Re: Inkjet Printer opinions?

TERRY KING (KINGNAPOLEONPHOTO@compuserve.com)
Thu, 19 Mar 1998 04:51:27 -0500

Message text written by INTERNET:autochrome@worldnet.att.net
> Of course I only use the printer to do paper negatives
- not finished images.
<

Why not let it do both as it it does both well ?

We are told that the prints do fade but under what conditions and on what
paper? Would we make a habit of hanging any printed or painted art work
in direct sunlight without expecting the light to degrade the image ? Are
prints made on photo-copying paper likely to last as long as those made on
archival water-colour paper where the contents of the paper are perhaps
less likely to react adversely with the inks ? I know that is the inks
that are fugitive but does this quality change according to the paper ?
Which is the best combination of paper, position and ink that is likely to
extend the life of a bubble jet print ?

We should remember that it is now possible to obtain fine bubble jet
prints, with detail in the shadows and highlights, that, to look at, that
could just not be obtained chemically. Perhaps we should think a little
more about these things before casting the bubble jet print to one side.
Enjoy its beauty under appropriate conditions, see Luis's comments on
Strand's 'mercury' platinum prints, and if it does fade, run off another
one from the disc. Or alternatively, scan in the Strands !

I made a Wedgwood print for an exhibition I curated in 1989, a silver
nitrate image on leather, no fixing. I can still show it students as it is
kept in appropriate conditions.

Terry King