Re: POP prints archival ?

Claude Seymour (cseymour@CapAccess.org)
Wed, 1 May 1996 11:47:58 -0400 (EDT)

On Thu, 2 May 1996 SCHRAMMR@WLSVAX.WVNET.EDU wrote:

> Date: Thu, 2 May 96 00:07:56 +1000
> From: SCHRAMMR@WLSVAX.WVNET.EDU
> To: Multiple recipients of list <alt-photo-process@cse.unsw.edu.au>
> Subject: Re: POP prints archival ?
>
> No reason why it should be any better or worse than any silver print.
> POP paper contains silver chloride. Modern papers are a mixture of
> silver chloride and bromide. But the significant condition is gold
> toning and washing. Once the paper is exposed, developed and fixed the
> image is made of silver grains. It maters not if it started out as
> silver chloride or silver bromide or for that matter, silver iodide.
> The gold attaches itself to the silver grains. Gold is less reactive
> than silver. A really good washing gets rid of the hypo.
> BTW most photoarchivists consider selenium toning as good as gold toning.
> Properly fixed, toned and washed silver prints shoul;d have a lifetime
> of 100-300 years. Some RC papers are now being accepted as archival
> e.g. Ilford Multigrade IV Deluxe.
>
> Bob Schramm

I saw Henry Wilhelm recently and his parting words to me were, "_Always_
use fiber based papers."

Claude Seymour