Printer/Paper tests for BCI-6 ink set (s9000, i9900)

Canon BCI-6 Ink set versus paper types

Short list as of 15 December 2004.

S9000 printer: (6 BCI-6 ink set (B, C, PC, M, PM, Y)) (*1)
Best overall: Kodak Ultima High Gloss and Satin finish
Best in Harsh conditions: Ilford Classic pearl and high gloss finish
Best for B+W: Epson or Canon Matte finish
Favorite 13x19 paper: Canon photo paper pro coated with two layers of lumijet
Worst overall: HP high gloss
Worst observed fading: uncoated Canon Photo Paper Pro

I9900 Printer: (8 BCI-6 ink set (B, C, PC, M, PM, Y, R, G)
Best overall: Ilford Classic Pearl
Best glossy: Kodak Ultima High Gloss
Best B+W: TIE: Epson Matte, Canon matte, Ilford Classic Pearl
Favorite 13x19 paper: Epson Premium photo paper semi-glossy (*2)
Worst Overall: OD glossy
Worst observed fading: no observed results yet (*3).

In January 2003 I conducted a semi- comprehensive test of various papers after I discovered that first, a the same print looked different on Canon Paper and Kodak paper even though they had come out of the same printer using the exact same ink cartridges and second the Canon paper faded in my office noticeably within 6 weeks, while the Kodak Ultima paper I had used has not. This is a compilation of my original results. I have included some more recent observations versus my i9900 results.

This was a non-scientific test, but with some controls (I don't have the equipment to do a scientific test). The purpose of the test is to see for myself which paper worked best for me with the Canon S9000 printer using Canon BCI-6 inks. If you use a different printer /ink combo and I suspect you could be getting significantly different results even with the same paper you used on the ink jet. I now use a i9900 as my primary printer and have noticed a slight improvement in some combinations (*1). I did not use a lot of Canon papers in the test as I already knew that paper was not acceptable to me.

The two images used for the print test should be available at:
Image 1:
http://www.longwatcher​.net …alm_Desert_Suns​et-OMP.jpg
The image was of a sunset in Palm Desert, California with a couple of Palm trees and a wall. I made no contrast or color adjustments; however, I did sharpen the print version one level. This image was used for color and water tests. It was printed as an 8x10.

Image 2:
http://www.longwatcher​.net/adult/images/Mari​cel_background compilation-WEB.jpg
This is a smaller web version of the image I used: This image was used for color, B+W, and sunlight tests. It was printed as a 5x7 print first in color, then in B+W.

In my coated water tests, I used Lumijet Imageshield (recommended by local store).
I sprayed two coats and then covered one corner a third time

In the consolidation all of the data is under each individual paper type. It covers all of the paper I consider to be for photos. All information is from the outside of the box. This should help in clarifying which papers I tested. Note: I missed some of the barcode, but that is the portion I compare against.

Results………………..

Kodak Ultima Picture Paper - Satin Finish / barcode 41778 35308 / Made in Canada
Color (winner Overall S9000) - This is what I normally use with my S9000, more vibrant (saturated) colors then other papers, less grey in the print. The sky had slightly more blue then the screen showed, but the sunset colors were more pink in color. It is actually closer to how I remember the actual sunset looking to my eyes.
BW - Cyan, noticeable
Water test – bled when wet uncoated, no smearing after second coating (note: after 3rd coating looked more glossy then satin.
Sunlight – in the back of the car window test the resin coating on the print broke down and rendered the print unusable although there was no observed fading.
Fading: Except for a few of the prints I observed when I visited a model in Jamaica I have never observed any fading from Kodak Ultima prints. The Jamaica prints had some apparent fading, but they may have not been as good as I remember them to be also, but they had definitely faded less then the Canon prints done at the same time. I have one print behind glass that has shown no fading in room light (under a light that is usually on when I am home) and it has shown no observable fading since January 2001. I ran a similar print during the test

Kodak Ultima Picture Paper - High Gloss / barcode 41778 89279 / Made in Canada Color (winner overall glossy) - a very slight touch grayer then the Satin finish and closest to the monitor in terms of blue sky colors. Otherwise identical to Satin finish in terms of color.
BW - Cyan, noticeable
Water test – bled when wet uncoated, no smearing after second coating
Sunlight and fading: See Kodak Ultima Satin above.

Kodak Premium Picture Paper - High Gloss / barcode 41771 09602 / Made in Canada (not used in comprehensive test)
Color - Produces decent prints, but just doesn’t look as good to me and it has some fading problems.
Water test – bled when wet uncoated (not tested coated)

Canon Matte Photo Paper / barcode 13803 01701 / Made in Japan
BW (Winner S9000) - just a very slight cyan cast, barely noticeable
Water test – bled when wet uncoated, still smeared after 3 coats.
Sunlight and fading – not as bad as glossy Canon papers, but still some fading observed.

Canon 11x17" Glossy Photo Paper / barcode 50845 72250 / Made in Japan (not used in comprehensive test)
Color - Good color, but quickly fades in office environment unless coated.

Canon 13 x 19" Photo Paper Pro / barcode 13803 01173 / Made in Japan (color comparison tests only)
Color - Good color, but quickly fades in office environment unless coated.
Sunlight and fading – I have observed very noticeable fading of the cyan within 6 weeks in my office environment, which is what started this whole test to begin with.

Canon 4 x 6" Photo Paper Plus Glossy / barcode 13803 02117 / Made in Japan (not used in comprehensive test)
Color - Good color, but quickly fades in office environment unless coated.
Water test – bled when wet uncoated, still smeared after 3 coats.

Canon High Resolution Paper / barcode 50845 72316 / Made in Japan (not used in comprehensive test)

Office Depot Canvas Cloth for Inkjets (*5) / barcode 35854 98035 / Made in USA
Color - DANGER, this paper almost jammed up in my printer. If I print with it again I will set it out and make sure it is very flat before feeding it to printer as the paper caught in the printer in several places, it was just luck that it did not jam in the printer. As to color, definite darkening of the image, but not quite to the level of the other papers except in the dark areas where it actually was darker then other photo papers (I would have to guess that the black ink adheres better to the art canvas paper then other inks). On the other hand the print looked good after it got passed the jam up.
BW – did not try as I did not want to jam up my printer
Water test – The paper smeared and then smeared even worse after being coated.

Office Depot Premium Satin Gloss Photo Paper / barcode 35854 98213 / Made in Japan
Color - A bit lighter then other Office Depot paper tested.
BW - slight green noticeable
Water test – almost no smearing from water when uncoated, no smearing after 2 coats, looked glossy after 3rd coating.

Office Depot Premium High Gloss Photo Paper / barcode 35854 98033 / Made in Japan
Color - All of the Office Depot papers were lighter(brighter) then any of the other papers or the Monitor thus losing some contrast in the process that showed in the other prints, however they gained in the dark areas at the bottom (which I did not want).
BW - slight green, noticeable
Water test (winner uncoated) – this paper had the least smearing when water was applied after 24 hours of drying.

Office Depot Super Heavy Weight Photo Paper / barcode 35854 98272 / Made in Japan
Color - Other then the paper has a nice feel to it (similar in weight to Kodak Ultima) no difference from other Office Depot Papers.
BW - touch of green cast, very minor
Water test – light smearing uncoated, still smeared after 3 coats.

Epson Matte Paper Heavyweight / barcode 10343 81832 / Paper made in Japan packaged in USA
BW (Second Place S9000) - Just a very minor touch of yellow, which I think is the paper itself, again barely noticeable
Water test – some smearing of yellow and magenta inks when uncoated, no smearing after 2nd coat

Epson Premium Glossy Photo Paper / barcode 10343 81920 / Paper made in Japan packaged in Mexico (note inner wrapper was the one I got Seiko from (I had accidentally placed in OD box).
Color - Surprisingly this paper gave the closest to my monitor in terms of overall color with just a touch less blue. Very close in terms of pinks and oranges. It was also closest to the Canon paper in terms of results. [Given that my eyes are shifted slightly into the UV spectrum from normal, this does not mean it is closer to true to the original, only closer to reflecting the same spectrum as the monitor emits.]
BW - Touch of green, very minor (best for glossy BW on s9000)
Water test – only very minor smearing when uncoated, still smeared after 3 coats.

HP Premium plus Photo Paper Matte / barcode 88698 83992 / Paper made in UK (stamped on box)
BW - Green, Blotting, does not play well with printer
Water test – bled when wet uncoated, still smeared after 3 coats.

HP Premium Photo Paper Glossy / barcode 88698 17423 / made in UK? not on box (may have been stamped on tear off portion)
- Took forever to dry, close to Kodak paper in terms of color spread, but with a noticeable green tint. I also saw some blotting of the ink occurring with this paper. Given the drying time and blotting I am unlikely to use this paper in the future on the S9000 with Canon Ink. There was also significant curling of the paper straight out of the box. So it would need to sit awhile to flatten before feeding it to the printer.
BW - Green, blotting, etc..
Water test – bled when wet uncoated, no smearing after 2nd coating.

Ilford Galerie Classic Gloss Paper / barcode 19498 98230 / made in Switzerland
Color – very similar to Kodak Ultima paper on s9000 printer although it tends to have a very slight red tint to it over the Kodak, my supply ran out before I got my i9900 and have not been able to find locally since then. One negative is it tends to curl after about 24 hours.
BW - Cyan, somewhat noticeable - some blotting in medium grey fields of color
Water test – bled when wet uncoated, still smeared after 3 coats.
Sunlight and fading: This paper has shown no fading outside of the back of the car window test I conducted and even then it was minor.

Ilford Galerie Classic Pearl Paper / barcode 19498 97925 / made in Switzerland
Color (winner overall i9900)(*4) – I did not have this paper available when I did my first test run, but did for later tests and it showed very similar results to Kodak Ultima paper on the s9000, but on the i9900 for some reason it shows just a simply fantastic output. I can’t explain the difference unless it is the addition of the red and green inks.
BW - Touch of Cyan, minor (does not show up on i9900 prints)
Water test – bled when wet uncoated, still smeared after 3 coats.
Sunlight and fading: This paper has shown no fading outside of the back of the car window test I conducted and even then it was minor.

Plain Paper: I tend to use Kodak bright White plain paper, but no matter what I have used, I have noticed no fading on anything I have printed on plain paper. Of course it tends to be just text documents.

T-Shirt transfer: I have not printed any of these on my i9900 yet, but the couple I have done on the s9000 using OD t-shirt transfer are still going strong after a year of washing about once per month, although the edges of the transfer themselves are starting to break down a bit. The color looks good with about the same amount of fading I see in any t-shirt that gets worn as much as that one does.


Footnotes:
Please note: My eyes are slightly off normal range into the UV portion of the spectrum and thus what I see is not always exactly what everyone else sees in terms of color.

1. I have reason to suspect that Canon may have made changes to their ink between my initial tests in Jan 2003 and sometime in early 2004 as the box labels changed, but there were no observed changes in color results that I could see. I do know my i9900 seems to be producing better results then my s9000 although they use the same basic ink set

2. I like the look of this paper, but plan on getting some Ilford to test eventually. It was not available to me when I did the first test. I have only done one 13x19 on Canon paper since getting the i9900 and I like the Epson results much better.

3. I have not seen any fading yet from any print done on the i9900, but then I don’t tend to use the paper that I observed fading in previously.

4. People keep asking if my prints done on Ilford Classic Pearl with i9900 are inkjet or conventional prints, they tend to disbelieve when I tell them they were done on an inkjet, which in my mind shows the high quality of the prints.

5. There had been previous discussions about the source of OD paper. I think the OD Canvas is probably NCR, the other OD papers could be made by Epson, but they are not likely to be NCR as they don't have offices in Japan that I could find on their web site.

Big disclaimer: I have no ability to know if any of the companies has changed their ink or paper composition since I first conducted this test. Exception: I know Kodak has upgraded the Ultima paper at least once to their current “Colorlast” technology, which has shown no difference in terms of output quality from the batch I used in the test. However from reading the technical paper it should last even longer then the original batch. And as noted in footnote #1, I suspect Canon of changing their ink.

Thanks for sharing your findings.

An excellent resource for the forum,.. thanks!

I recently started using the Ilford papaer.. and have to say I am loving it. Affordable compared to Canon and I love the results. They've got a line available at CompUSA (haven't seen it elsewhere) called "Printasia" that seems almost the same as the "Classic", when it goes on sale at CompUSA for 1/2 off... I stock up on 13X19"

I also discovered the Printasia variety of Ilford paper at CompUSA and for the longest tiem could not locate any info. on it. Having recently picked up some UK photo magazines (they publish some excellent mags by the way!) I began to see reference to the Printasia variety as a consumer grade available in Europe. My results are very similar with Printasia as they are with the more expensive Galerie papers. I guess CompUSA must be sourcing from Europe - never seen it at half price though! Must look more often I guess. It really does give excellent results AND is available in the useful 6 x 4" size too for general snapshot printing.

Jeez, Tim, what else have you done this year?

Look forward toyour visit. Thanks for this resource.

Tom.

Have I mentioned that I do advanced airborne sensor technology research for the USAF as my day job? Pays real good, but can get frustrating at times. At least it lets me buy nice camera equipment.

Cool is seeing the building of a hyperspectral sensor at one of the program review meetings I went to this year. Looking at what seems to be a thick solid metal mirror and realizing that it is in reality a mid-wave IR lens.

CyberDyneSystems wrote:
An excellent resource for the forum,.. thanks!

They've got a line available at CompUSA (haven't seen it elsewhere) called "Printasia" that seems almost the same as the "Classic", when it goes on sale at CompUSA for 1/2 off... I stock up on 13X19"

I couldn't find any info on the Printasia line so I asked Ilford about it and this is the answer I received:
quote

"ILFORD Printasia inkjet paper is a non dealer brand for ILFORD around the world and has been around for a few years. ILFORD have 2 inkjet brands for small format Galerie sold normally via pro dealers and Printasia which is sold via other retail sectors where ILFORD`s name is required. The products are different in these brands as they are aimed at different users. Please use www.printasiafun.com for full details of the Printasia range and availability as this site has regional specific inforkmation.

The Printasia name does come from an older D2T2 based imaging system from a few years back, but the Printasia inkjet media is not old or discontinued media.

Regards ILFORD Imaging "unquote

A very useful comparison.

So, what about the new BCI-7 inks (now available in Japan). Are these pigmented? Canon do supply pigmented inks for their W8200 wide format inkjet printers so why don't they do them in the BCI-x series? These would overcome the fading problems once and for all and get ahead of Epson.

MIME changed to 'text/html' | Content warning: script

The google transalation of Canon Japans press release

translation says it's still dye...
apperently the paper used is going to play a significant role.. thy are sounding like it will be more lile a photoraphic paper?


http://www.photo-i.co.uk/News/Nov04/121​.htm

Interesting. And it seems that if you

Scottes' translation of his hypothesis after reading the translated press release.

Thank you for sending me this information. It is very detailed and thorough, just what I need.

THANK YOU SO MUCH! After posting my question on this subject, I was gently pointed to your sticky report. I tested then the "compatible" ink I had in my S9000 printer with Canon and Kodak ultima paper, then the genuine ink with both papers. You are absolutely right! The genuine ink on Kodak paper is awesome. My black and white photos are back to black and white and the colors match the monitor. This has been most helpful and I thank you for putting the time and effort into giving us this report.

BTW, I'm retired AF myself (early retirement in the mid 90's---I'm not THAT old) I salute your service!

Terri

Your welcome to all the thanks.

Just a quick update:
recently I got my hands on some Printasia Pearl and Kodak Professional Inkjet paper - Lustre.

No extensive tests yet, but the initial impressions are that the Printasia appears exactly the same as the Ilford Classic Pearl in all appearances including results. The Kodak Lustre looks like the same surface as the Ilford Pearl, which I like. There are however a slight color difference so I am fairly sure Kodak is not using Ilford to make this paper. It also is slightly different then Ultima settings.

So far the best part is that the Kodak Professional Inkjet paper is that it does not have those annoying words "inkjet" on the back so this should minimize to near-zero the chances that someone will be able to tell the difference between inkjet and chemical print. Those words are my only real complaint about Ultima paper.

Another good part of the Kodak Professional inkjet paper is they have it in 13x19" size.
I have been researching the difference between that and the Ultima paper and it appears a bit thinner 255ml versus Ultima's 270ml thickness and of course it has a lustre coat and no "inkjet" on back. Otherwise I can find no discernable difference in quality.

Lastly, I came across an update to Kodak's Ultima paper whitepaper which indicates they are having even better results in extended testing then originally announced. From what I could read, ozone is the biggest problem factor, but even then their results show 162 years (or about 40 years that I would trust in selling a print) for uncoated paper. coat that paper and it goes to 300+ years (or 75 I would trust). They had a note on Epson inks about loss to ozone depletion that appears to make it seem the worse brand of ink. They are primarily using HP ink set as basis, but the are also testing Canon i860 inkset BCI-6 for M,C,Y, and Black, but does not include PM or PC or for the i9900 red or green. I wish they would test against those.

EDIT: I just found the FAQ page for the Kodak Professional paper. It says with pigment based ink it will last long time. With dye based ink (AKA BCI-6) and you coat it and put it behind glass it might last as long as Ultima paper. Hmmm!, I am thinking that I will stick with Ilford Pearl which is cheaper and Kodak Ultima High Gloss.
link:
http://faqs.kodak.com/​inkjet_english/FAQ_6_2​38.shtm

Longwatcher,

What a great thread as the i9900 is the printer I was looking at. This helps me with what paper to use with it.

Dave

Slight update as of today.
I have discovered that Canon has silently upgraded their PR-101 paper (it will apparently have a watermark on back) so that it will last longer with both the BCI-6 and new BCI-7 ink. I will have to try it again in a couple of months when I am fairly sure to get new version of paper. (It took Kodak Ultima 'Colorlife' version about 4 months to show up once they advertised it).

So what I am saying is new boxes of Canon photo paper might not be as crappy as they were when I first started testing papers because of the dissapointing longevity of Canon paper.

Just an update.