Re: Reasons for alt processes
terryroth@earthlink.net
Mon, 22 Jun 1998 17:06:21 -0700
Sil Horwitz wrote:
>
> At 12:22 PM 98/06/22 +0000, katharine thayer wrote:
>
> >The other thing I forgot to say was that in addition to the aesthetic
> >considerations and personal preference, another reason to be leery of
> >electronic is the archival problem. (Maybe someone else mentioned this
> >as well.) Even the newer IRIS inks are only said to be good for 25
> >years, which isn't what I'd consider archival. And of course the life of
> >your average inkjet print can be measured in days, if exposed to light,
> >and dyesub is about the same.
>
> I am in the midst of a study on permanence of photographs, and I will agree
> in general with what you say, except that most dyesub prints have a longer
> life than inkjet prints. The basic reason is that inkjets require liquids
> that will not clog the jets, while dyesub uses dyes imbedded in resin. The
> only computer printer that does not use dyes (except in what they call
> "photographic" mode) is the ALPS which, in the Photo-Realistic mode, uses
> pigments. I do not have the laboratory equipment necessary to test these
> pigment-based prints, but my sunlight tests show no degradation long after
> the inkjet prints have faded. And sunlight is not the only deteriorative
> factor: there is atmospheric and locally generated ozone, sulfur and other
> ambient gases, humidity, etc., etc. The resin-based dyes are fairly immune
> to these.
>
> This is not all bad. Unlike chemically-produced color prints (which also
> are not archival, except for Ilfochrome) the computer-generated prints can
> be remade in exactly the same configuration every time, so prints can be a
> throwaway, with the image on CD the archived photograph. The present issue
> of Photo Technique, incidently, has some very interesting correspondence on
> the deterioration of RC prints. As Judy Siegel and I have discussed, we may
> see a return to "alternative" print making to insure permanence! So,
> perhaps, instead of looking backward, we are actually looking at the future!
>
> Sil Horwitz, FPSA
> Technical Editor, PSA Journal
> silh@iag.net
> Visit http://www.psa-photo.org/
*******************
In my daily life, I am a computer specialist. We do not consider the
CD an archival tool!! They do not last "forever". But they are
probably better than any magnetic storage ( I refer to the laser CD's,
which store info as a series of pits).