[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: Need Baseline For Archival papers & inks

Michael, I think you are on to something here. The fact is that people in
general are used to traditional photographic prints and don't usually think
about the fact that they really don't last very long without fading. My
mother has some prints hanging on her wall that have faded considerably
(noticeable over 10- 20 years, and probably beginning well before that). If
we could tell buyers/ recipients of our work that they can be reasonably
confident under normal viewing conditions that a print will last as long as
a print on Kodak Royal Gold paper that they get from one-hour processing, or
when going for a big- bucks art sale, that expected life is similar to a
traditional C-print or Ilfochrome, then we're in business. It is very hard
indeed to make sense of the absolute numbers and various ink/ paper/ printer
combos that we're trying to digest.


-----Original Message-----
From: owner-epson-inkjet@leben.com
[mailto:owner-epson-inkjet@leben.com]On Behalf Of Michael Greer
Sent: Thursday, November 04, 1999 5:08 AM
To: epson-inkjet@leben.com
Subject: Need Baseline For Archival papers & inks

Having some experience in predictive analysis, I think we need a baseline
comparison on these archival issues. When Henry Wilhelm quotes years, people
take this data as absolute. That is, if Henry says a particular paper/ink
combination will last 7-9 years, many people assume their prints will be
in 10 years with absolutely no thought given to application (i.e. direct
sunlight exposure, surface unprotected, etc.). How many people actually know
what his criteria is for fading? I'd assume not many. Anyway, giving
results (i.e. this combination will last for 8 years) is difficult business.
You don't see this level of attention or concern given to "real"
prints because people have some level of expectation from them. That is,
it's a
known quantity, at least in the minds of people.

In conducting many predictive analysis, we many times came to the conclusion
that "directional" results are more stable than absolute results. Meaning we
are testing 2 configurations, which one is better for engine cooling under
MPH, 95 degreee, 50% humidity conditions? Note, the analysis will deliver
one performs better (a directional result which points us in the direction
of a
satisfactory design). Not configuration A will have a radiator exhaust
temperature of 182 degrees (this would be the case of an absolute result).

With this in mind, it seems to me that making a Kodak or Fuiji paper a
baseline, then testing and rating papers against that baseline under the
conditions would give us more information than a year rating. For instance,
rating a particular ink/paper combination a 0.5 would mean that this
combination lasts half as long as the baseline photographic print under the
same test conditions. This would mean a lot more to me than the current year

Explore potential income opportunities with Greer and Associates at
http://www.ibocity.com/greeraa. Also, Come visit my digital photography web
site along with a lot of other interesting stuff at

Mike Greer
Do You Yahoo!?
Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com
Turn off HTML mail features. Keep quoted material short. Use accurate
subject lines. http://www.leben.com/lists for list instructions.

Turn off HTML mail features. Keep quoted material short. Use accurate
subject lines. http://www.leben.com/lists for list instructions.

[Photo]     [Photo Printers]    [Yosemite Photos]     [Scanner Discussion]     [Gimp]     [Gimp Users]

Powered by Linux