|[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]|
Since I appear to have trouble posting to this group, I am sending this message two different ways, this one by email. Unfortunately, my last email took several weeks to show up on the list. I seem to have generated a small amount of controvery over a test I ran which compared the following: - An Epson 3000 print using OEM inks on Epson Glosy paper (the thin stuff) - A commercial photo print - A magazine clipping I found that after two months in a west-facing window which receives direct sunlight for half the day (when the sun is out, that is) the Epson print had begun to fade in the usual way, that is, slight fading of the magenta ink. I also found, however, that the magazine reproduction had faded more, especially the yellow, and surprisingly, the commercial print had faded more noticeably as well, again primarily the yellow. This was, by no means, a scientific test, simply something I did to satisfy my own curiosity. Obviously, "direct sun for part of the day" cannot be quantified. My feeling is that NONE of these prints could be considered "archival" since all are primarily dye-based. Nor would I guess from this little test how any of these might survive under "normal" display conditions, since even oil and watercolour paintings ought to be kept away from direct sunlight. I'm not even certain whether blasting a print with 50,000 lux of ultraviolet for a short period of time is any way to judge how it might last under gentler day-to-day conditions over a long period of time. I hope this clears up any misconceptions about my little experiment. John Lasruk Toronto Canada - Turn off HTML mail features. Keep quoted material short. Use accurate subject lines. http://www.leben.com/lists for list instructions.
[Photo] [Yosemite News] [Yosemite Photos] [Scanner] [Gimp] [Gimp] Users