Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: A Real-Life FBA/OBA/FWA experiment  (Read 8195 times)
Sven W
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 514


« Reply #20 on: October 03, 2010, 03:12:50 PM »
ReplyReply

Why CIE76?

The numbers posted don't say much of anything to me. Delta E without an actual Lab value of both the measured original and time related shifts would be the only way it would mean much to me.

Also are these measurements overall on ink tank colours, reference flats with composite , or blends. Or is this only white point tests?

I think what you are posting is valuable, you need only expand a little the material tested and details.

Here's the Lab values:

RC
March 1, 2010
L 94.1
a -0.5
b -4.7
October 1, 2010
L 95
a -0.4
b -2.3

Non OBA Cotton
March 1, 2010
L 97.4
a 0
b 2.4
October 1, 2010
L 98.2
a -0.2
b 0.8

Matte
March 1, 2010
L 96
a 0.6
b -4.3
October 1, 2010
L 96.2
a -0.8
b 0.2

Fiberbased with TiO2
March 1, 2010
L 96.1
a 0.8
b -4.8
October 1, 2010
L 96.5
a 0.2
b 4.1
Logged

Stockholm, Sweden
MHMG
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 623


« Reply #21 on: October 03, 2010, 03:32:25 PM »
ReplyReply

Here's the Lab values:

Non OBA Cotton
March 1, 2010
L 97.4
a 0
b 2.4
October 1, 2010
L 98.2
a -0.2
b 0.8
...

The non OBA cotton sample shows the bleaching effect I referred to in an earlier post... b* value decreasing and L* going up. It's visually subtle and unlikely at this point to be unnoticed by most people when the print is matted and framed under glazing (unless the overmat got removed for inspection for some reason), but a measurable shift nonetheless. It may continue a little bit further but will undoubtedly quit changing at this rate.

Mark
Logged
neil snape
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1433


WWW
« Reply #22 on: October 03, 2010, 03:52:35 PM »
ReplyReply

Fiberbased with TiO2
March 1, 2010
L 96.1
a 0.8
b -4.8
October 1, 2010
L 96.5
a 0.2
b 4.1


Thanks for the values , it helps.
Is the last figure correct or is the b value missing the - (minus sign)?
Logged
John R Smith
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1357


Still crazy, after all these years


« Reply #23 on: October 04, 2010, 03:05:02 AM »
ReplyReply

Well, I'm not shy. Here's one I am quite happy to name and shame -

Innova Ultra-Smooth Gloss.

Really bad yellowing after a very short period of exposure to daylight.

John
Logged

Hasselblad 500 C/M, SWC and CFV-39 DB
and a case full of (very old) lenses and other bits
Ernst Dinkla
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2866


« Reply #24 on: October 04, 2010, 04:30:20 AM »
ReplyReply

Here's the Lab values:

RC
March 1, 2010
L 94.1
a -0.5
b -4.7
October 1, 2010
L 95
a -0.4
b -2.3

Non OBA Cotton
March 1, 2010
L 97.4
a 0
b 2.4
October 1, 2010
L 98.2
a -0.2
b 0.8

Matte
March 1, 2010
L 96
a 0.6
b -4.3
October 1, 2010
L 96.2
a -0.8
b 0.2

Fiberbased with TiO2
March 1, 2010
L 96.1
a 0.8
b -4.8
October 1, 2010
L 96.5
a 0.2
b 4.1


Speculations:

1/Ilford Galerie Smooth Pearl 11RC or FujiFilm Satin RC, at least one of the RC papers with the FBA in the pulp between the RC barriers. HP has similar qualities. The Fujicolor Crystal Archive chromogene paper is an early example of that concept.

2/One of the Canson Arches qualities, Aquarelle most likely. The bleaching could be TiO2 related, that whitener has amazing qualities in other products like tiles and glass coatings, more or less burning contaminations SO2, NO, away when struck by UV light. Probably related to the UV bleaching practiced for inkjet prints that attracted sulfur from the air.

3/Many varieties around, I have few samples. A fresher sheet of Epson EEM than I measured? FBA in the coating. The shift could be a cumulation of: FBA destruction, air pollution on the coating (SO2) and a cheap whitening agent next to the FBA + woodbase degrading. Scandinavia had its share of Icelandic ash and sulfur dioxide this year.

4/Innova IFA29 Fibaprint White Semi_Matt fits the best here. Whether it actually has TiO2? TiO2 isn't the ideal companion of high loads of FBAs. What I also see in some papers with heavy FBA content, this one included, is a white reflectance compensation at the red of the spectrum and little in between. If the FBA fails in time nothing in the middle will compensate the loss of the brightener's bluer spectrum. FujiFilm PhotoGlossy RC, HP Matte Proofing  are other examples.

Edit: an addition to this. Pollution of the paper coating has a lot of influence on Spectrometer readings. I have a Fuji Photo Rag sample in the spectral plots of SpectrumViz. I'm quite sure it is actually HM's Photorag but the sample is older and has been stored in the original Fuji sample book. I think the paper covering it has contaminated the Photo Rag surface. It has an uneven yellow discoloration. When measured with an UV capable Spectrometer the yellow contamination will act as a filter on the UV light so the fluorescence is already reduced + the yellow itself adds to spectral reflectance. In shape the spectral plot is very similar to the HM Photorag plot but deviated and I doubt the FBA is actually destroyed, it is more like measuring the paper with an UV-cut Spectrometer. I will remove that sample but for the time being compare the plots i would say.


met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst Dinkla

spectral plots of +100 inkjet papers:
http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
« Last Edit: October 04, 2010, 05:05:25 AM by Ernst Dinkla » Logged
Sven W
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 514


« Reply #25 on: October 04, 2010, 05:00:14 AM »
ReplyReply

Fiberbased with TiO2
March 1, 2010
L 96.1
a 0.8
b -4.8
October 1, 2010
L 96.5
a 0.2
b 4.1


Thanks for the values , it helps.
Is the last figure correct or is the b value missing the - (minus sign)?

No, that's the correct value; from a blueish -4.8 to a yellow 4.1, on the b-axis.
/Sven
Logged

Stockholm, Sweden
neil snape
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1433


WWW
« Reply #26 on: October 04, 2010, 05:05:26 AM »
ReplyReply

That is a significant change!  Ouch.
Logged
narikin
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 859


« Reply #27 on: October 04, 2010, 07:42:08 AM »
ReplyReply

interesting and informative thread this turned out to be.

and somewhat depressing - it just shows that a little bit of thought in choosing papers is not enough: simply choosing an 'art paper' by a well known manufacturer, or or a photo Baryta Photo paper with great claims, is often no guarantee, or worse than if you'd stuck with standard (RC) Inkjet 'Photo Paper'! 

you have to look closely at detailed spectral plots, fading tests, specific to your inkset, and then still choose your preferred paper type - Matte/Photo/Baryta/cool/warm/no/low/medium OBA's/textured/smooth/gloss/semi matte/stipple

amazing looking at the Aardenberg results how things differ with an identical paper in Epson, HP or Canon ink. Or even within Epson - 9900 vs 9880 inks.  Epson certainly don't lead in inkset longevity, for the most part.

...arrgh...
Logged
narikin
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 859


« Reply #28 on: October 04, 2010, 07:52:17 AM »
ReplyReply

That is a significant change!  Ouch.

Yes, Innova, and Epson who sell very similar (wink) as 'Exhibition Fiber', at very high prices, should be ashamed of themselves.
Logged
Ernst Dinkla
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2866


« Reply #29 on: October 04, 2010, 08:25:27 AM »
ReplyReply

Yes, Innova, and Epson who sell very similar (wink) as 'Exhibition Fiber', at very high prices, should be ashamed of themselves.


I think you are mixing up three messages and four papers here. Neil commented on an unknown paper's failure.
The Innova Ultra Smooth-Gloss is considered equal in composition but not in weight to the EEF. John mentioned yellowing of the first paper. And my contribution is pure speculation on another Innova quality.


met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst Dinkla

Try: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/
Logged
narikin
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 859


« Reply #30 on: October 04, 2010, 08:56:25 AM »
ReplyReply

I think you are mixing up three messages and four papers here. Neil commented on an unknown paper's failure.
The Innova Ultra Smooth-Gloss is considered equal in composition but not in weight to the EEF. John mentioned yellowing of the first paper. And my contribution is pure speculation on another Innova quality.

thanks for clarification Ernst, I see enough firm results on Innova's high OBA papers in Mark's archive.  Their OBA free papers do much better, so the company do give you a choice, to be fair to them.

Yes the correlation between EEF and Innova's Ultra Smooth... is there for all to see
as it is between Ilford Galerie Silk and a particular Canson paper.

am interested to see how the new 'Hot Press' papers come out in all this, but right now I am sticking with Canson Baryta Photographique (mid OBA, bright cool whites, smooth surface) or Platine (no OBA, acceptable neutral whites, slightly textured) for my needs, with perhaps a foray into Hahnemuhle Photo Rag Pearl 320.  Others may have different needs/surface requirements.  

Alternatively it is very tempting just to go back to Epson Premium Photo Papers, to keep it safe and easy!
« Last Edit: October 04, 2010, 09:09:34 AM by narikin » Logged
robgo2
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 344


WWW
« Reply #31 on: October 04, 2010, 11:08:32 AM »
ReplyReply

Both Canson Platine Fiber and Baryta Photographique recently entered AaI&A light fade testing. They do indeed possess nice high L* values for media white point, and the Platine does get very close to "neutral" without any OBA.  The first test results at the 10 megalux hour interval will be posted in the AaI&A database around November 10, so there is no info in the database about them just yet. And at such an early exposure stage, we won't yet see much change unless the relatively high level of OBA in the Canson Baryta is really problematic. However, it may be incorporated in a Baryta subbing layer and/or paper core rather than in the microporous ink receptor layer. That would in all likelihood provide much better resistance to OBA burnout. I suspect the paper like Sven tested has those bountiful OBAs located right in the microporous top coat. It's chemistry, concentration, and location in the media that leads to the OBA performance variations we are documenting in our tests.  The Platine as advertised (and as measured here at AaI&A) is indeed OBA-free. But there are reasons for paper whitepoint discoloration/bleaching other than OBA burnout, so even OBA-free papers really need to be evaluated for paper white stability.

I'm optimistic that the Canson papers will do well in my tests. I sure hope so. I really like the surface texture and appearance of both of these papers.

kind regards,
Mark

This makes me feel good about my decision to use Canson Platine exclusively with my Epson 3880.  Erik at Shades of Paper turned me on to it, and I am grateful to him for that.  Of course, I am eager to see if the final results of this testing confirm early impressions.  I have also tried the Canson Baryta but found the surface too prone to scratching, especially on 17x22 inch sheets that buckled in the printer when they became wet with ink.

Rob
Logged
neil snape
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1433


WWW
« Reply #32 on: October 04, 2010, 11:13:27 AM »
ReplyReply

Have you not tried Hahnemuhle PhotoRag Baryta?

It does scratch, but the surface is very nice, and is free of OBA AFAIK.

Hard pressed to find a better paper.
Logged
Pages: « 1 [2]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad