> Prev
From: Peter Jason <pj@jostle.com>
Subject: Toner Vs Ink?
Full headers:
Path: news.netfront.net!goblin1!goblin.stu.neva.ru!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Peter Jason <pj@jostle.com>
Newsgroups: rec.photo.digital
Subject: Toner Vs Ink?
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2018 07:59:00 +1100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <hjbu8d1fe34sse5bm726ie12kcib77r6vu@4ax.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="1f85d78ac72c5515511a64c7293b7ba7";
logging-data="5177"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+C+PSl/jThvFYH0pDm2EBj"
User-Agent: ForteAgent/8.00.32.1272
Cancel-Lock: sha1:Qh+LYRLR1PvUe3H9r+hWzTR2gNE=
Print Article
Forward Article
I usually have my photos printed at a kiosk, but for the A4 larger
ones I use the office Fuji-Xerox laser color printer.

Is laser-toner photos longer lasting than the Kiosk-printed variety?

Peter 

	
From: nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid>
Subject: Re: Toner Vs Ink?
Full headers:
Path: news.netfront.net!goblin2!goblin1!goblin.stu.neva.ru!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid>
Newsgroups: rec.photo.digital
Subject: Re: Toner Vs Ink?
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2018 16:07:26 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <220220181607261822%nospam@nospam.invalid>
References: <hjbu8d1fe34sse5bm726ie12kcib77r6vu@4ax.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="a6f80d165dae92ed69a6d0dc4f1e3762";
logging-data="7016"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+rUqTBGlO/6x8T9zXQwbq4"
User-Agent: Thoth/1.9.0 (Mac OS X)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:XEV1Vhs1pWUcU3aKcfbp8wgx2Gg=
Print Article
Forward Article
In article<hjbu8d1fe34sse5bm726ie12kcib77r6vu@4ax.com>, Peter Jason<pj@jostle.com> wrote:

> I usually have my photos printed at a kiosk, but for the A4 larger
> ones I use the office Fuji-Xerox laser color printer.

that's a mistake.

> Is laser-toner photos longer lasting than the Kiosk-printed variety?

it doesn't matter whether they do or not. fresh out of the printer,
they're already not as good as what can be had from even a mediocre
photo printer and a colour managed workflow. 

	
From: Ken Hart <kwhart1@frontier.com>
Subject: Re: Toner Vs Ink?
Full headers:
Path: news.netfront.net!goblin2!goblin.stu.neva.ru!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Ken Hart <kwhart1@frontier.com>
Newsgroups: rec.photo.digital
Subject: Re: Toner Vs Ink?
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2018 17:50:53 -0500
Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <p6nhgc$13ud$1@gioia.aioe.org>
References: <hjbu8d1fe34sse5bm726ie12kcib77r6vu@4ax.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: zbCsgRx3lefeW5lTDMklVw.user.gioia.aioe.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/52.5.0
Content-Language: en-US
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.3
Print Article
Forward Article
On 02/22/2018 03:59 PM, Peter Jason wrote:
> I usually have my photos printed at a kiosk, but for the A4 larger
> ones I use the office Fuji-Xerox laser color printer.
> 
> Is laser-toner photos longer lasting than the Kiosk-printed variety?
> 
> Peter
> 
> 
Too many variables...

Toner is melted into the paper, and is generally water resistant. Inkjet 
prints might run if they get damp, depending on the ink. And light-jet 
photos are actual "old-school" photographs: light-sensitive photo paper 
exposed to laser light and chemically processed. If they get wet, they 
can usually be dried to their original appearance.

The big issue is the quality. Toner cannot make as fine a dot on the 
paper, and toner pigments don't really mix. Inkjet printers can make a 
smaller dot, and the different colors of ink mix together as they soak 
into the paper. Photo-sensitive papers have all three colors already in 
the paper, wanting to be exposed to the proper color light.

I've done toner printed photos and inkjet photos. Inkjet photos look 
better, but toner photos are more rugged. And properly done 
photo-sensitive paper prints beat them both.

-- 
Ken Hart
kwhart1@frontier.com 

	
From: nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid>
Subject: Re: Toner Vs Ink?
Full headers:
Path: news.netfront.net!goblin2!goblin1!goblin.stu.neva.ru!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid>
Newsgroups: rec.photo.digital
Subject: Re: Toner Vs Ink?
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2018 19:08:12 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 70
Message-ID: <220220181908122628%nospam@nospam.invalid>
References: <hjbu8d1fe34sse5bm726ie12kcib77r6vu@4ax.com> <p6nhgc$13ud$1@gioia.aioe.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="43ed6352efc2813e12e49aabe4479977";
logging-data="13568"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+VmRAVW28LrQkrHey7dkmK"
User-Agent: Thoth/1.9.0 (Mac OS X)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:9iFTIxGdfnCeM2hI6BxpCcICcC8=
Print Article
Forward Article
In article <p6nhgc$13ud$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Ken Hart<kwhart1@frontier.com> wrote:

> > I usually have my photos printed at a kiosk, but for the A4 larger
> > ones I use the office Fuji-Xerox laser color printer.
> > 
> > Is laser-toner photos longer lasting than the Kiosk-printed variety?
> > 
> Too many variables...

not at all. 

ink jet versus laser printer. 1 variable.

presumably everything else is the same, he just chose a different
printer.

> Toner is melted into the paper, and is generally water resistant. Inkjet 
> prints might run if they get damp, depending on the ink.

you must be using a very old inkjet printer and he didn't ask about
water resistance anyway.

> And light-jet 
> photos are actual "old-school" photographs: light-sensitive photo paper 
> exposed to laser light and chemically processed.

one reason why they're not as good as inkjet prints.

> If they get wet, they 
> can usually be dried to their original appearance.

so can inkjet prints. 

> The big issue is the quality. Toner cannot make as fine a dot on the 
> paper, and toner pigments don't really mix. Inkjet printers can make a 
> smaller dot, and the different colors of ink mix together as they soak 
> into the paper. Photo-sensitive papers have all three colors already in 
> the paper, wanting to be exposed to the proper color light.

the dots can't be seen at normal viewing distances so their size is not
an issue. 

the dots also don't mix in the way you think they do. since they're
smaller than what the eye can resolve, the mixing is done in your eye,
not on the paper.

not surprisingly, if you look at photo paper under high magnification,
you can see film grains.

> I've done toner printed photos and inkjet photos. Inkjet photos look 
> better, but toner photos are more rugged. And properly done 
> photo-sensitive paper prints beat them both.

then you did something wrong.

first of all, comparing 'properly done photo-sensitive paper prints'
with *improperly* made inkjet prints is bogus.

if you intentionally fuck up one, then the other will win. no surprise
there. the correct comparison is with the best each can do. 

modern ink jet photo printers have a wider gamut than photo paper and
laser printers, particularly those with more than 4 inks, and with a
properly calibrated workflow, will produce *better* results which last
longer than anything you can do with photo paper. 

the problem with laser printers, what you are calling toner, is that
they have a much smaller gamut and cannot be properly calibrated,
resulting in lower quality prints. 

	
From: Fred McKenzie <fmmck@aol.com>
Subject: Re: Toner Vs Ink?
Full headers:
Path: news.netfront.net!goblin1!goblin2!goblin.stu.neva.ru!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Fred McKenzie <fmmck@aol.com>
Newsgroups: rec.photo.digital
Subject: Re: Toner Vs Ink?
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2018 10:31:20 -0500
Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <fmmck-20A693.10312023022018@46.sub-75-242-165.myvzw.com>
References: <hjbu8d1fe34sse5bm726ie12kcib77r6vu@4ax.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ugXB8TzFZy871wxDgoX84A.user.gioia.aioe.org
X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org
User-Agent: MT-NewsWatcher/3.5.3b3 (Intel Mac OS X)
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.3
X-Face: M2:kXKd:RWOYDl{uZc`?lIp)JGp#{Wu!73$b9:+?s~%}Ay|,WvxTz{\^4AJh
N>Vy`r;;jIzv<<vS,[g~;ir61gwO/"Ff8_<BmgGs~{wyfHZYW3=:3,2vO7fLZ0RO7PT
&/HNHm0?k/~s)P<fv_6SH>@nXU8{,j+xR(<OXVIKnd)
Print Article
Forward Article
In article<hjbu8d1fe34sse5bm726ie12kcib77r6vu@4ax.com>,
 Peter Jason<pj@jostle.com> wrote:

> I usually have my photos printed at a kiosk, but for the A4 larger
> ones I use the office Fuji-Xerox laser color printer.
> 
> Is laser-toner photos longer lasting than the Kiosk-printed variety?

Peter-

Maybe.

I assume your Kiosk print is inkjet.  Some companies claim their inkjet 
prints will last 100 years, but I have had some others fade in a few 
months time.

If you are satisfied with the appearance of your laser prints, you still 
have to worry about them sticking to anything they touch.  Mounting in a 
frame, you need to use a separator to keep them from sticking to the 
glass.  They may fade over time, but I do not know how fast.

In either case, the different primary colors may fade at different 
rates, resulting in color shift over time.

You can only find out by waiting.  Do not erase your computer image!

Fred 

	
From: Eric Stevens <eric.stevens@sum.co.nz>
Subject: Re: Toner Vs Ink?
Full headers:
X-Received: by 10.200.34.148 with SMTP id f20mr2389627qta.28.1519426972185;
Fri, 23 Feb 2018 15:02:52 -0800 (PST)
Path: news.netfront.net!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!q21no3492368qtn.1!news-out.google.com!o9ni7923qte.1!nntp.google.com!peer02.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!post02.iad!fx35.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Eric Stevens <eric.stevens@sum.co.nz>
Newsgroups: rec.photo.digital
Subject: Re: Toner Vs Ink?
Message-ID: <fa719d1riomr9pdhksu6mv560t8nald6k2@4ax.com>
References: <hjbu8d1fe34sse5bm726ie12kcib77r6vu@4ax.com> <fmmck-20A693.10312023022018@46.sub-75-242-165.myvzw.com>
User-Agent: ForteAgent/8.00.32.1272
MIME-Version: 1.0
Lines: 38
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte - www.forteinc.com
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2018 12:02:52 +1300
X-Received-Bytes: 1966
X-Received-Body-CRC: 3803370927
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Original-Bytes: 1822
Print Article
Forward Article
On Fri, 23 Feb 2018 10:31:20 -0500, Fred McKenzie<fmmck@aol.com>
wrote:

>In article<hjbu8d1fe34sse5bm726ie12kcib77r6vu@4ax.com>,
> Peter Jason<pj@jostle.com> wrote:
>
>> I usually have my photos printed at a kiosk, but for the A4 larger
>> ones I use the office Fuji-Xerox laser color printer.
>> 
>> Is laser-toner photos longer lasting than the Kiosk-printed variety?
>
>Peter-
>
>Maybe.
>
>I assume your Kiosk print is inkjet.  Some companies claim their inkjet 
>prints will last 100 years, but I have had some others fade in a few 
>months time.

Depends upon the printer and the ink they use. In my experience there
are large variations but durability seems to be improving.
>
>If you are satisfied with the appearance of your laser prints, you still 
>have to worry about them sticking to anything they touch.  Mounting in a 
>frame, you need to use a separator to keep them from sticking to the 
>glass.  They may fade over time, but I do not know how fast.
>
>In either case, the different primary colors may fade at different 
>rates, resulting in color shift over time.
>
>You can only find out by waiting.  Do not erase your computer image!
>
>Fred
-- 

Regards,

Eric Stevens 

	
Next <
Subject: Re: Toner Vs Ink?
Full headers:
Path: news.netfront.net!goblin1!goblin.stu.neva.ru!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Neil <neil@myplaceofwork.com>
Newsgroups: rec.photo.digital
Subject: Re: Toner Vs Ink?
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2018 17:28:28 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <p6q4ic$coi$1@dont-email.me>
References: <hjbu8d1fe34sse5bm726ie12kcib77r6vu@4ax.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2018 22:28:28 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="b1e4ad647643cc0fe5b5a6edde479147";
logging-data="13074"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/Gzi8ZKotp/1fQ15JCFtcUU5XTwM8Ri/8="
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/52.6.0
In-Reply-To: <hjbu8d1fe34sse5bm726ie12kcib77r6vu@4ax.com>
Content-Language: en-US
Cancel-Lock: sha1:wuZJghob93RXIt1xnKjmNVToCcA=
Print Article
Forward Article
On 2/22/2018 3:59 PM, Peter Jason wrote:
> I usually have my photos printed at a kiosk, but for the A4 larger
> ones I use the office Fuji-Xerox laser color printer.
> 
> Is laser-toner photos longer lasting than the Kiosk-printed variety?
> 
> Peter
> 
> 
There is no single answer to this question, and as Ken pointed out, it 
may be appropriate to consider film-based prints, too, since they are 
excellent quality.

Laser printers are not all of the same quality, nor do they use the same 
toner, so image quality and longevity will vary depending on your choice.

Inkjets tend to be more economical for the same or higher image quality 
that consumer-grade lasers are capable of. They also are capable of much 
larger print sizes than laser or film printers.

Just a few things to consider...

-- 
best regards,

Neil