Fading Coloured Photos

[bainbrig]

Printing from a Canon Pixma, using good inks and Canon photo paper.

Initial results always sparkling, good colours, etc. But if I stick a photo on the wall ( not in sunlight at all) after some months it gets faded.

Is there any way round this? Do commercial photo printing firms still use some sort of fixative?

Ta.

BillB

[TonyV]

Woofgang I thought I meant apples with apples (no pun intended) by saying
"But truth applies to all the major printer manufacturers that their ink works the best with their printers."
but hay ho think you knew what I meant

[woofgang]

its late and I was up early :)

[TonyV]

No problem

[Peter Pedant]

I thought all colour processes faded - ( weren't 'fast')

Reynolds paintings - they dont all have TB - they have all faded
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/art/11469577/Joshua-Reynolds-Experiments-in-Paint-The-Wallace-Collection-review-illuminates-his-achievement.html

and the prewar colour film - agfa and kodak - were coloured but not as we know it ....

[Khandro]

bainbrig//So are you both (K and K) saying the colour fade IS caused by the non-Canon inks?//

Yes, and it isn't simply because they are 'non-Canon' it's because they are better quality pigments, like you can buy a kiddies set of watercolours for peanuts, or pay 10 times the price for artist quality Winsor & Newton's.

However, having said that; ALL pigments will eventually fade in ultra violet sunlight, it is simply a matter of time, the better the pigment the longer it will last.

[TonyV]

PP true but, Joshua Reynolds was 1723 ~ 1792. I think any printer inks won't visible after around 250 years lol

[Peter Pedant]

er agreed - hey his studio is above the Ming Long supermarket in Gerrard St., er - was
I mentioned Reynolds er the famous C18 portraitist not only to show I could spell his name or even knew when he lived ( and where)
but to illustrate my first comment
" I thought all colour processes werent fast"
( and then gave an example)

[ There is always such a forest of 'foo dat?' 'fing dat yeah!' and "I didern't!" in these threads- I think hubba hubba baby - let's *** it up with a comment from the century before two]

[Peter Pedant]

aaaargh missed one!

I should have said - Reynolds was eighteenth century - and they had hand coloured prints ( penny plain and tuppence coloured - Pollocks theatres) and do they fade when they are framed and exhibited
( yes - and the paper degrades as well doesnt it?)

[Peter Pedant]

rhymes with whizz with a jay

[TonyV]

ok PP tue shay ~ atrocious spelling, but phonetically you may get the gist

[Peter Pedant]

Hi Candy - how are you? kissy kissy ( that is my Miss Piggie wheedling voice because I want something)

just thought

My brother who is an arteest and colourist ( artist style)
has done (nay crafted) a water colour of my great nephew who treasures it and wont frame and hang it ( ha! geddit?)
And we heard of a colour print process what involved oils and was light fast - that is the fade problem was solved by the printer using oil based paints
any idea where we could get it done ?
obviiously there is a fee and we will pay
thanks

[Peter Pedant]

// ok PP tue shay ~ atrocious spelling,//
no I think Joshua Reynolds really did spell his name like that

[TonyV]

was referring to my spelling

[Khandro]

PP, You can buy a spray can of fixative which is protection against fading from U.V. light it comes matt or satin and is completely transparent to spray on you watercolour.
The one I use is German, made by Schminke, but there are others you will find.

[bainbrig]

"like you can buy a kiddies set of watercolours for peanuts, or pay 10 times the price for artist quality Winsor & Newton's."

Still anecdotal, I'm afraid.

And that argument is SO poor - do you buy Apple iPad leads (about £20) or unbranded ones (£8)?

Most leads (and I suspect but as yet have no proof!) like most inks are produced in the same factories in Taiwan or Shanghai, and again (I suspect only) differ mainly in whether they're shipped out in Canon wrappers or 'Bloggs' ones. (This used to be the case (proved) with Soap Powders in the 60s and 70s, when the same powder was used to fill different boxes, which, of course, were sold for different prices. Dearer, for the more discerning "I only buy what's best" brigade, and cheaper, for the "I only buy what I can afford" shoppers.

Science, please, not stories.

BB

[Zacs-Master]

You cant write ‘I suspect but as yet have no proof!’ and then ask people to stick to scientific fact without looking a bit daft, Bill.

[Khandro]

Zacs, We don't often agree, but here we do most certainly.

[Zacs-Master]

United in the face of absurdity, Khandro.

[Peter Pedant]

thanks Kandh
will do

and Oh come on boys lighten up - the is AB

[bainbrig]

My point is this. Throw me an anecdote, and I’ll throw one back. Throw me a scientific fact, and I’ll button it while I check it out.

All I’m reading so far is
a) It must be right cos Canon say so
or
b) I’ve always bought the expensive stuff so it must be right (otherwise I’d look a right burke)

Not saying that Canon DON’T add some sort of fixer to their overpriced inks; they might.
What I AM saying is that as colour inks, there is little or no difference for results from even a good quality inkjet printer.
And if you keep the prints in a box (or album) neither Canon nor compatible will fade appreciably. Hang ‘em on a wall and they might!

To me, the spirit of scientific method always says “I might be wrong.”

And I might be wrong. I’d like my fellow ABers to be similarly undogmatic.

BB