Re: POP prints archival ?

Pollmeier Klaus (100561.2417@CompuServe.COM)
02 May 96 03:07:54 EDT

Bob Schramm wrote:
<No reason why it should be any better or worse than any silver print [...].>
See my previous mail: There is at least one reason why P.O.P. can be worse than
other silver prints: the smaller grain size. Perfect toning is a 'must'.

<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.>

Newer research (Image Permanence Institute, Rochester and J. S. Johnsen,
Kopenhagen) showed, that selenium and gold toning is much less effective than
Ansel Adams and subsequently others (including me) thought. IPI therefore
developed a polysulfide toner (IPI Silverlock), which protects the image much
better, without turning the image too brown. The permanence of selenium and gold
toned developed-out images is not least caused by the proper processing required
to prevent staining during toning.

RC papers have been improved since the mid-80s, but still even ILFORD doesn't
recommend their Multigrade IV Deluxe for prints intended to be displayed for a
longer time. In the dark, they will probably be equal to FB-papers.

Klaus Pollmeier