Bob_Maxey@mtn.3com.com wrote:
>
> And, as far as permanence is concerned (and I am seriously concerned), none
> of the slides I have that were made prior to 1955 (and that includes
> Kodachrome) are in pristine condition, even though they have been in the
> dark under fairly controlled conditions most of the time.
>
> I have thousands of Kodachromes that tell a different story. Are you sure
> they were processed by Eastman Kodak; many slides of that era were not. The
> only Kodachromes in my collection that have problems are those not
> processed by Kodak. Especially the Kodachromes that were processed by
> Technicolor Labs; all or most are faded to magenta. Incidentally, most of
> my old Ektachromes are faded to varying degrees. The only other slides that
> have not are Agfachromes. If none of your slides dating to 1955 are good, I
> suggest you have problems that are not to be attributed to Kodachrome. No
> one else I know has this problem, and from other lists, I hear the same
> thing....Kodachromes lasting the longest and still perfect. I also have
> about 2500 early Kodachrome Viewmaster reels, perfect condition. And my
> collection of Kodachrome Prints and sheet Kodachromes are still good. I
> also collect Kodachrome Stereo Slides and I have yet to see any problems
> here, either.
>
> Color prints I
> made in the 1950s into the 60s are largely gone (but better than
> commercially made ones of the same period). There are no "original"
> Polaroid pictures that are fit to be looked at.
>
> This is to be expected. ALL of my Polaroids are bad, but Polaroid is hardly
> an archival process. The only exception is P/N 4 X 5 stuff....still usable.
>
> And commercially produced
> BW prints from even 50 yrs ago are, for the most part, faded or fading
>
> I worked for a the oldest photographic firm in Utah, and one of the oldest
> Kodak Dealers in the USA. In the collection were tens of thousands of Glass
> Plates, Nitrate based negatives, Cirkit rolls, and lots of other negative
> materials. These images were not stored in the best of conditions, but are
> perfect. No fading, either. Each envelope had a print made when the
> negatives were processed. Still perfect. Here again, I think you might have
> issues unrelated to the materials. Processing might be a suspect as well.
>
> (I
> do a lot of computer improvement on these for genealogical purposes). The
> scientists can produce inks/dyes that have longer life, they are working on
> it, and we should (a la Cibachrome/Ilfochrome) have pigments and dyes for
> computerized printing that will be the equivalent or better than in
> chemically produced color prints.
>
> One day perhaps, not yet however.
> Getting back to the Alt-Photo thing for a moment: I hope all those working
> on color "carbon" prints are paying close attention to the mordanted dyes
> they are using for the color: many water colors are not even as permanent
> as the dyes used in color prints and computerized prints.
>
> Very true, there is a considerable amount of variation here. Dye Transfer
> prints are still very stable and materials are once again being offered.