Protective sprays / fixative sprays for prints

[Ellis Vener]

Do you use these for your inkjet prints?



Any recommendations?

Are any of them archival?

 

[mike earussi]

The big three are Hahnemuhle, Moab and Premier Art Print Shield, with the latter having been tested by Aardenburg as adding about a 23%-41% increase in display life using Epson K3 ink (depending on color). All three are considered archival.

https://www.aardenburg-imaging.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/AaI_20120802_SN002Lf.pdf

https://www.aardenburg-imaging.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/AaI_20120802_SN001Lf.pdf

Also Jose tested them:

I've used all three and prefer Premier Art because it's spray is less intense than the others. It's also a little cheaper than the others if purchased in bulk:

https://www.itsupplies.com/PremierArt-Print-Shield-Inkjet-Spray-Case-p/pa1950case.htm

 

[William Carson]

Do you use these for your inkjet prints?

Any recommendations?

Are any of them archival?

As well as protecting from UV light, Ozone and other airborne contaminates are protected against. It should be mentioned that because these airborne contaminates permeate both sides of paper, both sides of print should be sprayed. Moab Desert Varnish is a good choice.

 

[Mark McCormick]

Do you use these for your inkjet prints?

Any recommendations?

Are any of them archival?

As well as protecting from UV light, Ozone and other airborne contaminates are protected against. It should be mentioned that because these airborne contaminates permeate both sides of paper, both sides of print should be sprayed. Moab Desert Varnish is a good choice.

Spraying both sides for maximum protection sounds reasonable in theory, but AFAIK, has never been tested for the practical benefit it may or may not deliver.

The protective sprays being discussed are quite expensive because a full can won't effectively cover more than a dozen or so letter-size prints when applied correctly in a two pass coating step. The per print additional cost of spray coating is enough that using a protective spray pretty much diminishes any substantive savings one gets by using third party inks and then spraying each print in an attempt to boost print permanence back up to OEM equivalency (and it doesn't get you there, anyway). Also, coating the back side doubles the cost, but may or may not provide any significant additional benefit. The primary benefit of protective sprays comes from sealing the microporous coating layer, and that coating can only be reached with a spray from the image bearing side of the media.

Folks, these are simply the facts as I know them. I do personally use protective spray on expensive glossy/luster "traditional fiber" inkjet media printed with pigmented ink sets because it eliminates all bronzing/differential gloss issues and adds some additional scratch and abrasion resistance when handling the prints. Some printmakers say they don't see bronzing and differential gloss when a print is framed under glazing, but I still see it, and I don't like it, hence, a protective spray solves my issues when printing on glossy/luster media with pigmented inks.

I will put it on my "to do" list to actually perform a paired comparison test between no spray, spray on front side, and spray on both sides. It would be an interesting test. Can't promise when said testing will take place.

kind regards,
Mark

--
Mark McCormick

http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com

 

[gscotten]

The protective sprays being discussed are quite expensive because a full can won't effectively cover more than a dozen or so letter-size prints when applied correctly in a two pass coating step. The per print additional cost of spray coating is enough that using a protective spray pretty much diminishes any substantive savings one gets by using third party inks.

I can always see irregularities in the coating if I spray 13x19 prints from my Pro-100. Maybe I am doing it wrong.

I find it is cheaper to just print important prints on my Pro-10 with OEM inks.

I have considered passing my Pro-100 prints through my Pro-10 to add a chroma optimizer overcoat. Does the CO add any UV protection and would it add any fade resistance? (I use Precision Colors ink on the Pro-100.)

 

[Ellis Vener]

Do you use these for your inkjet prints?

Any recommendations?

Are any of them archival?

From the responses (thank you) so far, I see that it would help to add some details about printer and media.

i am printing with a Canon imagePROGRAF Pro-1000 using OEM inks

For this project, prints for an exhibition, the media is Ilford Galerie Gold Silk Fibre Media. The other media I use, for portfolios, is Moab double-sided Entrada.

--
Ellis Vener
To see my work please visit http://www.ellisvener.com
Or on instagram @therealellisv

 

[Mark McCormick]

I have considered passing my Pro-100 prints through my Pro-10 to add a chroma optimizer overcoat. Does the CO add any UV protection and would it add any fade resistance? (I use Precision Colors ink on the Pro-100.)

Although the protective sprays like Print Shield advertise increased UV resistance, it's so minimal as to be disregarded. The reason these sprays improve lightfastness is because they are helping to seal the pores and lower the oxygen permeability. Inkjet inks fade due to photo oxidation reactions, so lowering the light lower the fade rate and lowering the oxygen transport to the dyes or pigments also lower the fade rate.

Ditto for the CO with regard to UV blocking capability, and while it can help seal the porous ink receptor layer somewhat, it's not going to appreciably help you with your dye-base pro-100 prints. Not worth it, IMHO.

cheers,
Mark

 

[William Carson]

Do you use these for your inkjet prints?

Any recommendations?

Are any of them archival?

As well as protecting from UV light, Ozone and other airborne contaminates are protected against. It should be mentioned that because these airborne contaminates permeate both sides of paper, both sides of print should be sprayed. Moab Desert Varnish is a good choice.

Spraying both sides for maximum protection sounds reasonable in theory, but AFAIK, has never been tested for the practical benefit it may or may not deliver.

The protective sprays being discussed are quite expensive because a full can won't effectively cover more than a dozen or so letter-size prints when applied correctly in a two pass coating step. The per print additional cost of spray coating is enough that using a protective spray pretty much diminishes any substantive savings one gets by using third party inks and then spraying each print in an attempt to boost print permanence back up to OEM equivalency (and it doesn't get you there, anyway). Also, coating the back side doubles the cost, but may or may not provide any significant additional benefit. The primary benefit of protective sprays comes from sealing the microporous coating layer, and that coating can only be reached with a spray from the image bearing side of the media.

Folks, these are simply the facts as I know them. I do personally use protective spray on expensive glossy/luster "traditional fiber" inkjet media printed with pigmented ink sets because it eliminates all bronzing/differential gloss issues and adds some additional scratch and abrasion resistance when handling the prints. Some printmakers say they don't see bronzing and differential gloss when a print is framed under glazing, but I still see it, and I don't like it, hence, a protective spray solves my issues when printing on glossy/luster media with pigmented inks.

I will put it on my "to do" list to actually perform a paired comparison test between no spray, spray on front side, and spray on both sides. It would be an interesting test. Can't promise when said testing will take place.

kind regards,
Mark

Thanks for this additional info. So, UV glass is the best protection for light. I had not considered cost of spray but if a print is valuable for lasting for maximum years, it would be good to spray a sealant against oxygen/ozone fading. How you would test for airborne contaminants fading? If you do such testing, it would be valuable information.

 

[gscotten]

Although the protective sprays like Print Shield advertise increased UV resistance, it's so minimal as to be disregarded. The reason these sprays improve lightfastness is because they are helping to seal the pores and lower the oxygen permeability. Inkjet inks fade due to photo oxidation reactions, so lowering the light lower the fade rate and lowering the oxygen transport to the dyes or pigments also lower the fade rate.

Ditto for the CO with regard to UV blocking capability, and while it can help seal the porous ink receptor layer somewhat, it's not going to appreciably help you with your dye-base pro-100 prints. Not worth it, IMHO.

cheers,
Mark

Thanks, Mark!

 

[LensVu]

Do you use these for your inkjet prints?

Any recommendations?

Are any of them archival?

As well as protecting from UV light, Ozone and other airborne contaminates are protected against. It should be mentioned that because these airborne contaminates permeate both sides of paper, both sides of print should be sprayed. Moab Desert Varnish is a good choice.

Spraying both sides for maximum protection sounds reasonable in theory, but AFAIK, has never been tested for the practical benefit it may or may not deliver.

The protective sprays being discussed are quite expensive because a full can won't effectively cover more than a dozen or so letter-size prints when applied correctly in a two pass coating step. The per print additional cost of spray coating is enough that using a protective spray pretty much diminishes any substantive savings one gets by using third party inks and then spraying each print in an attempt to boost print permanence back up to OEM equivalency (and it doesn't get you there, anyway). Also, coating the back side doubles the cost, but may or may not provide any significant additional benefit. The primary benefit of protective sprays comes from sealing the microporous coating layer, and that coating can only be reached with a spray from the image bearing side of the media.

Folks, these are simply the facts as I know them. I do personally use protective spray on expensive glossy/luster "traditional fiber" inkjet media printed with pigmented ink sets because it eliminates all bronzing/differential gloss issues and adds some additional scratch and abrasion resistance when handling the prints. Some printmakers say they don't see bronzing and differential gloss when a print is framed under glazing, but I still see it, and I don't like it, hence, a protective spray solves my issues when printing on glossy/luster media with pigmented inks.

I will put it on my "to do" list to actually perform a paired comparison test between no spray, spray on front side, and spray on both sides. It would be an interesting test. Can't promise when said testing will take place.

kind regards,
Mark

Mark,

You say you use protective sprays on expensive glossy/luster "traditional fiber" inkjet media. I hours of searching the Net you are the only person to distinguish coated papers from the others. So, which protective sprays do you use and/or recommend?

Appreciated,

Leonard

 

[enduser]

The graffiti guys recommend Spray Max 2K aerosol range.

 

[Howard Moftich]

I'm pretty sure all the spray cans are all the same product, just re-branded.

PremierArt, Hahn Varnish, MOAB Desert Varnish, etc

 

[Philip Eihuyar]

I'm pretty sure all the spray cans are all the same product, just re-branded.

PremierArt, Hahn Varnish, MOAB Desert Varnish, etc

This is new info to me. All the above sprays are actually the same product but sold with only different labels? Are you sure?

$16 Moab desert varnish spray

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?Ntt=MOAB%20DESERT%20VARNISH&N=0&InitialSearch=yes&c3api=4680%2C%2CMOAB%20DESERT%20VARNISH%2Ce&msclkid=64fbb4765f281b39d960eb26a63c852f

$38 400 ml [ https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/prod...11640702_protective_spray_14oz_twin_pack.html ]

Premierart print shield - $20

Print Shield | Premier Imaging Products

PremierArt™ Print Shield Spray is a lacquer based protective coating for all inkjet prints. Its low solids formulation maintains the original look of the

www.premierimagingproducts.com

 

[David Pavlich]

I've been using Moab Desert Varnish for some time now. Seems like a good choice.

David

 

[Howard Moftich]

No, I'm not 100% sure but I do recall older threads (here and elsewhere) that seemed to indicate that. Note that the Hahn is a 2pk.

 

[mike earussi]

No, I'm not 100% sure but I do recall older threads (here and elsewhere) that seemed to indicate that. Note that the Hahn is a 2pk.

They're similar but not exact. I've compared all three and the primary difference is in how they spray. I hated the Moab as it came out way too strong--too much propellant. The Hahnemuhle and Print Shield were similar but the Print Shield can be bought by the case of 12 with about a 25% price break from itsupplies. https://www.itsupplies.com/PremierArt-Print-Shield-Inkjet-Spray-Case-p/pa1950case.htm

 

[Kemo-sabe]

If you intend to do a large volume of liquid lamination you should invest in a LPHV or HPHV spraying system. And look at Marabu ClearJet laminates as well as Primier Ecoshield and Breathing Colors Timeless liquid laminates. These can be purchased in 1 gal cans reducing your cost. They are Archival.

You can not get the required coverage with a spray can when coating large format prints. nor can you control the spray pattern to any degree of accuracy with a spray can. You also can't get your coatings as thin comparative to a good spray gun system.

The negative it does take a capital out lay to invest in a good spraying system. Liquid lamination is another skill set that one must learn. Dust is your enemy.

Liquid lamination provides UV protection, scratch and touch protection, moisture protection, and most importantly Ozone protection. Ozone is the biggest cause of print degradation and longevity.

You have to be careful with water based inks on particular papers. In some cases one must lay down a LL solvent coat initially. Then let that coat dry thoroughly and then apply your water based laminates on top to prevent ink bleeding.

Just my 2₵. Good Printing.....

 

[mike earussi]

If you intend to do a large volume of liquid lamination you should invest in a LPHV or HPHV spraying system. And look at Marabu ClearJet laminates as well as Primier Ecoshield and Breathing Colors Timeless liquid laminates. These can be purchased in 1 gal cans reducing your cost. They are Archival.

You can not get the required coverage with a spray can when coating large format prints. nor can you control the spray pattern to any degree of accuracy with a spray can. You also can't get your coatings as thin comparative to a good spray gun system.

The negative it does take a capital out lay to invest in a good spraying system. Liquid lamination is another skill set that one must learn. Dust is your enemy.

Liquid lamination provides UV protection, scratch and touch protection, moisture protection, and most importantly Ozone protection. Ozone is the biggest cause of print degradation and longevity.

You have to be careful with water based inks on particular papers. In some cases one must lay down a LL solvent coat initially. Then let that coat dry thoroughly and then apply your water based laminates on top to prevent ink bleeding.

Just my 2₵. Good Printing.....

You are correct, but not everyone has the room for a spray setup, that's why the roller application system is also available. BTW, the only liquid laminate that has been proven to extend display life is Premier Art Eco Print Shield. No tests have been done on Timeless and BC's other coating Glamour 2 has been shown to actually decrease display life by about 1/2.

 

[LensVu]

I plan to fix and varnish several Breathing Color Media: two matte (Emblem Textured Natural and Pura Velvet), a Baryta (River Stone Satin Rag) and a metallic (Vibrance Metallic). Breathing Color assured me that Timeless varnish was the way to go for the matte papers, however, "Timeless Varnish cannot be roll-coated onto any glossy media, including Vibrance Metallic, Vibrance Gloss, Vibrance Luster, River Stone Satin Rag, Crystalline Canvas, 17M Canvas, or any other media that requires Photo Black ink. The ink will come off of the paper and onto the roller and it will smear."

All of which suggests that the ink and substrate have to be taken into account when choosing a fixative (if one is considered at all) and a varnish. For the Vibrance Metallic and River Stone papers, I finally decided on Lascaux Fine Art Fixative and various layers of Gloss + Matte Golden Archival Spray Varnish. I will update my findings once I get printing - when and if my Epson P900 ever materializes.

 

[Ken60]

Mark when you do a test of these "photographic" sprays, can you please also try and compare against the Art market sprays like Winsor & Newton professional fixative. I ask this because the Winsor fixative was bought at a fraction of the price !