|[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]|
Side A: >>The problem with your theory of air exposure as the primary fading >>mechanism is that controlled tests have found that prints exposed to >>light fade much faster than prints kept in the dark, but otherwise >>under similar conditions. Side B: >I don't know whose "controlled" tests found this to be true, nor how >"similar" were the conditions of dark storage (were the control prints >sealed hermetically from the effects of the dark storage ambience?). My own >"controlled" tests suggest that air exposure is of very great importance. I'm kind of beginning to wish this discussion didn't remind me of the American Cancer Society and the American Heart Association debating over which disease is the most important killer. I find it hard to see this as an either-or thing. There is a huge weight of evidence that shows that increased exposure to light will cause prints to fade faster, and almost everyone has seen practical examples of it--which would appear in no way to negate the possibility that air exposure can have a significant effect even in the absence of strong light levels. (Not my air, mind you--I live in the middle of nowhere in Idaho. But the rest of you may have to worry.... (:>) Gary Hunt <email@example.com> - Please turn off HTML mail features. Keep quoted material short. Use accurate subject lines. http://www.leben.com/lists for instructions.
[Photo] [Yosemite News] [Yosemite Photos] [Scanner] [Gimp] [Gimp] Users