Many genealogists scan old photographs, touch them up in a photo editing program, and then print them on high quality ink-jet printers. There is but one problem: those printed pictures may disappear within a few years.
In testing, pictures printed on Epson's Stylus Photo 870 and 1270 dye-based printers were expected to last ten years. When the products went to market, users found that the colors in prints were changing drastically in as little as two months.
The Hewlett-Packard Photosmart 475, a dye printer that produces snapshot-size photos, will produce photographs that are estimated to last 82 years. No ink-jet printer will create "permanent" pictures.
You can read more about this in an article in the New York Times at http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/05/technology/circuits/05print.html?_r=1&ref=circuits&oref=slogin.
NOTE: The New York Times frequently leaves articles online only for a few days and then removes them. This article was online when these words were written but may disappear at any time.
A much more technical report is available on the Wilhelm Imaging Research web site at http://wilhelm-research.com.
Dick,
The Wilhelm Research site is one that I've been using for a long time. They do some pretty extensive longevity testing.
Posted by: Dino (All Dino, All the Time) | June 07, 2007 at 02:48 PM
I am so glad that this being reported! I am an "old-school" photographer who has been trying to communicate this for years to no avail. In addition to inkjet images fading even with dye printers, the images will become fragile with time
since the dye still sits on the top of the paper. With silver papers photographic chemistry bonds with the silver embedded in the emulsion of the paper resulting in a must more stable and archival image. I photograph children and
it grieves me that so many unsuspecting parents will not have images left by the time they are grandparents, much less images to pass down to future generations. Thanks for the information!
Posted by: Carole Johnson | June 08, 2007 at 07:05 AM
I have been researching my Family History and was given a 100 year old photo album. This is disturbing news because I have purchased a very good HP Printer and all their very best Premium HP Photo Papers and Inks to print my precious, 100 year old photos thinking they will last me a very long time. HP has been saying all along that their photos will last a very long time. Now I don't know what to do to preserve them---one can't afford to take all their photos to a professional. What a dilemma!!!
Posted by: Gayle | June 08, 2007 at 10:54 AM
Do what I do. Scan old photographs into a PC and download new pictures from a digital camera directly to the PC. You can leave them there or burn backup copies to DVD at regular intervals. No fading ever and new prints can be made at will on either a printer or at a regular photo lab
Posted by: Andrew Nopper | June 08, 2007 at 12:52 PM
I have used an Epson's Stylus Photo R800 printer for several years. I use both the Epson archival quality inks and archival quality acid-free photo paper and I have not experienced a problem with fading or colors changing. I also store them in archival acid-free album inserts but not cold storage. I would expect professionals and archivists to use high-end color laser printers or special photo printers. Using products from a single manufacturer and following that manufacturers recommendations will ensure the best longevity for digital prints. None of them warrant a thousand years but some warrant 80 years, which is longer than my old film-based prints have lasted because they are already faded and discolored. My bigger concern has been the loss of resolution in digital images that I import into my genealogy and other software with each change of hardware and operating system.
Posted by: Eileen Souza | June 08, 2007 at 02:51 PM
What about the printers in the Walmarts, K-marts etc., are they any better, has any testing been done on the pictures from these machines?
Posted by: Jo Ann | June 08, 2007 at 09:32 PM
I save my digital images to a cd in jpg format, then take them to Wal-Mart and have them sent through the Fuji Film developer process. 15 cents a piece for 4X6 pictures and get them back in about an hour. They charge 25 cents a piece to have them printed instantly from HP ink jet.
Posted by: Matthew B. Rogers | June 08, 2007 at 09:49 PM
I have 7,000 of my images and movies stored at a photo website/archival company that will be safe for generations to come. It gives me security and flexibility plus the ability to order quality, inexpensive (10 cents) prints if I choose. I have been trying to get the word out more and more about the value of online archival storage because the problem with photo image deterrioration, the potential for hard drives to crash and the relatively short life of CD's and DVD's, particularly since my family lost most of our photographs in a storage fire many years ago. But you need to look for a site that will scan the photos if you don't have a scanner or want to do it yourself, have a solid financial backing, can offer you prints if you desire, a website with which you can use them and maybe the most important, a company that wouldn't continue to charge you something year after year to continue having them archived.
Posted by: Kathryn Callahan | June 09, 2007 at 11:19 AM
How about photos printed on a color laser printer? Will those last?
Posted by: Carol Maske | June 09, 2007 at 12:36 PM
In response to Gayle's comment: "Now I don't know what to do to preserve them---one can't afford to take all their photos to a professional." After my sister, who always uses film cameras, complained that she never got to see the photos the rest of the family takes with their digital camera, I started using MyPublisher.com to produce photo albums with digital pictures. The first book I printed was a family history album, with the digital copies I had made of old photographs, maps, passenger manifests, and other document-style and photographic images. I did the storybook version so I could add the history alongside the images. There are many companies, like Kodak, who will create books from your digital images. I would recommend that you start looking into that to preserve the electronic scans you have made of your historic images. If the site is any good, it will leave the book up electronically so that you can send the link to family members who can choose to print a copy of the book for themselves, or just to look at it online.
Posted by: Susan Daily | June 09, 2007 at 03:24 PM
I'd love to know where Kathryn Callahan has stored her photos {photo website/archival company} as I have been looking for somewhere like that.
I consider any home printed, and most lab printed photos to be temporary at best. I'm almost wishing I could reactivate my darkroom, but that is impossible where I live now. Some of those photos were printed 20 years ago and look the same as when new but I don't expect new prints to last at all. Enjoy for now and save the digital files. Our family send the files to each other so there is more chance of them surviving computer failures etc. Everyone backs up differently so that is also a help. Heaven knows there are so many more photo files to keep with a digital camera family!!
Posted by: Mary Holland | June 10, 2007 at 01:29 AM
Why is so many of the http not able to be opened? If you want to do some further research, you can't. Even copy and paste doesn't work. I find this very upsetting.
Susie
Posted by: Susie Perkins | June 12, 2007 at 11:18 AM
I found the posting about the fading of ink jet prints very interesting. Even conventional photographs will fade depending on how and where they are stored. The fading effect can be enhanced or quickened depending on the location where they are viewed. I have photographs conventional that are almost 40 years old that show no signs of fading. I also have the same photographs that were hung on a living room wall without a ultra violet absorbing glass which have faded and lost their original color.
My point is all types of inks and dyes and emulsions are subject to fading. You can decrease the fading effect by not displaying the photos or prints where they will be exposed to sunlight or light.
If the record or photo is of a great historical value then make several digital copies and also have a good quality b/w negative made of the subject.
In years past photographers would copy color photos on b/w negatives. One negative for each of the primary colors.
Posted by: Zale Archer | June 21, 2007 at 02:31 AM
Mary Holland asked where I had stored my digital photographs (my comment on June 9, 2007). She can email me at callfosh@aol.com for information or go to www.preservephotoimages.com and sign up for her own free site and 5 GB of free storage. You will note my name listed at the top with my phone number because in making full disclosure, I liked the service so much I sharing the information with as many people as possible. One day, it may be profitable, but for now, people are getting a lot of free storage space, etc.
Posted by: Kathryn Callahan | April 15, 2008 at 03:26 PM