photos, if you keep things in sync!

regards,
Patrick

--
--- KMail v1.8 --- SuSE Linux Pro v9.2 ---
      Registered Linux User #225206
There's no problem so awful that you can't
add some guilt to it and make it even worse!  ...Calvin & Hobbes
_______________________________________________
Gimp-user mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: archival-quality gilmp prints (gimp prints)

Carol Spears
In reply to this post by Andreas Waechter
On Fri, Jun 10, 2005 at 01:02:56AM +0200, Andreas Waechter wrote:

> Helen wrote:
> >I'm using an HP Deskjet 5550, on good-quality photo paper.
> >My prints lose color in less than a year.
> >Is there a way to prolong the life of a print, other than an
> >extremely expensive giclee printer?
>
> Just an idea - photo shops (online or real shops) can do
> prints on real photo paper (the stuff real photos are done
> with) - for these shops it doesn't matter whether the
> picture comes from a digital camera or from a graphic
> program like GIMP.
>
> I don't know what the costs are where you live - here it is
> a few Euro-cents per 10cm*15cm (4" by 6") print.
>
i would like to second this opinion.  my friend and i were standing in
an evil yet very inexpensive store comparing prices.  the roll of paper
that was special cut to print 4x6 inch photos, each photo printed would
have costed 40 cents a piece.  that number presumes that each print you
make is good (not a mistake).  the price they charged for single
reprints was 26 cents per photograph of the same size.

more than that, the people working at the counter were intelligent,
approachable and knowledgible about what the machines could do -- or at
the very least, honest and able to tell me who to speak with.  as cheap
as i am, i have no desire to see these services or people go away.  i
would rather see more of them.  

if you are making prints of your art via photograph printer facilities,
there are a few things to watch out for.  i was trying to print a poster
that was mostly black and the machine they use auto fixes this.  it
caused the image parts to print washed out.  if you are printing
artwork, it is in your best interests to talk to someone who understands
the machine that will be doing the printing.  for this location, it was
the simple task of writing on the envelope instructions to not color
correct the print.  the poster turned out fine, even beautiful and it
was extremely (in my opinion) inexpensive.

i come from a long line of do-it-yourselfers, however, the same line
seems to have a threshold for quality.  

and more news from the print world, they still do not let the raw
information about the color profiling out to the general public.  i do
not know what it takes to have access to this information yet either.
for my dollar, i still remember what the manager of the print shop told
me about how to handle converting images from rgb to whatever that
machine would prefer it in.  he said "let the machine do the
conversion", the more i read about the way it is done, the more i really
really believe in this suggestion.

on one hand, you can believe it is working.  on the other hand, you can
believe that someone who actually understands it has set up the crazy
chain of events and table reading and converting to actually work.  i
tend to believe the other hand more than the one hand.

thanks for reading this,
carol

_______________________________________________
Gimp-user mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: archival-quality gilmp prints

Owen-24
In reply to this post by Andreas Waechter
On Fri, 10 Jun 2005 01:02:56 +0200
Andreas Waechter <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Helen wrote:
> > I'm using an HP Deskjet 5550, on good-quality photo paper.
> > My prints lose color in less than a year.
> > Is there a way to prolong the life of a print, other than an
> > extremely expensive giclee printer?
>
> Just an idea - photo shops (online or real shops) can do
> prints on real photo paper (the stuff real photos are done
> with) - for these shops it doesn't matter whether the
> picture comes from a digital camera or from a graphic
> program like GIMP.


Here in Australia, prints are about 20-30 cents a copy. To print your own comes out at 50-100 cents per copy

I was thinking of doing a Christmas card this year. Could be easily personalized with changes to just one layer.

Also, I have made up a couple of test patterns that I send in when I do a batch of printing to check the fidelity of printing.

Part of the test pattern are some borders that are say 10, 20 and 40 pixels in. You get an idea of how much is chopped off.
Unfortunately the last two lots have come out with the border (and presumeably) the whole image, rotated by about one degree.

I can only guess that this is a feed problem with the printer but find it hard to beleive that the Agfa print process uses one reel of paper 6inches wide. Anyone know how the mass print runs are done in the big photo shops?




Owen
_______________________________________________
Gimp-user mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: archival-quality gilmp prints (gimp prints)

Stacey Hawkins
In reply to this post by Carol Spears
I used to print at home on a Cannon printer.  I really liked it because
of the individual ink tanks.  Then I found an online print company that
has GREAT pricing and turnaround that is unparalleled.  

There is no charge for opening an account or uploading your images, and
you can store them in online albums to share with whomever you please.
You can order prints from wallet sizes all the way up to a 24x30" print.
They have several paper offerings in addition to regular E-Surface
paper.  [The metallic is sensational!  This paper will absolutely blow
people away.]  They also have a Black and White paper printed with a
black and white laser.  They accept digital files and negatives.  

If I upload my prints this morning, they would most likely be printed
and shipping to me TONIGHT.  I know I sound like a spokesperson here,
but I truly believe that if you check out what they do, you will be
equally impressed.  

http://www.mpix.com/


For international users, go here:  http://www.magix.com/select.html
All prints are fulfilled for Magix by the Mpix company.  


Cheers, Stacey

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email]
[mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Carol
Spears
Sent: Thursday, June 09, 2005 6:59 PM
To: GIMPUser
Subject: Re: [Gimp-user] archival-quality gilmp prints (gimp prints)

On Fri, Jun 10, 2005 at 01:02:56AM +0200, Andreas Waechter wrote:

> Helen wrote:
> >I'm using an HP Deskjet 5550, on good-quality photo paper.
> >My prints lose color in less than a year.
> >Is there a way to prolong the life of a print, other than an
> >extremely expensive giclee printer?
>
> Just an idea - photo shops (online or real shops) can do
> prints on real photo paper (the stuff real photos are done
> with) - for these shops it doesn't matter whether the
> picture comes from a digital camera or from a graphic
> program like GIMP.


I would like to second this opinion.  my friend and i were standing in
an evil yet very inexpensive store comparing prices.  the roll of paper
that was special cut to print 4x6 inch photos, each photo printed would
have costed 40 cents a piece.  that number presumes that each print you
make is good (not a mistake).  the price they charged for single
reprints was 26 cents per photograph of the same size.

more than that, the people working at the counter were intelligent,
approachable and knowledgible about what the machines could do -- or at
the very least, honest and able to tell me who to speak with.  as cheap
as i am, i have no desire to see these services or people go away.  I
would rather see more of them.  

if you are making prints of your art via photograph printer facilities,
there are a few things to watch out for.  i was trying to print a poster
that was mostly black and the machine they use auto fixes this.  it
caused the image parts to print washed out.  if you are printing
artwork, it is in your best interests to talk to someone who understands
the machine that will be doing the printing.  for this location, it was
the simple task of writing on the envelope instructions to not color
correct the print.  the poster turned out fine, even beautiful and it
was extremely (in my opinion) inexpensive.

i come from a long line of do-it-yourselfers, however, the same line
seems to have a threshold for quality.  

and more news from the print world, they still do not let the raw
information about the color profiling out to the general public.  i do
not know what it takes to have access to this information yet either.
for my dollar, i still remember what the manager of the print shop told
me about how to handle converting images from rgb to whatever that
machine would prefer it in.  he said "let the machine do the
conversion", the more i read about the way it is done, the more i really
really believe in this suggestion.

on one hand, you can believe it is working.  on the other hand, you can
believe that someone who actually understands it has set up the crazy
chain of events and table reading and converting to actually work.  i
tend to believe the other hand more than the one hand.

thanks for reading this,
carol

_______________________________________________
Gimp-user mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
_______________________________________________
Gimp-user mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: archival-quality gilmp prints

Nicholas-3
In reply to this post by Helen Etters
AFAIK, the most archival photographs produced by computers are either
inkjets with pigment based inks especially produced as archival, such as
the ultrachrome inks by epson on rag photo quality paper. The other
alternative are things like "lightjet" prints produced on Fuji Crystal
Archive photo paper. http://www.wilhelm-research.com/ is the recognised
leader in this field. Regards all.
_______________________________________________
Gimp-user mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user