Any ideas here? There's so much expertise among the regulars here I'm sure 
some useful ideas will surface.

I want to print some artwork that I've done on the computer. It looks great 
using my normal colour inkjet printer on heavyweight paper, but I know that 
ordinary printer inks fade rather rapidly, and I want my artwork to survive 
in all its colourful glory, if not permanently, at least for 20 years or so.

I could go to a commercial printer I suppose, but it seems prohibitively 
expensive just for a few copies. (I'm hoping to mount and frame and sell 
some of this stuff. I'm not expecting to be able to sell hundreds of 
copies.) What about colour laser printers? Is colour toner more permanent 
than inkjet ink? I know there are printshops that will print things out for 
you on colour laser printers if you give them a disk. But it doesn't look as 
nice iirc - sort of shiny and artificial looking.

Are there any specialist inks I could get for my present printer that would 
last better?

I've thought of doing a course in lithography and making proper arty prints 
but that seems like a very long-term ambition. I'm also in the middle of 
making a painted version of one of these pictures, but of course it looks 
different with paint and what I want to do is to make copies, not just 
one-offs.

ally

a l l y wrote:

> Any ideas here? There's so much expertise among the regulars here I'm
> sure some useful ideas will surface.
>
> I want to print some artwork that I've done on the computer. It looks
> great using my normal colour inkjet printer on heavyweight paper, but
> I know that ordinary printer inks fade rather rapidly, and I want my
> artwork to survive in all its colourful glory, if not permanently, at
> least for 20 years or so.


Hi Ally,

this is one of the problems we came across years ago when saving prints for 
our portfolio of any artworks commissioned. It's rare that anything is hung 
on the wall and there are, in fact, only two prints of mine hung in the 
local gallery which I thought may fade as they get placed in a south-east 
facing shop window and hit by the sun all day. They've been there two years 
now so I know I've hit the right idea. More in a bit.

Years ago they would have faded fairly quickly but besides the improvements 
in inkjet technology there are some things you can do.

We use various different printers here, including laser. The laser printers 
are too shiny in output but that's OK behind lamination and glass to a 
certain extent. They mostly get used for photo/text and lineart or business 
cards, stationery stock etc.

Laser-jets are fine if you use the correct inks which can be expensive, 
though inks are getting better, longevity-wise all the time. You need a good 
balance between paper and ink. Buy only inkjet-receptive coated paper and 
nothing less. The prints I have in the gallery were done on a laser jet (as 
most of our prints are, on 140 GSM light-textured watercolour paper and 
placed in a folder). Even in a light-protected folder there is slight fade 
with time and so when I was told I could use the gallery to advertise I 
finished the prints with an anti-UV spray and used UV glass. Not an ideal 
solution as UV glass doesn't stop fading in the end, but the right mix of 
ink, paper, spray and glass has left these in direct sunlight with no fade. 
'Museum-grade' glass is best but not generally stocked by your local glazier 
or picture framer.

When we get asked for prints of Kai Hsia's work (http://kaihsia.ukweb.nu/) 
we generally refuse unless enticed by much cash even though it could be a 
lucrative business... (KH believes that the 'spirituality' behind her work 
should mean that every picture is unique and never reprinted. Unless it's an 
ex-commission re-requested pictures are repainted from scratch. Anyway, you 
have no control over where and how the customer is going to place the 
picture. Single prints on the specialist printers are cost-prohibitive.

Start with a good printer. Something that gives around 1440 dpi is ideal.

In general home printers commonly in use on most computer systems are 
laser-jet and UV lamination works well. Cold lamination works better than 
hot - better texture and less chance of damage to the inks. Go for a matt 
rather than a standard laminate. Those are too shiny. Then again, it's a 
matter of taste or how well it suits your subject matter. Paintings, 
sketches, doodles - use matt. Photoprints, brochures, flyers - gloss.

The best solution I know of for drawings is to use 'liquid lamination'. You 
must mount your subject, if on paper, to a board first to resist curling. 
Use a fixative first as the laminant is water-based. The ink will 'bleed' if 
you don't (though that can create a weirdly artistic effect in itself - try 
it on laser-jet photoprint!!!!). After fixative wait 24 to 48 hours and 
either spray or brush on the laminant. It comes in various sheens but I 
prefer matt. You may need to experiment with papers and fixatives. Some give 
a very slight yellowish discolouration. I started off using hairspray!!

Finally there's the matt polymer acrylic varnish - again used after a 
fixative..

Some people may mention ultra-violet light stabilising sprays. These, though 
highly effective, are dangerously toxic and environmentally unfriendly. OK 
if you have access to a fume cupboard but get it up you nose or on your skin 
and you'se in trouble man...

Even so, after all that, inkjet prints should have a life span of between 20 
and 30 years but may fade around that time by 30% without treatments. I 
expect that we are getting up to 100 years fade resistance (though "it 
doesn't always do exactly what it says on the tin!"). By then I hope I'm not 
around.

Everything is stored on CD now, anyway... So if the print is for your own 
use why not reprint every 5 years or so to keep it fresh!!

Kezzi. . .

"a l l y"  wrote in message 
news:3qr000Fgbb2oU1@individual.net...

> Any ideas here? There's so much expertise among the regulars here I'm sure 
> some useful ideas will surface.
>
> I want to print some artwork that I've done on the computer. It looks 
> great using my normal colour inkjet printer on heavyweight paper, but I 
> know that ordinary printer inks fade rather rapidly, and I want my artwork 
> to survive in all its colourful glory, if not permanently, at least for 20 
> years or so.
>
> I could go to a commercial printer I suppose, but it seems prohibitively 
> expensive just for a few copies. (I'm hoping to mount and frame and sell 
> some of this stuff. I'm not expecting to be able to sell hundreds of 
> copies.) What about colour laser printers? Is colour toner more permanent 
> than inkjet ink? I know there are printshops that will print things out 
> for you on colour laser printers if you give them a disk. But it doesn't 
> look as nice iirc - sort of shiny and artificial looking.
>
> Are there any specialist inks I could get for my present printer that 
> would last better?
>
> I've thought of doing a course in lithography and making proper arty 
> prints but that seems like a very long-term ambition. I'm also in the 
> middle of making a painted version of one of these pictures, but of course 
> it looks different with paint and what I want to do is to make copies, not 
> just one-offs.
>
> ally

Nothing to do with paintings or art but I remember I had to get some typing 
sent to a solicitor and they suggested a spray to make sure the document 
didn't fade.  I printed it on my inkjet and then sprayed it.  Can't remember 
the name of it though.
Ray

Ray Ingham wrote:

> "a l l y"  wrote in message
> news:3qr000Fgbb2oU1@individual.net...
>
>> Are there any specialist inks I could get for my present printer that
>> would last better?
>>
>> I've thought of doing a course in lithography and making proper arty
>> prints but that seems like a very long-term ambition. I'm also in the
>> middle of making a painted version of one of these pictures, but of
>> course it looks different with paint and what I want to do is to
>> make copies, not just one-offs.
>>
>> ally

> Nothing to do with paintings or art but I remember I had to get some
> typing sent to a solicitor and they suggested a spray to make sure
> the document didn't fade.  I printed it on my inkjet and then sprayed
> it.  Can't remember the name of it though.
> Ray


"Clearshield" spray by Clearstar is what we use...

Kez. . .

"Dirty Sanchez"  wrote in message 
news:4348d1ad_3@mk-nntp-2.news.uk.tiscali.com...


>
> Everything is stored on CD now, anyway... So if the print is for your own 
> use why not reprint every 5 years or so to keep it fresh!!
>

Gosh, loads of useful info. Thanks. This'll give me something to think 
about.

The prints aren't for my own use: I want to try to sell them. Years ago 
(pre-PCs with nice printers) I used to do paintings in liquid acrylics and 
sold quite a lot. Sometimes, like KH, I'd repaint one that was popular 
several times. Unlike your good lady, though, I have no qualms about making 
copies of the things.

Some of the paintings I did still hang on my walls, and some of them are 
fading now, after about 20 years. I knew absolutely zilch about UV, 
acid-free papers, fading colours and all that back then. Neve even occurred 
to me there might be a problem. But I know better now and I'd like my stuff 
to last a bit longer if possible.

Mounting them and framing them behind glass sounds fine though.

ally

"Ray Ingham"  wrote in message
news:2852f.11815$U51.1872@news-server.bigpond.net.au...

>
> "a l l y"  wrote in message
> news:3qr000Fgbb2oU1@individual.net...
> > Any ideas here? There's so much expertise among the regulars here I'm
sure
> > some useful ideas will surface.
> >
> > I want to print some artwork that I've done on the computer. It looks
> > great using my normal colour inkjet printer on heavyweight paper, but I
> > know that ordinary printer inks fade rather rapidly, and I want my
artwork
> > to survive in all its colourful glory, if not permanently, at least for
20
> > years or so.
> >
> > I could go to a commercial printer I suppose, but it seems prohibitively
> > expensive just for a few copies. (I'm hoping to mount and frame and sell
> > some of this stuff. I'm not expecting to be able to sell hundreds of
> > copies.) What about colour laser printers? Is colour toner more
permanent
> > than inkjet ink? I know there are printshops that will print things out
> > for you on colour laser printers if you give them a disk. But it doesn't
> > look as nice iirc - sort of shiny and artificial looking.
> >
> > Are there any specialist inks I could get for my present printer that
> > would last better?
> >
> > I've thought of doing a course in lithography and making proper arty
> > prints but that seems like a very long-term ambition. I'm also in the
> > middle of making a painted version of one of these pictures, but of
course
> > it looks different with paint and what I want to do is to make copies,
not
> > just one-offs.
> >
> > ally
> Nothing to do with paintings or art but I remember I had to get some
typing
> sent to a solicitor and they suggested a spray to make sure the document
> didn't fade.  I printed it on my inkjet and then sprayed it.  Can't
remember
> the name of it though.
> Ray
>

Fixative.

Edith

On Sat, 8 Oct 2005 23:36:50 +0100, a l l y wrote:


> I want to print some artwork that I've done on the computer. It 
> looks great using my normal colour inkjet printer on heavyweight 
> paper, but I know that ordinary printer inks fade rather rapidly, 
> and I want my artwork to survive in all its colourful glory, if not 
> permanently, at least for 20 years or so.


A very good post has already being made but it might be worth looking 
at the website of the printers maker to see what they say about the 
longevity of the inks and ways of maximising that.

My Epson Stylus Photo Color 890 and its inks say they are stable for 
several years (I forget how long) when mounted behind glass. Certainly 
stuff I have printed out and bunged in an ordinary photo frame doesn't 
appear to have faded after being on the wall for several years, not in 
direct sunlight though...

Another option is to look at the various online photo printers. Some 
use optical methods onto photgraphic paper rather than printing. 
Ordinary 4x6 prints are a few tens of pence each price goes up as the 
print gets bigger but even so for one offs or short runs they still 
might be economic.

-- 
Cheers                                              new5pam@howhill.com
Dave.                                             pam is missing e-mail

The Traveller wrote:

> "Ray Ingham"  wrote in message
> news:2852f.11815$U51.1872@news-server.bigpond.net.au...

>> Nothing to do with paintings or art but I remember I had to get some
>> typing sent to a solicitor and they suggested a spray to make sure
>> the document didn't fade.  I printed it on my inkjet and then
>> sprayed it.  Can't remember the name of it though.
>> Ray
>>
> Fixative.
>
> Edith


No.... fixative stops smudging/bleeding, etc. It won't stop fading...

Kez. .  .

"Dirty Sanchez"  wrote in message
news:43491896$1_4@mk-nntp-2.news.uk.tiscali.com...

> The Traveller wrote:
> > "Ray Ingham"  wrote in message
> > news:2852f.11815$U51.1872@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>
> >> Nothing to do with paintings or art but I remember I had to get some
> >> typing sent to a solicitor and they suggested a spray to make sure
> >> the document didn't fade.  I printed it on my inkjet and then
> >> sprayed it.  Can't remember the name of it though.
> >> Ray
> >>
> > Fixative.
> >
> > Edith
>
> No.... fixative stops smudging/bleeding, etc. It won't stop fading...
>
> Kez. .  .
>

I see, K. I sprinkle flowers with salt before pressing them so thay will
keep their colour. Anything there?

Edith Saltydog.

The Traveller wrote:

> "Dirty Sanchez"  wrote in message
> news:43491896$1_4@mk-nntp-2.news.uk.tiscali.com...
> 
>>The Traveller wrote:
>>
>>>"Ray Ingham"  wrote in message
>>>news:2852f.11815$U51.1872@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>>
>>>>Nothing to do with paintings or art but I remember I had to get some
>>>>typing sent to a solicitor and they suggested a spray to make sure
>>>>the document didn't fade.  I printed it on my inkjet and then
>>>>sprayed it.  Can't remember the name of it though.
>>>>Ray
>>>>
>>>
>>>Fixative.
>>>
>>>Edith
>>
>>No.... fixative stops smudging/bleeding, etc. It won't stop fading...
>>
>>Kez. .  .
>>
> 
> I see, K. I sprinkle flowers with salt before pressing them so thay will
> keep their colour. Anything there?
> 
> Edith Saltydog.
> 
> 


Hey-hey, you salty dog
Hey-hey-hey, you salty dog
Said, the little fish, big fish swimmin' in the water
Come back, man, and gimme my quarter

Bluesily
Mississippi Ron
-- 
Lune Valley Audio
Public address system
Hire, Sales, Repairs
www.lunevalleyaudio.com

Dave Liquorice wrote:

> On Sat, 8 Oct 2005 23:36:50 +0100, a l l y wrote:
>
> My Epson Stylus Photo Color 890 and its inks say they are stable for
> several years (I forget how long) when mounted behind glass. Certainly
> stuff I have printed out and bunged in an ordinary photo frame doesn't
> appear to have faded after being on the wall for several years, not in
> direct sunlight though...


Good point, but generally ink fading is tested under fluorescent or tungsten 
lighting and not UV or direct sunlight etc. To be on the safe side I would 
reduce the manufacturers estimates by up to 30% for standard printing. Epson 
printers, by the way, are one of the best all-rounders and the Stylus Photo 
Color has always been an exemplary machine. We have burned two of them out 
with overuse. Inks are getting better and more stable. Just keep away from 
refilling or reconditioned (and rechipped) cartridges unless you're just an 
average user. Hmmmm.... somehow that sounds demeaning. It's not meant to :) 
Maybe I'm a printing snob!

I'm just doing a scan and laser print of my last sketch. It's fetched 5 
commissions already. The original was for the owner of a dog training 
club... Shall pop down to the local stables next week!!! ;)


> Another option is to look at the various online photo printers. Some
> use optical methods onto photgraphic paper rather than printing.
> Ordinary 4x6 prints are a few tens of pence each price goes up as the
> print gets bigger but even so for one offs or short runs they still
> might be economic.


Online printing is good value though 'Staples' are good for one-offs. One of 
the best bargains for long-run prints that we have found online is 
VistaPrint in the States (they have a UK gateway now at 
www.vistaprint.co.uk). We use them a lot. They did our 'original' Chrissie 
cards last year at an unbeatable price. (We did have our own lithographic 
shop until our business partner passed away - he was the expert. My biggest 
regret is never taking up his offer of learning the print-run...)

Sketch going online now:

http://westshape.co.uk/180458/91005/lady.jpg

Gitcha orders in for Christmas LOL!!!

Kez. . .

The Traveller wrote:

> "Dirty Sanchez"  wrote in message
> news:43491896$1_4@mk-nntp-2.news.uk.tiscali.com...
>> The Traveller wrote:
>>> "Ray Ingham"  wrote in message
>>> news:2852f.11815$U51.1872@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>>
>>>> Nothing to do with paintings or art but I remember I had to get
>>>> some typing sent to a solicitor and they suggested a spray to make
>>>> sure the document didn't fade.  I printed it on my inkjet and then
>>>> sprayed it.  Can't remember the name of it though.
>>>> Ray
>>>>
>>> Fixative.
>>>
>>> Edith
>>
>> No.... fixative stops smudging/bleeding, etc. It won't stop fading...
>>
>> Kez. .  .
>>
> I see, K. I sprinkle flowers with salt before pressing them so thay
> will keep their colour. Anything there?
>
> Edith Saltydog.


I nivver knew that!! Tell me more. KH is into her dried flowers but they 
always look a bit on the 'brown side' to me...

Me granny used to stick sugar in't'watter to mek 'em last longer.

Kez. . .

"Dave Liquorice"  wrote in message 
news:nyyfbegfubjuvyypbz.io3syp1.pminews@news.howhill.com...

>
> Another option is to look at the various online photo printers. Some
> use optical methods onto photgraphic paper rather than printing.
> Ordinary 4x6 prints are a few tens of pence each price goes up as the
> print gets bigger but even so for one offs or short runs they still
> might be economic.
>

Thing is, they're not photos, they're artwork, so I don't want them on photo 
paper. The ones I've printed out so far, just as sort of test pieces, are on 
heavyweight paper embossed with various types of grain, like canvas or 
whatever. I really like the look of that, but I don't suppose this paper is 
acid-free and I gather that can affect the longevity of the colour. (I buy 
my interesting paper at the stationery shop at Rheghed. Great selection  and 
good value for money.) Maybe I could just cut sheets of good quality 
water-colour paper into A4 pieces and use that.

ally

"Dirty Sanchez"  wrote in message 
news:4349370c_3@mk-nntp-2.news.uk.tiscali.com...

>

Just keep away from

> refilling or reconditioned (and rechipped) cartridges unless you're just 
> an average user. Hmmmm.... somehow that sounds demeaning. It's not meant 
> to :)


Well, there's printing, and then there's Printing. Most of us just do 
printing with a small "p" most of the time, so the quality of the ink 
doesn't matter that much so long as it keeps flowing and looks more or less 
OK. Even when I print my little books on cane & rush seating I'm not that 
fussy about exact colour matches and so on. My customers just want to read 
nice clear instructions with well-drawn diagrams - they're not interested in 
the exact 'look' of the thing. In fact, this is probably the first time I've 
stopped to think about quality: first time I've thought about Printing with 
a capital "P".


> Maybe I'm a printing snob!


Just the sort of man I need to give me advice I'll pay attention to!

(We did have our own lithographic

> shop until our business partner passed away - he was the expert. My 
> biggest regret is never taking up his offer of learning the print-run...)


Oh, wouldn't that be useful...


>
> Sketch going online now:
>
> http://westshape.co.uk/180458/91005/lady.jpg
>

No wonder you're getting repeat orders! Excellent work!

ally

"Dirty Sanchez"  wrote in message
news:4349370c_3@mk-nntp-2.news.uk.tiscali.com...

> Sketch going online now:
>
> http://westshape.co.uk/180458/91005/lady.jpg
>
> Gitcha orders in for Christmas LOL!!!
>
> Kez. . .


Lovely Kezz.
Good dog, nice dog. Bight neighbour. Clever lass.

E.

Dirty Sanchez wrote:
  > Sketch going online now:

> 
> http://westshape.co.uk/180458/91005/lady.jpg
> 
> Gitcha orders in for Christmas LOL!!!
> 
> Kez. . . 
> 
> 


Aw! She's lovely.

Jp

On Sun, 9 Oct 2005 20:00:27 +0100, a l l y wrote:


> Thing is, they're not photos, they're artwork, ...


Is there a difference? It's just an image in your computer that you 
want to print... 


> ... so I don't want them on photo paper. The ones I've printed out 
> so far, just as sort of test pieces, are on heavyweight paper 
> embossed with various types of grain, like canvas or whatever.


You can get textured photographic paper... Seriously check a few out 
and see what they offer.

-- 
Cheers                                              new5pam@howhill.com
Dave.                                             pam is missing e-mail

On Sun, 9 Oct 2005 16:27:49 +0100, Dirty Sanchez wrote:


> Epson printers, by the way, are one of the best all-rounders and the 
> Stylus Photo Color has always been an exemplary machine.


I'm always impressed by the print quality, it does like to have Epson 
paper though. I have lots of "Kodak Premium Picture Paper" but the 
colours come out a little odd (magenta) compared to printing on "Epson 
Premium Photo Paper", even if you use the exact same settings.


> Just keep away from refilling or reconditioned (and rechipped) 
> cartridges unless you're just an average user.


I do but I'm sorely tempted to refill and reset the chip. I don't 
print in colour all that often and more often than not I have to go 
through several cleaning cycles to get all the nozzels working. I'd 
say 50% of the ink ends up wasted in this way.  B-(  Even buying the 
cartridges (T008 and T007) fairly cheap at CostCo it is still very 
expensive printing.


> Sketch going online now:


Nice, must be market for cards made up from such quality sketching.

-- 
Cheers                                              new5pam@howhill.com
Dave.                                             pam is missing e-mail

"Dirty Sanchez"  wrote in message
news:43493e6d_4@mk-nntp-2.news.uk.tiscali.com...

> The Traveller wrote:
> > "Dirty Sanchez"  wrote in message
> > news:43491896$1_4@mk-nntp-2.news.uk.tiscali.com...
> >> The Traveller wrote:
> >>> "Ray Ingham"  wrote in message
> >>> news:2852f.11815$U51.1872@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> >>
> >>>> Nothing to do with paintings or art but I remember I had to get
> >>>> some typing sent to a solicitor and they suggested a spray to make
> >>>> sure the document didn't fade.  I printed it on my inkjet and then
> >>>> sprayed it.  Can't remember the name of it though.
> >>>> Ray
> >>>>
> >>> Fixative.
> >>>
> >>> Edith
> >>
> >> No.... fixative stops smudging/bleeding, etc. It won't stop fading...
> >>
> >> Kez. .  .
> >>
> > I see, K. I sprinkle flowers with salt before pressing them so thay
> > will keep their colour. Anything there?
> >
> > Edith Saltydog.
>
> I nivver knew that!! Tell me more. KH is into her dried flowers but they
> always look a bit on the 'brown side' to me...
>
> Me granny used to stick sugar in't'watter to mek 'em last longer.
>
> Kez. . .


'ere the put thur carnae shuns in lemonade.

Edith and the top of the morning to you all.

"Dave Liquorice"  wrote in message 
news:nyyfbegfubjuvyypbz.io4los2.pminews@news.howhill.com...

> On Sun, 9 Oct 2005 20:00:27 +0100, a l l y wrote:
>
>> Thing is, they're not photos, they're artwork, ...
>
> Is there a difference? It's just an image in your computer that you
> want to print...


Yeah, but I want it to look like it's been painted, or at least carefully 
hand-printed.

>
>> ... so I don't want them on photo paper. The ones I've printed out
>> so far, just as sort of test pieces, are on heavyweight paper
>> embossed with various types of grain, like canvas or whatever.
>
> You can get textured photographic paper... Seriously check a few out
> and see what they offer.
>

OK, I'll not dismiss it out of hand. I shall have a look. Thanks.

ally