Five year color shift test results!

Paul Verizzo

Print Addict
Joined
Apr 16, 2011
Messages
424
Reaction score
88
Points
173
Location
Sarasota, FL, USA
Printer Model
Canon ip4500, 9000 MK II, PRO-
Be prepared to be astounded!

The test:

Printer: Canon PRO 9000 MK II. Printer settings were appropriate for the Canon paper, others were just “Glossy,” and “Matte,” except as noted. No attempt was made to tweak the color profiles, density, etc.

Inks: Genuine Canon

Test Image: From TSS, a photo source, I used their multi-frame color test image, tweaked it so that the whitest white squares were at 0, and the blackest blacks were at 255, RGB. Then the same was changed to B&W, and both put into one image. View, download from here: http://1drv.ms/1ziPm9H

Papers:
Ilford Classic and Smooth,
Royal Brites double sided matte
Canon Photo Paper Plus Semi-Glossy,
Canon Photo Paper Plus II Glossy,
H-P “Everyday” Glossy,
H-P “Premium” Glossy,
Arista (relabeled Premier Brand?) Lustre

Per Ilford, their papers were printed set to Photo Paper Plus II, High quality.

The two H-P papers and the Ilford Classic are “swellable polymer” papers, best for dye inks. I think the Royal Brites is too, if for no other reasons the age of the product, the price, and not instant dry. All others are microporous.

Storage: Prints were exposed to air for several weeks, then piled in a ziplock bag and put on a shelf. Moved around sometimes, no direct and barely indirect sunlight due to another shelf layer inches above the storage one. Coastal Florida, no air conditioning (you read that right!) for approximately five years.

Photographing the images: I chose to photograph instead of scan the images so that they were in a typical ambient light environment and inkjet prints are so sensitive to light differences. My Konica-Minolta A2, bright day outside, indirect light, all images with the same exposure setting, white balance for cloudy day.

Comparison to fresh prints. Not particularly valid because the four that I did were on a Canon iP4500 with generic ink cartridges. I need to close a few eBay deals for more genuine Canon ink before I do more fresh prints on the 9000.

Viewable images: http://1drv.ms/1z1G6mt (OneDrive) Double click on any image, it will open in a dedicated photo browser. Any color cast is due to any number of factors, the chore at hand is to compare one image with another only.

The first four images (with penned notes in the middle) are four of the papers with generic inks in my iP4500. All very sparkly and bright, albeit the Royal Brites needs to have the curve adjusted, too red to be perfect.

The next batch is readily identified by the image using up only half the page, and the paper type readily seen in large computer printed letters.

The last photos just have some handwritten notes on them. Not sure of their heritage other than “old, too.”


The very quick summary:

Overview: The B&W portions of the test image, same as the color portion except monochrome is where the differences become instantly noticable. (The best frame to compare papers is the one farthest on the right and second one down, between the arch and the fingers.) This is true both on new prints with some dry time, and the aged prints. While the color portions might well pass the “Looks OK” test, the right side tells you what has changed. Just like the old B&W photo papers but even more so, the native tints and warmth will vary with paper and printer settings. Since the only drift was towards the green, that tells us it’s the magenta dye shifting.

The envelope, please............There were only two papers that did not suffer from monochrome grays turning to greens:

El Cheapo Royal Brites Matte, more about this paper, below.

Ilford Galerie Classic.........which of course, is no longer made.

That’s it, folks. One paper no longer made, the other a cheap craft market paper only in matte and letter size.

Is there a best of the rejected prints? Yeah, but “best of the worst” isn’t exactly a compliment. In order, the three best rejects are Ilford Galerie Smooth Pearl, Canon Photo Paper Plus Semi-Glossy, and Arista/Premier? All are microporous papers. I was disappointed that the H-P Premium Glossy, a swellable polymer paper, didn’t do better.

Here’s sort of good news for the B&W printing crowd: Setting the printer on grayscale, a test print on H-P Everyday paper after five years had a warm tone but no green shift. I’ll have to try this with some other papers, although not with a five year wait! Very reminiscent of the old warm tone or selenium toned prints of yore.

Valuable Lesson: Definitely set you printer to Grayscale when printing a B&W image!

There are distinct differences in the brightness of the paper stock, too, that seem to have been exacerbated in storage. The brightest were Royal Brites Matte and Canon papers. The Ilford Smooth was one of the darkest, and the H-P papers were in between.

Burning question: Surely laying stacked like they were is something close to being in an album, behind glass, or even laminated. Not saying the same, but in those directions. Minimal to no air circulation. Certainly UV didn’t have had anything to do with the results, and this is proven by a complete lack of fading.

The only contributory factors I can think of is the polyethylene bag, but really! Or, perhaps the various vapors still outgassing or from the papers themselves? If either case, then keeping the print alone would change all this. Your ideas welcome!

Not Surprising: You can’t go terribly wrong with Canon papers! But even within the fold, there are differences. Why Canon never made swellable polymer paper is beyond me, unless the "instant dry" is more important than the long life they so struggle to achieve. They never made a pigment printer until just a few years ago. Too strange.

About that Royal Brites Matte paper: I have no recollection where I got my first box from, eBay? I instantly fell in love with it; inexpensive, heavy weight, print on two sides, and noticeably forgiving on color accuracy. No matter what printer or inks, the results were always just fine for home use. Putting 2, 3, or 4 images on each side, much handier than a stack of loose 4x6's, or whatever. Little did I know it would do so well on this test.

The official website is at: http://www.royalbritespaper.com/products.php?cat=1&id=10011

As of tonight, 18 December 2014, there wasn't any of the matte on eBay. YMMV.

The lesson that hurts: All effort calibrating your monitor, making custom color profiles, buying the best paper(s) is probably wasted. I know many will disagree because that thinking is so ingrained. But the fact is in the real world the colors in that print will shift not just with time, but environment and light source. Checking all these papers in incandescent light gives a whole different set of results than indirect daylight. The good news is that our brain adjusts the image to look better and better if there is no other reference point. Subjectivity trumps objectivity.
 
Last edited:

Smile

Printer Master
Joined
Aug 23, 2006
Messages
1,914
Reaction score
417
Points
253
Location
Europe EU
Printer Model
Canon, Brother, HP, Ricoh etc.
Good job :)

I read also that L800 results were that the simple matt paper gave longer lasting prints too.
 

Paul Verizzo

Print Addict
Joined
Apr 16, 2011
Messages
424
Reaction score
88
Points
173
Location
Sarasota, FL, USA
Printer Model
Canon ip4500, 9000 MK II, PRO-
Good job :)

I read also that L800 results were that the simple matt paper gave longer lasting prints too.

Thanks!

Pardon my ignorance, what's an L800?

Everything else being equal, not sure why matte would have a different result than other surfaces. OTOH, the mysteries of inkjet printing are as many and deep as any religion!
 

Roy Sletcher

Indolent contrarian
Platinum Printer Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2010
Messages
978
Reaction score
1,007
Points
233
Location
Ottawa, CANADA
Printer Model
Canon Pro-100, and Epson 3880
Thanks!

Pardon my ignorance, what's an L800?

Everything else being equal, not sure why matte would have a different result than other surfaces. OTOH, the mysteries of inkjet printing are as many and deep as any religion!


Not sure everything else is equal and I suspect this is the reason that reliable, verifiable, and reproducible results are hard to come by.

We have a lot of variables in play:

1: Printer and its technology.
2: Colourant - most subject to proprietary secrecy
3: The substrate, usually a combination of a base paper and a specially (read - Proprietary) treated printing surface.
4: Display - behind glass (Various kinds) or in a folder (Limited light and atmosphere) or even sprayed additives.

Where to start? Paul's original post is a step in the right direction, but only a step.

Just my 2 cents.

Roy Sletcher
I learn something new every day.
The problem is remembering it the next day.
 

Paul Verizzo

Print Addict
Joined
Apr 16, 2011
Messages
424
Reaction score
88
Points
173
Location
Sarasota, FL, USA
Printer Model
Canon ip4500, 9000 MK II, PRO-
Not sure everything else is equal and I suspect this is the reason that reliable, verifiable, and reproducible results are hard to come by.

We have a lot of variables in play:

1: Printer and its technology.
2: Colourant - most subject to proprietary secrecy
3: The substrate, usually a combination of a base paper and a specially (read - Proprietary) treated printing surface.
4: Display - behind glass (Various kinds) or in a folder (Limited light and atmosphere) or even sprayed additives.

Where to start? Paul's original post is a step in the right direction, but only a step.

Just my 2 cents.

Roy Sletcher
I learn something new every day.
The problem is remembering it the next day.

Love your quote, Roy! Certainly holds true for me.

Rereading your list of variables, those - and a number of others - hold true in the larger world. There is no way that anyone or any institution could possibly test with every parameter possible. And even while the tests were being done, you can be assured that a new ink or paper will come into the marketplace.

I think my test was very valid because A) It used the genuine Canon Chromalife inks, allegedly the best for a Canon printer, ya know? :) B) All prints were treated exactly the same.

I'm disappointed enough that I might sell my 9000; eBay sold auction items show some lucky buyers of the PRO-1, not a heck of a lot more than new 9000's are selling for. Mine is not new, but I'd be surprised if it has had the equivalent of 50 sheets of large format run through it. I think of it as merely tested!
 

Roy Sletcher

Indolent contrarian
Platinum Printer Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2010
Messages
978
Reaction score
1,007
Points
233
Location
Ottawa, CANADA
Printer Model
Canon Pro-100, and Epson 3880
Love your quote, Roy! Certainly holds true for me.

Rereading your list of variables, those - and a number of others - hold true in the larger world. There is no way that anyone or any institution could possibly test with every parameter possible. And even while the tests were being done, you can be assured that a new ink or paper will come into the marketplace.

I think my test was very valid because A) It used the genuine Canon Chromalife inks, allegedly the best for a Canon printer, ya know? :) B) All prints were treated exactly the same.

I'm disappointed enough that I might sell my 9000; eBay sold auction items show some lucky buyers of the PRO-1, not a heck of a lot more than new 9000's are selling for. Mine is not new, but I'd be surprised if it has had the equivalent of 50 sheets of large format run through it. I think of it as merely tested!


Paul,

Certainly was not my intention to be dismissive of you posted results.

In fact the colour shift of the blacks you document so well mirrors my own anecdotal experience with the Pro-9000. I used a lot of ink and paper trying to get a genuine neutral black AND keep the desired tonal range.

Now using a Pro-100 with black and two greys find this a lot easier to achieve.

Problem with selling these printers on eBay is the high shipping costs given the weight and dimensions of the item.

RS
 

Paul Verizzo

Print Addict
Joined
Apr 16, 2011
Messages
424
Reaction score
88
Points
173
Location
Sarasota, FL, USA
Printer Model
Canon ip4500, 9000 MK II, PRO-
Update on "Best of the Worst": A slight change. Again,all prints were compared in bright, indirect Florida winter sunshine.

"Least worst" remains the Ilford Galerie Smooth Pearl. Essentially tied are the two Canon papers. An almost imperceptible difference gives the nod to the PPP sem-gloss, but don't lose any sleep over it. The PPP is also slightly contrastier, but again, not by a lot. It shows in the frames of the hands.

I checked a fresh piece of the Smooth Pearl against the darker white of the test print, and the new one is substantially whiter. Why would a paper base or actually, unused emulsion change? No idea.

To cement the lesson about different ambient light: As I move to other well lit places, but perhaps behind a white curtain, the results change somewhat. But nothing that puts the last first or vice versa.

I wish I had included the H-P Everyday paper in this test. But wanting to be professional and all, I didn't. My new fresh prints which include one on the Everyday and one on the Premium, confirm what I've observed for five years: the Everyday just makes a nicer image! Brighter and more contrast. Just because the paper is thin doesn't mean the emulsion is inferior!
 

Paul Verizzo

Print Addict
Joined
Apr 16, 2011
Messages
424
Reaction score
88
Points
173
Location
Sarasota, FL, USA
Printer Model
Canon ip4500, 9000 MK II, PRO-
Well, forget almost everything I observed in the above tests and reported! I just discovered another large batch of prints on assorted papers and with assorted differences in printer settings, etc. And the bottom line is: You just can't predict fading and color shift!

Like before, a large ziplock baggie tucked away in the virtual dark. I don't know if this printer was an S800 or of the i4300 but without doubt, MIS inks.

I'm thinking that this test is truly closer to six years and the previous one I should have reported as about 3.5 years. Those prints were all done on a PRO 9000 MK II with genuine inks. The reasons for this deduction I won't bore you with.

This time almost NO paper showed color shifting! That even includes plain paper, "high resolution" type plain paper, and even a couple of clear acetates.

Like before the cheap-ola Royal Brites double sided matte paper came out stunning. (No doubt partly due to its brightners.) Similarly, but with a different finish, the HP Premium Glossy, which before was not so good. The microporous Ilford Galerie Smooth Pearl was much better than the several Classic Pearl prints, the latter mostly lacking saturation and "snap." Not supposed to be that way! Some plain paper looked great as did another cheap matte I used to use before Royal Brites. Also once again, some of the Ilford sheets became inexplicably overall darker. Not all. Stored just like everything else.

So, at this time, it's all a big shrug. Sure, my methods and recordings are open to justifiable criticism, but the end results are SO variable, it's like other things are going on. Change your printer setting and you get different color shifts? Whodda thunk? And certainly not predictable, just wait five years to find out.
 

palombian

Printer Master
Joined
Feb 4, 2014
Messages
1,869
Reaction score
2,244
Points
297
Location
Belgium
Printer Model
PRO10,PRO9500II,MB5150,MG8250
...

Problem with selling these printers on eBay is the high shipping costs given the weight and dimensions of the item.

RS

Well, I've found a company shipping 20 kg in Europe for € 20.
Just pack it very well and secure the printhead.
 

Roy Sletcher

Indolent contrarian
Platinum Printer Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2010
Messages
978
Reaction score
1,007
Points
233
Location
Ottawa, CANADA
Printer Model
Canon Pro-100, and Epson 3880
Well, I've found a company shipping 20 kg in Europe for € 20.
Just pack it very well and secure the printhead.


Sounds like a good deal. Belgium is a small country in size.

If I ship something Ottawa to Vancouver it is 3,500 km

One of the reasons people in North America like cheaper gas prices.

RS
 
Top