OT- kodak dye sub printers

[stephen_jones4]

The Kodak 8500 claims to get around issues of permanance in digital printing

(as well as having a more "photographic" feel). Does anyone know anything

about the life expectancy made with such a system?

[dick_van_nostrand]

The newspaper I worked at used a Kodak dye-sub printer for about five years for all print orders without a breakdown, other than those caused by mental lapses by operators. It's a great machine, the original of which was made for military use, hence its heavy duty construction.

[andy_piper2]

I made a few dye-sub prints with the first generation Kodak printers - and they showed visible fading within 3 months. Even my Apple 700 dpi ink-jet prints from the same era (7-8 years ago) held up better.

 

But I'm pretty sure print longevity was one of the first problems Kodak addressed in 'improving' their later-generation printers - something about an extra 'transparent' anti-UV ink layer on top of the colors.

 

The dye subs certainly have better tonality and max. resolution - but inkjet is catching up.

 

The thing that always made me itch about dye-sub was the wastage - even if you only have a tiny area of (say) yellow in a print, the machine uses a whole image's worth of yellow dye sheeting. And you end up with a big roll of the dye-carrying plastic sheeting to dispose of after each roll regardless of usage - compared to a couple of little plastic ink pots from the jet printers.

[fotografz]

I use an Olympus P400 Dye Sub printer that makes a 7X10 or so image

area print with a final pass of glossy UV laminate. The next generation is

suppose to make up to 11X14 and offer various finishes from mat to

glossy. The makers' propaganda claims up to 75 year life...which, of

course, I will not be around to see