| [Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] |
<x-flowed>> >John Nollendorfs wrote >>Michael & (many) others: >>Been following this thread and being intellectually entertained by theory >>versus science vs real life observations. > > >me too... > > >INTRODUCTION: >In a sense, its a battle between the physical scientists >(who can, or try to, control all variables) >and the behavioral scientists who frequently >have to "make do" with non-experimental methods... > >neither method is correct / incorrect >and both add to knowledge and understanding... > >Inkjet prints are like people >in that people make and display them... >You should be aware that ASTM is part of ANSI, soon to become part >of ISO. ASTM does not compete with IT9.9. Nor are there conflicting >standards. Issuance dates of alleged competing "standards" might say >something. Nor is there a battle between "those who empirically >collect data" and therefore consider themselves correct and the ANSI >standards committee wrong". You tend to imply that this is like a >political battle, or can be influenced by "popular opinion", and is >therefore out of reach of scientific reasoning. If so, you have a >lot to learn. The more you get educated as to the causes of fading, >the more you appreciate what the IT9.9 committee has accomplished. >Conversely, the less you know about the causal factors of fading, >the more you believe that testing is a simple process, and anyone >can do it. And that your anecdotal evidence is proof positive, and >even that anybody's evidence is proof positive. Chaos reigns once >again. Light fading tests for wools have been going on for years, started back in early textile days. More or less a go/no-go test, somewhat akin to tests performed internally by many companies to scout materials. Extrapolated to IT9.9 standard? I don't think so. >NEW POSSIBLE STANDARD: >There is a standards group (ASTM) >with a relatively simple process >and a practical repeatable test... > >which we could all share so we would >all be using a "similar", if not identical, >concept when we said "faded"... > >This standard test helps deal with the issue of Arizona >car window tests vs. northern Maine north facing >windows... and "maybe" with some of the other variables >like humidity, glass, etc. > > >REFERENCE: >Quote >"ASTM D 5383-97: Practice for the Visual >Determination of the of the Lightfastness >of Art Materials by Arts Technologists" > >Copyright 2000 >AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR TESTING AND MATERIALS >West Conshohocken, PA. All rights reserved. >This practice covers a method for exposing specimens >of colored art materials indoors to sunlight coming through a >closed window. A card containing eight ISO Blue Wool References >is exposed simultaneously. Blue Wool References 2 3, 6, and 7, >are used as controls in determining when to remove test >specimens from exposure and rate them. Test specimens are >rated by assigning each specimen the number of the Blue Wool >Reference that shows the same amount of color change. >This practice may be used to indicate art materials that >will change color within a few months or years in normal >indoor exposure and those that will remain unchanged for a >period of years..." > >ENDQUOTE >huge 6 page snip > >Adopted by: >Developed by ASTM Subcommittee: D01.57 >Ordering Information >Price: $ 30.00 Printed Pages: 6 > >http://www.astm.org/cgi-bin/SoftCart.exe/STORE/store.htm?E+mystore > >will get you to the search engine. >then put in "D 5383" in "search for standard" > > > >STANDARD SUMMARY: >I purchased the "Standard" in PDF form for $30.00 >and downloaded from the link above... > >Test protocol involves ink on paper compared to 8 BLUE WOOL >ISO TEST samples each with a *known* fade resistance... > >When your print fades at the same rate as wool number 1 >it means X years, wool no 2... Y years, wool number 8...Z years...etc. > >The standard tells you how to build the test device >(opaque cardboard with opaque cardboard covers) >How to read the results >(you must a construct viewing slot >using certain size cardboard cutout >with known color characteristics, etc) >How to create the test image >(certain size test strips, etc) >etc, etc., etc. 6 pages single spaced >instructions but easy to follow and relatively simple >The test IS based on window light being an accelerated >light over normal display / museum light... > >Although there can, and will be, significant interpretation (error) >in READING the samples - - its better than nothing or >waiting or never... and you get to test your own ink combinations on >favorite papers (and other weirdness') and if you do comparisons to >Wilhelm then there are some (controlled experimental baselines) >to follow as well... > >COMMERCIAL VERSION: >A commercial version designed to meet the "standard" test >including 3 Blue Wool sample cards is available from: >Golden Paints >Complete kit: $50 >Refill kit: $25 (more BLUE WOOL samples, 3 I think) >1-800-959-6543 >(they have a website but product not listed) >(they will also send you a handout info sheet for free >recommend this first) > >I purchased the kit as well as the standard and its a very well made >implementation of the "standard", but after looking >at both the standard and the commercial kit >I would recommend folks buy the "standard" if they are >concerned about economy... > >The cheapest way to do this is to buy the standard >for $30, build your own kit for $10-20 more... > >the main cost and the main "experimental control" >is/are the blue wool "fade" cards (you get 3 in the $50 starter kit above) > >or you can get 10 for $42.50 >or 50 for $205 >or 100 cards for $310 from Talas > >http://nt.bnt.com/talas/menu.html?category=130 > >fascinating site incidentally >lots of archival related materials and tests > >http://www.talas-nyc.com/ > > >RATIONALE: >Of course this is not as scientific as Wilhelm >BUT if enough people did the tests >(and carefully recorded their conditions) >a significant database with averages, means, >conditions, etc. could be assembled... > >more than Wilhelm could ever do in a lifetime >and thats one way the social science >works - - lots of data sets help to compensate for >the lack of controls... >both methods contribute > > >It basically works out to $3.10 per test... > > >A BUSINESS: >there might even be a mini-business here >for someone... (not me) > > >Pay $50 - 100 per year for web access >( or contribute X data "certified" points for free access) > >Logon... >Check that database... > > >AhHa... >OEM inks on egg coated paper >in bora-bora >1 week.... ;-) > > >AhHa... >Lyson Fotonic inks on pancakes >in North Dakota >2 weeks.... ;-) > > >Thanks. >Bob O sending from home. > >more later. > >FYI. > >The Physics of the Museum Environment >http://www.natmus.min.dk/cons/tp/index.htm > >>From Northeast Document Conservation Center > >"Protection from light damage" >http://www.nedcc.org/plam3/tleaf24.htm > >"The Care of Photographs" >http://www.nedcc.org/phocar.htm > > > > > > > > > > > >- >Please turn off HTML mail features. Keep quoted material short. Use >accurate subject lines. http://www.leben.com/lists for instructions. - Please turn off HTML mail features. Keep quoted material short. Use accurate subject lines. http://www.leben.com/lists for instructions. </x-flowed>
[Photo] [Yosemite News] [Yosemite Photos] [Scanner] [Gimp] [Gimp] Users
|