Agree or disagree with Keith Cooper it is always a pleasure to watch a photography video, especially a printing video, with no BS and with a down-to-earth real-word perspective based on decades of professional knowledge. Thank you for sharing Keith!
Got the ET-8550 recently. Was asking the same question today, as I'm getting professional photo prints requested of me. Uncannily timed video. I appreciate your pragmatic, business-minded insights on the matter. It's resolved my reservations about attempting to sell prints.
Thanks for addressing the issue with the real-world , common sense approach that we appreciate in your videos. A couple of thoughts: I've been using a dye based Canon Pro 100 printer for ten years and selling the prints without complaint. My decision to favor dyes over pigments is an artistic one. I found that a bye based print has more vibrant color than a pigment based one. That difference appealed to me. Nobody asks me if they are archival. Canon claims that prints made on their papers with their inks can last up to 300 years. So far, with ten years of personal experience, I haven't seen any evidence to make me question those projections. And for all of the debate over which ink is superior, as a practical matter, the distinctions make little difference. I think that the issue of whether a photograph is archival or not has its beginnings in the days of conventional darkroom printing. Photographs were always the bastard children of the art world, and struggled to find legitimacy among critics, curators and collectors, whose aesthetics and prejudices valued established media like painting and sculpture, but didn't know how to deal with photography, which was outside of their comfort zone. Artists don't have to be able to relate to photography, and vice versa. The easiest way was to dismiss it for its technical deficiencies, while their real objections were artistic or philosophical ones with the process. It took a long time before traditional B/W photographs were accepted as an art form. The first Show of Color work at MOMA by William Eggleston didn't occur until 1976. And while B/W fiber prints could be made to be archival, color prints from negatives (C prints) did fade. Longer lasting prints were available from slides using the Cibachrome process, but Eggleston's work was on color negative film. So all of the prints shown at first major exhibition of color photography, at America's flagship ART museum were NOT archival. MOMA didn't mind this technical deficiency. They believed the work had merit and value, and deserved to be on their gallery walls. The open secret that art snobs find it inconvenient to admit is that the paintings we consider masterpieces are not archival either. Excessive exposure to light, especially ultraviolet rays, can cause fading, discoloration, and cracking of the paint layers. Fluctuations in humidity can lead to cracking, warping of the canvas, and mold growth. Extreme temperature changes can cause similar issues as humidity, as well as affecting the paint's chemical composition. Airborne pollutants can react with the paint, causing discoloration and degradation. Another point for consideration is that artists of all sorts have been experimenting with new materials and techniques for ages. They weren't always more concerned with how long a piece of art would last, rather than how COOL it would look. Leonardo da Vinci's Last Supper began to deteriorate soon after it was completed. This openness to experiment continues, without much concern for longevity over style and substance. My conclusion is that the objections to accepting the value of a dye based print are simply prejudicial excuses. We see similar debates about the best cameras, cars, computers, and football teams. They are pointless (except football). Today's professional grade dye and pigment inks will both produce long-lasting prints. Ultimately, our judgement should be based on the satisfaction we receive from the print.
The small egos hiding behind snobbery in photography is exhausting. Obviously, be honest and don't market it as a full-archival if it's a dye-based print. I see folks who have huge online galleries of photos available for sale on different mediums (canvas, acrylic, multitude of papers, etc.) and I seriously doubt they have any idea what the vast majority of their images look like when printed. Where is the outrage over that deception? I've had some of my images look great on a monitor, but not so much when printed. Those prints will never be sold. I'd much prefer a photographer who proofs, prints and signs their own work and takes pride in quality versus buying something just because the inks will last 300 years. Who exactly is going to be demanding a refund if a print fades after 80 years or 200 years? Thank you for posting yet another fantastic video, Keith. I love your common sense approach to printing.
Thanks - my test is always, is this print good enough technically to have on my wall in my office - will I see issues every day? ;-) Whether I like the image is a different matter, but quality wise it has to pass the wall test...
I'd happily sell prints produced on my dye based Canon Pro 100S. If the prints have faded after 100 years the buyer can come see me and I'll reprint it for free 😁😋
Giclée is simply the french word for squirt, which is what inkjet nozzles do regardless of the ink. I looked this up back in 2014 when I first purchased my Canon Pro 1. So yea, what a load of pretentious nonsense! “Would you like to buy my squirt prints”? Sounds a bit icky and ominous! 😄
But if you use a French word, you can sell anything to Americans at a higher price. Hell you could probably just call it French squirt printing. And yes I'm an American.
I went to art school at a university which had a full photo school (I wound up having the full run of both), When I was doing an exhibition I wound up doing large scale reproductions of gum bichromate prints I'd made which were scanned and enlarged from 3x4" to 30x40". In the process I had the print technician work with me to make a custom profile for the paper I was using for the gum prints, which was a museum grade interleaving paper (i.e. a very archival non-photo paper), this was done on one of the LF Epson pigment printers which was just about the most archival printer on the market at the time. The prints came out really well in the end considering that paper is sized, but photographically uncoated. During the gallery show I had someone lecture me that unless I was using a specific (name brand) photo paper and giclee printing it wasn't archival and that my prints would fade to nothing 'inside a year'. As soon as they took themselves away the same print technician (Who had honestly never said anything negative about anybody in my presence before that) stated that anybody who unironically uses the term giclee is an idiot who can safely be ignored in all matters technical.
Great information. I've been slowly looking to add low volume prints to offer people, more as a value-added, for certain scenarios. I always provide the full digital copies of photos, so if a print ever fades many decades down the road they can always have them reprinted -- or maybe they'll like the aged-photo look. So far I've just been using a little Canon Selphi that claims 100 years of its little 4x6 prints, and at C$0.50 / print they make a nice special touch to be able to give to clients or friends/family, and right on the spot. I'm tempted by the ET-8550 as my next step in prints now that I've discovered how much I enjoy a printed photo, and I need to replace my office printer. Thank you for your great content!
That's very reasonable and reassuring 😊❤ As a graduating art student, apart from many other uses, I'll try my chance at selling art prints done with my et 8550/l8180 in this exact way - I think it will deliver a quality really good enough for now, and if it turns out to go well in the future then I might look out for a pure pigment printer. And at first I won't charge as high as many other people anyways, as I'll just be starting. At first, when I started looking for a printer I was certain it would have to be a pigment one (as I primarily use watercolors and I am very into pigments I know a thing or two about lightfastness and it's importance, I only use lightfast pigments in my paints and don't use dye-based ones), but then the reality of that was that it wouldn't be a good way cost-wise to start, especially since I will have to print quite a lot for the graduation projects :'D and the dyes in this one seem to be described as having a better chance of resisting fading that the other eco tanks' ink series. I also saw an artist using this printer, and in the description of the prints they said they are selling pigment prints - I asked about it (the printer and inks, since it's only a pigment black) and they vaguely responded to check the producent site... so now I'm wondering, whether they converted their printer and wouldn't like to risk telling people that or just use what they have but are confused 😂 I actually have two prints from them and they really look great (Tecco Matte 230gsm paper). I'm also wondering, is there any way to test what kind of inks were used 🤔 just curious what I got 😂 but in the end, I guess it's nice either way, I bought the printer also based on their performance as I really like their results in the prints I got :)) Thanks as always for the video, it's so nice to hear from an actual, well-informed human being rather than search for loose pieces of information throughout the internet 😅✨
Thanks - glad it was of interest. The best way of testing for pigment ink is with a test print and spectrophotometer ;-) The black has a quite different spectral response - dyes will often show a drift in colour if you light them with a tungsten lamp and compare it with daylight. I'd say their vagueness tells a lot ;-)
@@KeithCooper good to know, thanks! I don't really have access to the necessary equipment myself, but I have a friend studying chemistry who uses them, maybe I'll be able to test it one day 😂✨ I guess I can also try to get this exact same paper and try to match the print for approximately testing this 😂
Having been around some very high and mighty individuals and institutions in the Arts (oy, upper-case A, don't you know) over the years, your video got a number of laughs from me. Thank you Keith for your no nonsense, forthright, perspectives. I'm in your camp!
I was actually deciding between the Canon Pro-200 and the Pro-300. For the type of printing I like, the images from the Pro-200 even looked better. The colours are super rich and vibrant. With black and white, I have to be a bit more careful. It works but depending on the paper, it may come out „blueish“. But I am not doing it for selling to other people but mostly family and friends, as a hobby. And they pay me a cost so that I am +/- 0 at the end. So, a slightly different story.
Yes - there are times I'd expect more vibrant results from the PRO-200. A lot depends on the image and what paper you are using. There is not the clear dye/pigment choice some assume ;-)
@@KeithCooper no, they are converging. Dye inks also can last a few decades and pigment inks get more vibrant. But for certain scenarios, you can see a difference. I like dye ink prints with a lot of blue (water, sky) and on glossy or luster paper.
@@thomasa.243 It's surface finish, especially on high gloss and metallic where I often see a clear difference - colours are as much due to the quality of profiling and precise ink set as anything else. The best example I came across is the glossy metallic paper I tried in several reviews - the latest Wilhelm figures for dyes [specifically the 8550] give longevity figures I'd have only thought of for pigment not that long ago.
Exactly! Perhaps using acid-free, lignin, etc type of paper print could keep a print, depending on the subject matter, longer off from becoming freckled? Don't know, I am new to working with paper. Always worked on digitals, other than office stuff. I bought the ET-8550 last year after purchasing the 3850, which the 8550 is far superior. I wish, I had bought the larger earlier. That's how I found you on UA-cam. There are T-shirt designs printed with inkjet, promising 50+ washes. So I guess, there is margin to have prints keep long enough to enjoy. Thank you for your videos and your take on things.
Thanks - yes, if you have a look at the make-up of some of the better papers from the likes of Hahnemuhle, Innova and Canson you'll see various archival oriented substrates [cotton rag for example]
Yes - From my POV, that info should always be available. How prominently that is displayed is purely a marketing decision, since I do note than many of my corporate clients for very large prints have not one jot of interest in this side of things - I'll mention some of it, but purely in an auxiliary marketing context. Stuff will be on the wall until the next office move or re-decoration... "Giclee' is no more than a price multiplier in many areas
Brilliant video keith your down to earth no bs approach was very much needed :) now I don’t know if you’ll do this for me but a full framing process video what to use what doesn’t react well, spray mounting to the backing board all that jazz it’ll be cool to see and offer your knowledge on what to use and what not too, wall test maybe cheers mate
Thanks I just don't do enough framing I'm afraid - any prints I sell are usually unframed. Framing is usually a decorative choice for the buyer. Also, I don't do any form of spray - I react poorly to the chemicals Simple process - cut mask hole in board, print with good border to cover hole Stick mount tape along top edge. Put 2nd board and/or more paper behind print and refit rear sheet of hardboard.
Wedding photos! I sought and found a photographer, who agreed to do them on 6x6 slide film and as was the case, have her brother print them on Cibachrome. 1987 and colors still great. This was a pro photographer in a small shop. The big shop said "it does not matter", which I did not agree on!
Whoever spends 600€ for a 8550 and buys crappy third party inks really does not treasure their printer. Even the og inks are cheap. And just printing stuff for people on special occasions and seeing them stunned at the A3 prints makes me happy. I guess as long as there is not a special demand for archival means in an extremely professional usecase like in museums or 24/7 display in big business centers, why would it hurt? I guess even using the "hybrid inkset" as a marketing gag as in "you get the popping colors of dye inks, especially on glossy papers" together with "very nice blacks on matte/luster type paper" resulting in a "non standard type of color experience giving you the best of both ink types" ("of course at the cost of some longetivity") would still sell like hot cake. I do all of this as a hobby and most people really can't wrap their head around what I'm telling them about printing and what to look after. And compared to you I'd be counted as a newbee all the way. Most people use dropshipping services for prints that simply promise best quality in the industry and will never know, if they just bought a print made with pigment or dye inks. I'd go as far as saying even for 50€ a piece people wouldn't care if the picture would start to fade in 30-40 years. Most people move houses or change their taste more often, before there'd any signs of fading on the print.
Haha... all of my and my parents colour prints from the 50s, 60s 70s 80s and even early 90s have faded or changed colours over the decades just sitting in their sleeves. The negatives have similarly degraded. Fortunately, correction software does a good job. Hard to imagine prints made with quality OEM ink doing much worse than actual photographs.
Inkjet vs giclee. It’s no different than a rollercoaster with or without safety harnesses. One could argue the coaster without safety harnesses is even more thrilling. Lesson - only print with dye when you don’t have a safety harness on.
Interesting video as always and I've no interest in selling prints as photography is a hobby only for me. Two questions/points: First, for one of your corporate clients could a decent dye based print be better for some images than a pigment based one, where the dye image looks better, and the longevity is more than enough for their uses. Second what matters to the market depends, if you're justifying paying the price of the print because it'll become a heirloom then it may matter more than is rational but still be very important from a marketing perspective. Thanks
Thanks Yes, a dye print can indeed look very impressive, but and it's a big but... there are no standard dye based printers bigger than A3+ [13' width] There are indeed a lot of different considerations, which go into marketing choices ;-)
If it's UV related (?) you can get various framing glasses. I phoned a local framer a few weeks ago asking about this, when weighing up printer options. He said a lot and I only remember his last quote which was 6x standard glass. I asked what that would be for standard at 10x8. That was iro £12. So the top glass would be about £72 for the glass. Eek. One day when I'm a famous artist I'll look back and laugh. Right now I can laugh, at that idea itself! ? Because I think I saw something about moisture and atmospheric gases also degrading prints , recommending framed work should be sealed ( tape ). Just for people who don't know.
Yes, not cheap glass. Another aspect I didn't mention was that prints need to be properly dried. I framed a dye based print a few [15] years ago, in a hurry, and a month later, there was a thin film of solvent on the inside of the glass...
Hey Keith, great video! My wife and I have been learning from your videos for the last few months and have recently started selling prints of her paintings with the ET-8550. We've chosen a premium matte photo paper and are looking at saving more on ink. Do you have any advice or suggestions on picking/vetting 3rd party dye inks? Or a reliable and compatible pigment ink? Thanks!
Thanks. Any thoughts? Yes, don't even go there ;-) Really, if 8550 ink costs are too high then you really do need to consider the fundamentals of your business. Especially since you are using a good paper Buy cheap, buy twice - remember that your printer will need flushing and break any colour management/profiles. Say good bye to any warranty too...
C print longevity is on a par with good dye prints and worse than some. The recent info about the Epson ET-8550 surprised me [in a good way] about potential print lifetimes. For 'giclee' from labs, you're paying a premium for them to use that word in their marketing materials... ;-) yes, a 'Giclee tax' All depends on how you're showing things and how long you want them to be around
My ego is not sufficiently inflated enough to expect anyone to treasure my work in the 22nd century. Modern dye prints, properly prepared should last until then. I won’t be around.
I think there might be room for a couple of handheld videos aimed at a "family guy". This is x scene with Fido in it. This is my Canon XY or Epsom YX. One on glossy at say A4 and one on canvas for granny. Every setting and obviously just an example. Be no good to your advanced viewers and won't cover everything, but it's a video........As always thanks again for your work.
Thanks - that's actually quite a tricky one for me to do from a technical POV [hand held?] I also only ever use Macs, which rules out quite a chunk of audience. Then there is the matter of camera choice and software... I do try and cover basic examples in my actual printer reviews, but that's about the limit using software like Epson Print Layout or the Canon equivalent.
On a related subject has any research been carried out or what is your opinion on rolling prints to post? It is soomething I really don't like after I ordered an A2 print from a printhouse for a customer and it came in a tube. It may have paranoia on my part but it took me about a week to get it flat and I then repackaged it flat before I sent it on. After this experience I got an pro1000 but I stll have the problem of posting out large prints.
I use a big enough tube and interleave it with several sheets of archival tissue. I will ask people about it beforehand, but shipping prints the size I make flat is a non starter, especially internationally. I had to ship some 60" x 40" prints to a gallery in the US - fortunately I found a custom tube company - 8" diamerter in tissue and in a plastic bag, and then with a layer of bubble wrap... Anyway - the paper comes off a roll so the curl is already there... ;-)
Hi Keith, You always say that you don't know what a fine art print is, yet occasionally, when you talk about certain prints, you say that you wouldn't sell it as a fine art print. If you're reluctant to sell certain prints as "fine art," then it must mean something to you. Please specify what meaning that term has to you and the criteria you use to determine whether a particular print fits into that category. Be specific . Thanks
Ah... a reasonable observation ;-) :-) It's a print sold in a market which doesn't laugh at the term... Yes, it's almost entirely a marketing term to me - that means a flexible usage of the term. Less obviously hokum than 'Giclee', but one of those terms where I'd still personally rather use with quote marks around it. I don't have a precise or specific meaning - a few previous attempts to find one went round in circles or were quickly lost in a sea of pretentious tosh... Even less 'precise' than the results I got when I asked people what they meant when they told me a print had depth... That's what meaning it has to me - that's also why I'm never entirely comfortable with the term
@@KeithCooper That's fair enough, yet when you state that you wouldn't sell print X as a fine art print, you imply that "fine art" has meaning to you. Otherwise, any print can be labeled and sold as "fine art"
Yes a meaning... ;-) For me, for that print, is it pigment and on good paper and technically OK. Is it 'good enough' to sell where the words 'fine art' appear somewhere in the marketing... Nothing deeper than that.
I have had enough with home printing. Regardless of brand, there are continual issues with clogged nozzles etc. that the bludgers will not deal with. Go to a print shop and screw Epson, Canon and all those bludging companies that will not produce an ink jet that will not fail if it is not used for a few weeks.
Fair enough, if that's your experience. Just not opinions I share - a modest level of forethought and planning will easily keep most printers in good order, but yes YMMV...
@@KeithCooper That is my experience Keith. I am not a frequent printer, but I expect to be able to print with a two or three week break, After all we do have holidays. I am in a very dry environment that should be conducive to keeping things clean. Once again I have gone through numerous nozzle cleaning steps that wiped out a cartridge entirely on my Epson printer. They are nothing but thieves as far as I am concerned.
@@SwaggerlotI never have problems with Canon. From 2012 to 2022, I had a Canon printer that never every dried out. Never with the original ink and also never with aftermarket ink. It just starts up as if nothing happens. HP was very bad. If I skipped 3 days, it dried out. Epson is also ok. It is not on the same level as Canon but a few weeks are fine. Of course, your mileage may vary but I am very happy with Canon (printing and scanning, cameras not so much. But this is a different story 😅)
@@thomasa.243 You have been fortunate. My latest printer (Epson) has been a trial. I wonder if it was a firmware update, but a printer that worked well suddenly after a few weeks of inactivity had issues. Trying the menu suggested fix and obtaining support advice just resulted in the demise of a $40 cartridge. 'Go to one of out service centres' was their solution. These issues across various brands have been a pain for 15 or more years. How are they allowed to get away with it?
An amusing take on the topic. I have an Epson 3 in 1 from 2006 - RX650 - which gets very occasional use and does get its jets all-of-a clog if it is neglected but I have found that using bult bottles of non-proprietary inks in chargeable cartridges has not only saved a fortune ( for my miniscule budgets ) but the end result - the most important one - is of somewhat better quality. The jets are less inclined to block up too. Keith mentioned in another video that the printing out at modest intervals the test pattern on the machine should reduce the clogging significantly. But I am not a professional but a rather discriminating amateur who rarely prints because my own images do not meet my particular standards and, for most purposes, A4 in quite large enough. The very rare exception gets the full 60cm x 40cm or larger by pro lab.
@@KeithCooper I am a professional printer of lithography for artist and I only use ink that is 7 or 8 in lightfastness. The scale goes from 1 to 8. The difference between 5 and 6 is a huge step. If you dilute ink that has lightfastness 6 with 98% transparent ink the lightfastness goes down to 5. 5 is so bad that a sofa with fabric coloured with color of lightfastness 5 standing next to a window will lose a lot of its color after a few years, so the rule of fabric to sofas is to keep it at at least 6. 6 gives you in direct sunlight 6-8 weeks 7 gives you in direct sunlight 3-4 months 8 gives you in direct sunlight over 1.5 years
The Cadmiums are at the top of the list for permanence. Basically, most of the modern mineral colors like Earth or Oxide, Ultramarine, Cobalt, Cerulean or Manganese (pure - NOT hue), Viridian and others are still considered lightfast. They will last for more than 100 years without significant fading or changing.
@@KeithCooper By another 8850 printer and do what this man does and the problem is gone. You have one printer with Dye and one with pigment ink. Case closed. This video: If I decide to use Pigment inks of my ET-8850 when should I install them?
Agree or disagree with Keith Cooper it is always a pleasure to watch a photography video, especially a printing video, with no BS and with a down-to-earth real-word perspective based on decades of professional knowledge. Thank you for sharing Keith!
Thanks - much appreciated
Based on your video about longevity of 8550 prints I expect they will live longer than me!
Yes, longer than me too - for some that matters, for some less so ;-)
Got the ET-8550 recently. Was asking the same question today, as I'm getting professional photo prints requested of me. Uncannily timed video. I appreciate your pragmatic, business-minded insights on the matter. It's resolved my reservations about attempting to sell prints.
Excellent - glad to have been of help!
Thanks for addressing the issue with the real-world , common sense approach that we appreciate in your videos.
A couple of thoughts:
I've been using a dye based Canon Pro 100 printer for ten years and selling the prints without complaint. My decision to favor dyes over pigments is an artistic one. I found that a bye based print has more vibrant color than a pigment based one. That difference appealed to me. Nobody asks me if they are archival. Canon claims that prints made on their papers with their inks can last up to 300 years. So far, with ten years of personal experience, I haven't seen any evidence to make me question those projections. And for all of the debate over which ink is superior, as a practical matter, the distinctions make little difference.
I think that the issue of whether a photograph is archival or not has its beginnings in the days of conventional darkroom printing. Photographs were always the bastard children of the art world, and struggled to find legitimacy among critics, curators and collectors, whose aesthetics and prejudices valued established media like painting and sculpture, but didn't know how to deal with photography, which was outside of their comfort zone. Artists don't have to be able to relate to photography, and vice versa.
The easiest way was to dismiss it for its technical deficiencies, while their real objections were artistic or philosophical ones with the process.
It took a long time before traditional B/W photographs were accepted as an art form. The first Show of Color work at MOMA by William Eggleston didn't occur until 1976. And while B/W fiber prints could be made to be archival, color prints from negatives (C prints) did fade. Longer lasting prints were available from slides using the Cibachrome process, but Eggleston's work was on color negative film. So all of the prints shown at first major exhibition of color photography, at America's flagship ART museum were NOT archival. MOMA didn't mind this technical deficiency. They believed the work had merit and value, and deserved to be on their gallery walls.
The open secret that art snobs find it inconvenient to admit is that the paintings we consider masterpieces are not archival either. Excessive exposure to light, especially ultraviolet rays, can cause fading, discoloration, and cracking of the paint layers.
Fluctuations in humidity can lead to cracking, warping of the canvas, and mold growth.
Extreme temperature changes can cause similar issues as humidity, as well as affecting the paint's chemical composition.
Airborne pollutants can react with the paint, causing discoloration and degradation.
Another point for consideration is that artists of all sorts have been experimenting with new materials and techniques for ages. They weren't always more concerned with how long a piece of art would last, rather than how COOL it would look. Leonardo da Vinci's Last Supper began to deteriorate soon after it was completed. This openness to experiment continues, without much concern for longevity over style and substance.
My conclusion is that the objections to accepting the value of a dye based print are simply prejudicial excuses. We see similar debates about the best cameras, cars, computers, and football teams. They are pointless (except football). Today's professional grade dye and pigment inks will both produce long-lasting prints.
Ultimately, our judgement should be based on the satisfaction we receive from the print.
Thanks - well said!
I'd agree with much of that - I've seen enough painting restoration after the passage of time...
The small egos hiding behind snobbery in photography is exhausting. Obviously, be honest and don't market it as a full-archival if it's a dye-based print. I see folks who have huge online galleries of photos available for sale on different mediums (canvas, acrylic, multitude of papers, etc.) and I seriously doubt they have any idea what the vast majority of their images look like when printed. Where is the outrage over that deception? I've had some of my images look great on a monitor, but not so much when printed. Those prints will never be sold. I'd much prefer a photographer who proofs, prints and signs their own work and takes pride in quality versus buying something just because the inks will last 300 years. Who exactly is going to be demanding a refund if a print fades after 80 years or 200 years? Thank you for posting yet another fantastic video, Keith. I love your common sense approach to printing.
Thanks - my test is always, is this print good enough technically to have on my wall in my office - will I see issues every day? ;-) Whether I like the image is a different matter, but quality wise it has to pass the wall test...
I'd happily sell prints produced on my dye based Canon Pro 100S. If the prints have faded after 100 years the buyer can come see me and I'll reprint it for free 😁😋
Yes, I say to take it up with my estate... ;-)
Giclée is simply the french word for squirt, which is what inkjet nozzles do regardless of the ink. I looked this up back in 2014 when I first purchased my Canon Pro 1. So yea, what a load of pretentious nonsense! “Would you like to buy my squirt prints”? Sounds a bit icky and ominous! 😄
Ah yes - a slang term too...
But if you use a French word, you can sell anything to Americans at a higher price. Hell you could probably just call it French squirt printing. And yes I'm an American.
Squirt prints ✨💕 thanks, I'll remember that 😂 turns out that technically, they are not lying or anything... Just glorifying the process I guess 😂❤️
@@wiktoriatluvi lol yep as our American friend says, translate it to french treble the price and sell it to the yanks! 😅
It’s actually the French term to squirt in the sense of ejaculate
I went to art school at a university which had a full photo school (I wound up having the full run of both), When I was doing an exhibition I wound up doing large scale reproductions of gum bichromate prints I'd made which were scanned and enlarged from 3x4" to 30x40". In the process I had the print technician work with me to make a custom profile for the paper I was using for the gum prints, which was a museum grade interleaving paper (i.e. a very archival non-photo paper), this was done on one of the LF Epson pigment printers which was just about the most archival printer on the market at the time. The prints came out really well in the end considering that paper is sized, but photographically uncoated.
During the gallery show I had someone lecture me that unless I was using a specific (name brand) photo paper and giclee printing it wasn't archival and that my prints would fade to nothing 'inside a year'.
As soon as they took themselves away the same print technician (Who had honestly never said anything negative about anybody in my presence before that) stated that anybody who unironically uses the term giclee is an idiot who can safely be ignored in all matters technical.
Superb!
I can only agree ;-)
Great information. I've been slowly looking to add low volume prints to offer people, more as a value-added, for certain scenarios. I always provide the full digital copies of photos, so if a print ever fades many decades down the road they can always have them reprinted -- or maybe they'll like the aged-photo look. So far I've just been using a little Canon Selphi that claims 100 years of its little 4x6 prints, and at C$0.50 / print they make a nice special touch to be able to give to clients or friends/family, and right on the spot. I'm tempted by the ET-8550 as my next step in prints now that I've discovered how much I enjoy a printed photo, and I need to replace my office printer.
Thank you for your great content!
Glad to be of help!
In a way the fading of my old photos from C41 done in a lab in the 70s and beyond has added to the nostalgia….
Yes - shows how fresh the chemicals were in the processor that day... ;-)
That's very reasonable and reassuring 😊❤
As a graduating art student, apart from many other uses, I'll try my chance at selling art prints done with my et 8550/l8180 in this exact way - I think it will deliver a quality really good enough for now, and if it turns out to go well in the future then I might look out for a pure pigment printer. And at first I won't charge as high as many other people anyways, as I'll just be starting.
At first, when I started looking for a printer I was certain it would have to be a pigment one (as I primarily use watercolors and I am very into pigments I know a thing or two about lightfastness and it's importance, I only use lightfast pigments in my paints and don't use dye-based ones), but then the reality of that was that it wouldn't be a good way cost-wise to start, especially since I will have to print quite a lot for the graduation projects :'D and the dyes in this one seem to be described as having a better chance of resisting fading that the other eco tanks' ink series.
I also saw an artist using this printer, and in the description of the prints they said they are selling pigment prints - I asked about it (the printer and inks, since it's only a pigment black) and they vaguely responded to check the producent site... so now I'm wondering, whether they converted their printer and wouldn't like to risk telling people that or just use what they have but are confused 😂
I actually have two prints from them and they really look great (Tecco Matte 230gsm paper).
I'm also wondering, is there any way to test what kind of inks were used 🤔 just curious what I got 😂 but in the end, I guess it's nice either way, I bought the printer also based on their performance as I really like their results in the prints I got :))
Thanks as always for the video, it's so nice to hear from an actual, well-informed human being rather than search for loose pieces of information throughout the internet 😅✨
Thanks - glad it was of interest.
The best way of testing for pigment ink is with a test print and spectrophotometer ;-) The black has a quite different spectral response - dyes will often show a drift in colour if you light them with a tungsten lamp and compare it with daylight.
I'd say their vagueness tells a lot ;-)
@@KeithCooper good to know, thanks! I don't really have access to the necessary equipment myself, but I have a friend studying chemistry who uses them, maybe I'll be able to test it one day 😂✨
I guess I can also try to get this exact same paper and try to match the print for approximately testing this 😂
@@wiktoriatluvi Likeley a different type of spectro ;-)
If you are curious, see the spectral response info in my written 8550 review
Having been around some very high and mighty individuals and institutions in the Arts (oy, upper-case A, don't you know) over the years, your video got a number of laughs from me. Thank you Keith for your no nonsense, forthright, perspectives. I'm in your camp!
Thanks - appreciated ;-)
I was actually deciding between the Canon Pro-200 and the Pro-300. For the type of printing I like, the images from the Pro-200 even looked better. The colours are super rich and vibrant. With black and white, I have to be a bit more careful. It works but depending on the paper, it may come out „blueish“. But I am not doing it for selling to other people but mostly family and friends, as a hobby. And they pay me a cost so that I am +/- 0 at the end. So, a slightly different story.
Yes - there are times I'd expect more vibrant results from the PRO-200. A lot depends on the image and what paper you are using.
There is not the clear dye/pigment choice some assume ;-)
@@KeithCooper no, they are converging. Dye inks also can last a few decades and pigment inks get more vibrant. But for certain scenarios, you can see a difference. I like dye ink prints with a lot of blue (water, sky) and on glossy or luster paper.
@@thomasa.243 It's surface finish, especially on high gloss and metallic where I often see a clear difference - colours are as much due to the quality of profiling and precise ink set as anything else.
The best example I came across is the glossy metallic paper I tried in several reviews - the latest Wilhelm figures for dyes [specifically the 8550] give longevity figures I'd have only thought of for pigment not that long ago.
Exactly! Perhaps using acid-free, lignin, etc type of paper print could keep a print, depending on the subject matter, longer off from becoming freckled? Don't know, I am new to working with paper. Always worked on digitals, other than office stuff.
I bought the ET-8550 last year after purchasing the 3850, which the 8550 is far superior. I wish, I had bought the larger earlier. That's how I found you on UA-cam.
There are T-shirt designs printed with inkjet, promising 50+ washes. So I guess, there is margin to have prints keep long enough to enjoy.
Thank you for your videos and your take on things.
Thanks - yes, if you have a look at the make-up of some of the better papers from the likes of Hahnemuhle, Innova and Canson you'll see various archival oriented substrates [cotton rag for example]
@@KeithCooper Thank you for your suggestion!
What is important is that the buyer knows what they are getting for their money (apart from the image) - dye/pigment, archival paper etc.
Yes - From my POV, that info should always be available.
How prominently that is displayed is purely a marketing decision, since I do note than many of my corporate clients for very large prints have not one jot of interest in this side of things - I'll mention some of it, but purely in an auxiliary marketing context.
Stuff will be on the wall until the next office move or re-decoration...
"Giclee' is no more than a price multiplier in many areas
great fun ! one of my fave. you are in top form. keep up the good work.
Thanks - will try and keep the mix going...
Thanks for this Keith!
Thanks
Brilliant video keith your down to earth no bs approach was very much needed :) now I don’t know if you’ll do this for me but a full framing process video what to use what doesn’t react well, spray mounting to the backing board all that jazz it’ll be cool to see and offer your knowledge on what to use and what not too, wall test maybe cheers mate
Thanks
I just don't do enough framing I'm afraid - any prints I sell are usually unframed.
Framing is usually a decorative choice for the buyer.
Also, I don't do any form of spray - I react poorly to the chemicals
Simple process - cut mask hole in board, print with good border to cover hole
Stick mount tape along top edge. Put 2nd board and/or more paper behind print and refit rear sheet of hardboard.
@@KeithCooperthank you keith I’m trying to visualise this as I’m stupidly new to this all 😂
Wedding photos! I sought and found a photographer, who agreed to do them on 6x6 slide film and as was the case, have her brother print them on Cibachrome. 1987 and colors still great. This was a pro photographer in a small shop. The big shop said "it does not matter", which I did not agree on!
A quite specialist service at the time - even more so today
Good topic mate , thanks as ever
Thanks!
Whoever spends 600€ for a 8550 and buys crappy third party inks really does not treasure their printer. Even the og inks are cheap. And just printing stuff for people on special occasions and seeing them stunned at the A3 prints makes me happy. I guess as long as there is not a special demand for archival means in an extremely professional usecase like in museums or 24/7 display in big business centers, why would it hurt? I guess even using the "hybrid inkset" as a marketing gag as in "you get the popping colors of dye inks, especially on glossy papers" together with "very nice blacks on matte/luster type paper" resulting in a "non standard type of color experience giving you the best of both ink types" ("of course at the cost of some longetivity") would still sell like hot cake. I do all of this as a hobby and most people really can't wrap their head around what I'm telling them about printing and what to look after. And compared to you I'd be counted as a newbee all the way. Most people use dropshipping services for prints that simply promise best quality in the industry and will never know, if they just bought a print made with pigment or dye inks. I'd go as far as saying even for 50€ a piece people wouldn't care if the picture would start to fade in 30-40 years. Most people move houses or change their taste more often, before there'd any signs of fading on the print.
Yes, some useful marketing features there ;-)
Re: Giclee. Remember that old maxim: "Bulls**t baffles brains!"
Yup...
Haha... all of my and my parents colour prints from the 50s, 60s 70s 80s and even early 90s have faded or changed colours over the decades just sitting in their sleeves. The negatives have similarly degraded. Fortunately, correction software does a good job. Hard to imagine prints made with quality OEM ink doing much worse than actual photographs.
Yes, something to consider for those who praise chemical [colour] prints
Inkjet vs giclee. It’s no different than a rollercoaster with or without safety harnesses. One could argue the coaster without safety harnesses is even more thrilling.
Lesson - only print with dye when you don’t have a safety harness on.
Not entirely sure what you mean ;-)
"Giclee" is nothing but a marketing term used when it sounds better to the punters than "inkjet" ;-)
Simply superb.
Thanks!
Interesting video as always and I've no interest in selling prints as photography is a hobby only for me.
Two questions/points:
First, for one of your corporate clients could a decent dye based print be better for some images than a pigment based one, where the dye image looks better, and the longevity is more than enough for their uses.
Second what matters to the market depends, if you're justifying paying the price of the print because it'll become a heirloom then it may matter more than is rational but still be very important from a marketing perspective.
Thanks
Thanks
Yes, a dye print can indeed look very impressive, but and it's a big but... there are no standard dye based printers bigger than A3+ [13' width]
There are indeed a lot of different considerations, which go into marketing choices ;-)
this is very helpful. thank you!!
Glad it was of interest!
Hello Keith.
Useful, Interesting and informative, thank you.
That print you couldn't remember where it was in the Lake District, it's Ullswater.
👍🏼
@@michaelmccrory2220 Thanks - yes I remembered some time afterwards...
Perhaps one day I'll work off a script ;-)
@@KeithCooper
No need to work from a script, that's the charm of your presentation style.
👍🏼
Keywords..."if you can sell it!"
I'd not argue there...
... and if you gain repeat custom as well as positive referrals from that most valued advertising medium: "Word of Mouth".
If it's UV related (?) you can get various framing glasses. I phoned a local framer a few weeks ago asking about this, when weighing up printer options. He said a lot and I only remember his last quote which was 6x standard glass. I asked what that would be for standard at 10x8. That was iro £12. So the top glass would be about £72 for the glass. Eek. One day when I'm a famous artist I'll look back and laugh. Right now I can laugh, at that idea itself!
? Because I think I saw something about moisture and atmospheric gases also degrading prints , recommending framed work should be sealed ( tape ).
Just for people who don't know.
Yes, not cheap glass.
Another aspect I didn't mention was that prints need to be properly dried. I framed a dye based print a few [15] years ago, in a hurry, and a month later, there was a thin film of solvent on the inside of the glass...
Interesting, thank you very much.
Thanks
Hey Keith, great video! My wife and I have been learning from your videos for the last few months and have recently started selling prints of her paintings with the ET-8550. We've chosen a premium matte photo paper and are looking at saving more on ink. Do you have any advice or suggestions on picking/vetting 3rd party dye inks? Or a reliable and compatible pigment ink? Thanks!
Thanks.
Any thoughts? Yes, don't even go there ;-)
Really, if 8550 ink costs are too high then you really do need to consider the fundamentals of your business. Especially since you are using a good paper
Buy cheap, buy twice - remember that your printer will need flushing and break any colour management/profiles. Say good bye to any warranty too...
@@KeithCooper The answer I expected. I guess I just needed to hear this from a professional. Thanks again!
I think there is an expectation of longevity and durability when selling prints as art.
Yes - all depends on the expectations and requirements of your target market ;-)
How about C-Type prints on Fuji crystal as they last about the same as dye based prints?
Plus they are much cheaper than Giclee from labs?
C print longevity is on a par with good dye prints and worse than some. The recent info about the Epson ET-8550 surprised me [in a good way] about potential print lifetimes.
For 'giclee' from labs, you're paying a premium for them to use that word in their marketing materials... ;-) yes, a 'Giclee tax'
All depends on how you're showing things and how long you want them to be around
My ego is not sufficiently inflated enough to expect anyone to treasure my work in the 22nd century. Modern dye prints, properly prepared should last until then. I won’t be around.
Nope - nor me ;-)
I think there might be room for a couple of handheld videos aimed at a "family guy". This is x scene with Fido in it. This is my Canon XY or Epsom YX. One on glossy at say A4 and one on canvas for granny. Every setting and obviously just an example. Be no good to your advanced viewers and won't cover everything, but it's a video........As always thanks again for your work.
Thanks - that's actually quite a tricky one for me to do from a technical POV [hand held?] I also only ever use Macs, which rules out quite a chunk of audience. Then there is the matter of camera choice and software...
I do try and cover basic examples in my actual printer reviews, but that's about the limit using software like Epson Print Layout or the Canon equivalent.
On a related subject has any research been carried out or what is your opinion on rolling prints to post? It is soomething I really don't like after I ordered an A2 print from a printhouse for a customer and it came in a tube. It may have paranoia on my part but it took me about a week to get it flat and I then repackaged it flat before I sent it on. After this experience I got an pro1000 but I stll have the problem of posting out large prints.
I use a big enough tube and interleave it with several sheets of archival tissue.
I will ask people about it beforehand, but shipping prints the size I make flat is a non starter, especially internationally.
I had to ship some 60" x 40" prints to a gallery in the US - fortunately I found a custom tube company - 8" diamerter in tissue and in a plastic bag, and then with a layer of bubble wrap...
Anyway - the paper comes off a roll so the curl is already there... ;-)
@@KeithCooper Thank you :)
Hi Keith,
You always say that you don't know what a fine art print is, yet occasionally, when you talk about certain prints, you say that you wouldn't sell it as a fine art print.
If you're reluctant to sell certain prints as "fine art," then it must mean something to you. Please specify what meaning that term has to you and the criteria you use to determine whether a particular print fits into that category. Be specific . Thanks
Ah... a reasonable observation ;-) :-)
It's a print sold in a market which doesn't laugh at the term...
Yes, it's almost entirely a marketing term to me - that means a flexible usage of the term. Less obviously hokum than 'Giclee', but one of those terms where I'd still personally rather use with quote marks around it.
I don't have a precise or specific meaning - a few previous attempts to find one went round in circles or were quickly lost in a sea of pretentious tosh...
Even less 'precise' than the results I got when I asked people what they meant when they told me a print had depth...
That's what meaning it has to me - that's also why I'm never entirely comfortable with the term
@@KeithCooper That's fair enough, yet when you state that you wouldn't sell print X as a fine art print, you imply that "fine art" has meaning to you. Otherwise, any print can be labeled and sold
as "fine art"
Yes a meaning... ;-)
For me, for that print, is it pigment and on good paper and technically OK.
Is it 'good enough' to sell where the words 'fine art' appear somewhere in the marketing...
Nothing deeper than that.
@@KeithCooper Thanks for clarifying that.
Spray varnish/fixative ???
Can help, but difficult to use on large prints and the chemicals can cause issues for some [myself included]
Why stop at giclee? I got all your skibidi print needs right here!
Is that a thing? :-)
I have had enough with home printing. Regardless of brand, there are continual issues with clogged nozzles etc. that the bludgers will not deal with. Go to a print shop and screw Epson, Canon and all those bludging companies that will not produce an ink jet that will not fail if it is not used for a few weeks.
Fair enough, if that's your experience.
Just not opinions I share - a modest level of forethought and planning will easily keep most printers in good order, but yes YMMV...
@@KeithCooper That is my experience Keith. I am not a frequent printer, but I expect to be able to print with a two or three week break, After all we do have holidays. I am in a very dry environment that should be conducive to keeping things clean. Once again I have gone through numerous nozzle cleaning steps that wiped out a cartridge entirely on my Epson printer. They are nothing but thieves as far as I am concerned.
@@SwaggerlotI never have problems with Canon. From 2012 to 2022, I had a Canon printer that never every dried out. Never with the original ink and also never with aftermarket ink. It just starts up as if nothing happens. HP was very bad. If I skipped 3 days, it dried out. Epson is also ok. It is not on the same level as Canon but a few weeks are fine. Of course, your mileage may vary but I am very happy with Canon (printing and scanning, cameras not so much. But this is a different story 😅)
@@thomasa.243 You have been fortunate. My latest printer (Epson) has been a trial. I wonder if it was a firmware update, but a printer that worked well suddenly after a few weeks of inactivity had issues. Trying the menu suggested fix and obtaining support advice just resulted in the demise of a $40 cartridge. 'Go to one of out service centres' was their solution. These issues across various brands have been a pain for 15 or more years. How are they allowed to get away with it?
An amusing take on the topic.
I have an Epson 3 in 1 from 2006 - RX650 - which gets very occasional use and does get its jets all-of-a clog if it is neglected but I have found that using bult bottles of non-proprietary inks in chargeable cartridges has not only saved a fortune ( for my miniscule budgets ) but the end result - the most important one - is of somewhat better quality.
The jets are less inclined to block up too.
Keith mentioned in another video that the printing out at modest intervals the test pattern on the machine should reduce the clogging significantly.
But I am not a professional but a rather discriminating amateur who rarely prints because my own images do not meet my particular standards and, for most purposes, A4 in quite large enough.
The very rare exception gets the full 60cm x 40cm or larger by pro lab.
Fine art paint or ink are supposed to be able to stay in 2000 hours of direct sunlight without changing color
Do you have a full reference for this?
@@KeithCooper I am a professional printer of lithography for artist and I only use ink that is 7 or 8 in lightfastness. The scale goes from 1 to 8. The difference between 5 and 6 is a huge step. If you dilute ink that has lightfastness 6 with 98% transparent ink the lightfastness goes down to 5. 5 is so bad that a sofa with fabric coloured with color of lightfastness 5 standing next to a window will lose a lot of its color after a few years, so the rule of fabric to sofas is to keep it at at least 6.
6 gives you in direct sunlight 6-8 weeks
7 gives you in direct sunlight 3-4 months
8 gives you in direct sunlight over 1.5 years
The Cadmiums are at the top of the list for permanence. Basically, most of the modern mineral colors like Earth or Oxide, Ultramarine, Cobalt, Cerulean or Manganese (pure - NOT hue), Viridian and others are still considered lightfast. They will last for more than 100 years without significant fading or changing.
@@jan-martinulvag1953 Thanks for that
@@KeithCooper By another 8850 printer and do what this man does and the problem is gone. You have one printer with Dye and one with pigment ink. Case closed. This video: If I decide to use Pigment inks of my ET-8850 when should I install them?
Ive got some magic beans lol
dye or pigment based?