http://www.shutterbug.net/features/1103sb_thearchival

This is a link to a very informative article and interview with Henry Wilhelm.

IMO, the worrying about archival prints from an inkjet is over rated. It all stemmed from early production problems with inks, and only certain colors, that faded right away. Then the cat was let out...

With my 1280, which has a larger color gamut than the pigment inks, using the right papers you get 25 years. That's plenty. I haven't noticed any fading on any of my images.

Also, I believe the color gamut from inkjets has surpassed that of tradition printing methods. However, I still like the look of the lightjet prints over inkjets. Just a preferance.

Mike

Thanks for your info , Penny. I know the 2200 is the one for other manufacturers to beat, but I was hoping not to have to shell out over 600.00 for a printer. I was looking at the Canon 9100 which got great reviews and is just over 300.00. They state that with Canon paper will get 25 + years archive durability, which for me I can live with that ( I hope) However, I like to print on matte and Canon only makes an 8.5 x11 in matte. and a 13x 19 in glossy only. For me to print 13x19 in matte I would have to use another brand paper, and as was stated in the article by Henry Wilhelm by changing to a different paper other than the manufacturers brand could drastically reduce longevity. So much so as the prints may only last a couple of years. wow!
So, as I play this waiting game and see what the competition produces, now that Epson is getting a run for their money from Canon and HP I may lose my patience and shell out for the 2200 and be done with it.
Thanks again for your info Penny.

IMO, the worrying about archival prints from an inkjet is over rated. It all stemmed from early production problems with inks, and only certain colors, that faded right away. Then the cat was let out...

With my 1280, which has a larger color gamut than the pigment inks, using the right papers you get 25 years. That's plenty. I haven't noticed any fading on any of my images.

Also, I believe the color gamut from inkjets has surpassed that of tradition printing methods. However, I still like the look of the lightjet prints over inkjets. Just a preferance.

Mike
The 1280 would have been my choice, but the problem I have with it is the single color ink tank, and the fact that the heads are not user replaceable. If the printer is left to sit for a while without printing and the haeds clog, it would require a service call to change them costing as much as the printer itself.. I know it is a great printer and most users would swear by it but that really bothers me. As far as archival quality being overated, you may be right to a point but without the right paper ink combination could be a big waste of time.. Check out the article
Thanks for your comments

There are many good brands of paper out there. I use red river papers, and know many people who use them on their 2200's. They come with excelent color profiles.

If you're worried about the 1280 clogging, I wouldn't touch a canon. I went through three - in a couple of weeks time - prior to getting the 1280. But I live in an ultra dry climate. I find the clean utility works fine for the 1280. And even though it doesn't have seperate inks, it's still much cheaper than the 2200.

The 2200 had just come out and was an unknown commodity when I bought the 1280. Maybe I should have waited another year of two? I may still end up with one and add a quad black cartidge to the 1280. But I have other reasons for considering the 2200 than worrying about archivalness.

Still, as you point out, for $600 taking, or downloading, my important images to the local shop to get printed on a lightjet may be easier and cheeper for a while to come. Especially once you add in the cost of ink and paper.

Mike

Here's the way I look at it...worse come to worse you can always reprint to image in the future with the latest printer technology...as long as you have a copy of the original somewhere. No one wants their digital photos to fade but the technology is always improving and the printing/ink quality will improve right along with it.

John
];')