View Full Version : Photo print lifetime?

26-09-2004, 09:59 AM
Doing a lot of photos lately and printing out a few on photo quality paper,
I have been told in the past that they wont last as long before they fade?

does it depend on the printer or paper quality you think?

most are now on the new comp and on CD's as back ups.
so will have copies available to reprint.

is this a possibility? will the photo's fade out over time?

any info welcome.


mark c
26-09-2004, 10:06 AM
"Photo" and "fade" in the search box brings up a lot of stuff. I remember this has come up before.
example (http://pressf1.pcworld.co.nz/thread.jsp?forum=1&thread=43821&message=239155&q=photo+fade#239155)

26-09-2004, 10:14 AM
Oh, sorry didnt look far enuf i guess.


26-09-2004, 10:24 AM
What do you mean by quality paper? glossy paper?? or normal paper?

Glossy will last longer than normal paper. And it also depends on what printer you used to print it from.

If the printer is something like a photo printer like the HP Photosmart ones, I would say the photos would last longer.

26-09-2004, 10:32 AM
yeah glossy photo paper, framed, on my epson printer.

for those rare precious moments, once taken and the original safe in place it doesnt worry me if i have to print it again.

cos basically once that moment or person has gone, so has the opportunity.

the great feeling one has when one gives a memory like that is better than money. sadly life would be better, but one cannot have it all.

thanxs people


26-09-2004, 10:40 AM
Ah ok. I have the Epson photo 700 which it says is meant to print photos pretty good. But I've never used it for photos. The cartridges are too dear to buy. I just use it for normal printing.

But I use the HP Photosmart 145, which prints on 10x15 glossy paper.

Not normal A4 paper. The same size as a normal photo. It's easier to print from since it doesnt need a PC. It uses memory card slots. And since I use a digital cam, with a SD card, once I take a pic, I just chuck it in the SD slot on the printer, and print it.

26-09-2004, 10:56 AM
That would be as long as you dont want to edit it?

well if i ever in the future take up more photography stuff than i currently do, i would look at getting a decent photo printer, but if desperate for good quality stuff may look at taking CD's into the shop and get them printed.

the time i spend on these items is in between school work and motel work, so play is at odd hours for short bursts........ LOL

thanxs for the insight tho.

always interesting to see what others do.


26-09-2004, 11:04 AM
If I was concerned at the lifetime (and it's totally dependent on UV daylight exposure, photographic ink properties and qualities) I would take the image file to a photolab and have a professional print done.

Apart from the fact that its usually cheaper than a home done one, its also likely to last much longer.

26-09-2004, 11:09 AM
True as long as I dont want to edit it. It can still be connected to a PC tho (It's USB2). I use an internal USB2 7-1 card reader, for this very purpose. So if I needed to edit a photo, just chuck the SD card in, use something like Photoshop, or Paintshop, edit it, save the edited photo back to the card, then chuck the card in the printer.

If you do decide to get into photography, Get something like an internal card reader (USB2), if your mobo has USB 2 headers on it. It's easy to connect and fast. You won't regret it! This card reader was only $35 when I got it at Dick Smith. It might be cheaper now. (it fits in a spare floppy drive bay).

The program for the printer isnt too bad. BUT as usual HP programs install a lot of useless files onto the hdd lol.

26-09-2004, 11:09 AM
LOL yeah thats what i was thinking to Goddie,

i took 144 photos yesterday, while celebrating my Parents 50th wedding aniversary, so these moments need a good represetation for them in the future.
some crap, some absolutly great.
most of them will be irtreveable shortly, (the moments not the photos).

and to do it justice i think payment is a fine price to pay for a memory that will last a good lifetime.


26-09-2004, 11:29 AM
The whole question of how long prints will last is still open to more research. Epsom claim that their INKS are longer lasting etc., etc., etc. Also the exposure to UV and chemical contamination is a consideration. As far as I know the archival people, museums and the like are still not convinced that the digital media is the thing to archive photographs and for that matter digital media has not been going long enough to prove anything one way or another. Who knows what media storage will be like in another hundred years. Holographic images stored in a thing as big as a peanut ??