Re: RC prints archival? (was: POP prints archival ?)

Bas van Velzen (eland@knoware.nl)
Mon, 6 May 1996 23:07:17 +0100

>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

What I am trying to tell all the time is that with every layer you add the
problems deriving from it will be exponentially more difficult to solve.
And this has not necessarily to do with the materials as such but with the
fact that it is a layer and that layers of different materials will behave
differently - the war of the layers-. Reading a lot I am trying to solve
problems coming from multi-layered (and still called "flat") objects. RC
papers have more layers than fiber paper as CD-ROM's have more layers than
LP's and so on. (have you read about the new standard for CD-ROM's? - more
layers!! the new APS-films?? - more layers, even magnetic layers together
with emulsions! -and you know what happens to movie film with magnetic
sound).

>Clearly, this is a complex subject.<

Bas van Velzen

Jonge Eland papierrestauratie
eland@knoware.nl
t +31 20 623 79 89
f +31 20 627 32 23

VeRes (Dutch Association of Professional Restorers)
postbus 11503
1001 GM Amsterdam

PAPER IS ART IS PAPER IS ART IS PAPER IS ART IS PAPER IS ART IS PAPER