On 16/07/2014 14:36, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Arfa Daily
wrote:

I do too. The cheapos that I use have four times the capacity of
the genuines. The print quality and colours are as good also. I
doubt that the ink is quite as 'stable' on photo paper and exposed
to sunlight, but for 'regular' paper printing, it's just fine long
term. I have printed many photos using these inks in situations
where they are not exposed to sunlight all the time, and they have
been perfectly ok at the time of printing, and have remained so.

Interesting. We printed some pix on our Canon iP4000 using Canon carts.
But after some years these have now got a golden-ish sheen on any dark
areas of the pic. And why bother when you can get pix printed on proper
photo paper commercially or even online for tuppence-ha'penny.

Isn't that a BCI-6 cartridge machine? If so I am surprised that they
have lasted that long. I have a print of a wedding that was on the
window ledge from when my i9000 (now deceased) was new. The magenta ink
has almost completely bleached away after about a decade. Prints in
normal room locations behind glass survive perfectly well.

I use mine for printing posters for village events and laminated they
show visible fading in outdoors full sun after two or three weeks even
on original Canon BCI-6 - clones were slightly worse but not by much. My
new A3 printer is a Canon Pixma iX6550 on OEM CLI525/6 cartridges. I
haven't had it long enough yet to know how posters survive in full sun.

Well, if the printer's to hand, you have photopaper coming out of your
ears from when you used to buy the genuine HP inks in a 'pack', and
you are loaded up with cheapo ink that works ok, why not ?

You're assuming that the printed photos have long term stability, which
manifestly they don't.

Anything I want for proper display I have printed professionally on
digital photoprinting Fuji crystal archive kit. They really do last. Not
quite as photo stable as the old Cibachrome but almost as good.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown