Regarding all the discussion on the permanence of RC prints, I read an
article a couple of years ago by James Reilly (director of the Image
Permanence Institute) on the archival properties of RC paper. It was
published in a magazine for photography teachers put out by Kodak. The
article describes the history of the paper and how with each
formulation, the engineers thought they had gotten it "right" only to
discover that their fix caused additional problems. First, there was
the titanium dioxide brightener in the 70's RC papers which oxidized
and caused the paper surface to crack. In the 80's, an anti- oxident
was added to solve that problem, but then it was discovered that this
additive caused "premature aging." Now, of course, in the 90's (the
article concludes) all the problems are solved and in just another two
or three years, ANSI will declare RC paper "permanent."
On the other side is Henry Wilhelm, who in his book: "Permanence and
Care of Color Photographs" seems almost obsessed with proving that B&W
RC paper is unstable. He describes the problems inherant with different
generations of RC paper without being clear which problem belongs to
which generation. He doesn't appear to acknowledge that at least some
of the problems are fixed in the currently available paper. Wilhelm
does say that Ilford and Agfa RC papers are more stable than Kodak
brands.
Finally, there is Kodak itself. Back in the 70's, Kodak issued a
statement, which was published in their booklet on "Conservation of
Photographs" among other places, that until they were satisfied that RC
paper was a permanently stable base for photographic emulsions, that
they would continue to make fiber based papers.
Last time I checked, Kodak had not repudiated their statement and was
still making fiber paper ;-)
Clearly, this is a complex subject. Myself, I tend to agree more with
Wilhelm (though not obsessively) that RC paper just hasn't proven its
long term stability yet. Of course, RC is easier to wash, but that has
never been the problem. As much as I respect James Reilly, I am a
little incredulous at the conclusion of his article. It just sounded as
if RC paper was one big science fair project and we photographers are
the test subjects.
For whatever it's worth,
Carson Graves
carson@ileaf.com