Results with glass protection only

Results using Krylon® spray products and glass

These figures are not guaranteed and are provided only for possible print life. These estimates do not warrant or guarantee any specific benefit from Krylon products, and this site does not represent the Sherwin Williams™ Company in any way.

We used Krylon Spray products, #1305-UV Resistant Clear and #1301 Crystal Clear (High Gloss). The UV resistant product #1305 seems to provide greater longevity, but only one test was performed using this coating. It is obvious that using these types of spray coatings will extend print life of ink jet images.

Our spray techniques were certainly not scientific, but by following the manufacturer's guidelines, we probably replicated the typical experience of a consumer.

Summary

These "light fastness" tests do nothing to track the environmental effects on our images. Still, we believe that by using these types of products, certainly the coated image will be far less prone to "attack" by ozone from any source, humidity, and other elements which can breakdown colors.

Should you decide to employ Krylon or other protective chemical coatings, please carefully read and follow their precautions and instructions for application. We recommend working in a well ventilated area and using a painter's respirator mask.

This may seem to be quite a hassle, but when you can take the most colorful form (dye based inks) of ink jetting and add years to print life, it may be time well invested.

Once again, we have tested a number of our products for longevity using two popular printers, the Epson 785EPX and the Canon S-800. The S-800 has since been replaced by a newer series of Canon printers, but their ink systems remain the same. All inks were the dye based inks supplied by the manufacturers.

In the past, we have performed our tests without the benefit of glass coverings or spray coatings. Our objective has been and is to share the "worst case" scenario of image fading so as not to influence our customer with unrealistic expectations.



Test Methodology

Our independent test facility* has just released the data from our last test. They used an established technique of exposing our samples to 50 kilolux of unfiltered cool light fluorescent light for 3 months (simulating a period of 25 years). Each patch has 12 unique parts for measurement.

These tests do not account for other causes of image failure which we now know can have a significant effect. Measuring effects from pollution (indoors and outdoors) and humidity are very difficult to qualify and are not addressed with our tests.

As before, the lab measures the deterioration of the intensity of all of 12 patches. When fading or other change has been recorded to reach a specific point, the sample is declared to have "failed". For instance, if the "Pure Cyan" test reaches a point of 30% deterioration, that is the End Point for that sample regardless if no registered decline by any other of the 11 patches exists. The bottom line: we are looking for the worst case scenario.

This does not mean that your image will "disappear", rather it will change a bit in shade which can be recognized by the human eye especially if you compare to another identical image freshly printed on the same printer with the exact same settings as before.

Here is the specific test criteria for each paper:

Test	Patch	Parameter
Cyan Fade Magenta Fade Yellow Fade Black Fade	Pure Cyan Pure Magenta Pure Yellow Pure K Neutral	30% Loss 30% Loss 30% Loss 30% Loss
Cyan Fade Magenta Fade Yellow Fade Red Green Imbalance Red Blue Imbalance Green Blue Imbalance	CMY Neutral CMY Neutral CMY Neutral CMY Neutral CMY Neutral CMY Neutral	30% Loss 30% Loss 30% Loss + or - 15% change + or - 15% change + or - 15% change
Cyan Stain Magenta Stain Yellow Stain	Dmin Dmin Dmin	0.10 Density Change 0.10 Density Change 0.10 Density Change

*All tests conducted at the Rochester Institute of Technology

Return to RESULTS navigation page

Return to Print Life index page

Return to HOME page