Re: OT inkjet neg fading

Mark & Others,

I don't know if anyone has mentioned this, but much of this information is
available from Wilhelm Imaging Research. Henry Wilhelm is recognised as "the
expert" in this area of image permanence. They have a PDF you can download
for free, but be forewarned, it is 80 megabytes in size!

http://www.wilhelm-research.com/

I have a friend who bought a print she just loved from a local artist. The
artist had made the print on nice watercolor paper and then did some very nice
work with pastels on top of it. In about 3 months, my friend came over
storming mad and showed me her $300 print—all that was left was the pastels and a
very very faint vision of the original inkjet—which was dye based.

Anyway, check out the Wilhelm site, it is interesting.

Mark Nelson

Alt Photo Tip for Winter: If you live in the northern zones and are finding
printing is difficult due to low humidity and have to run a humidifier, you
can conserve our precious water supply by also running a dehumidifier.

hehehehe

In a message dated 12/31/03 10:41:09 AM, wcharmon@wt.net writes:

> To answer Judy's question, no, I never thought that inkjet prints were
> archival. But what surprised me was how rapidly the print loses
> density. In the article I mentioned, they had a graph that showed print
> density loss versus time. By 70 days, there was a 0.12 loss of print
> density, or almost a third of a stop. I am well aware that this was a
> specific result that is applicable to one printer/ink/paper
> combination, but it sure gives one pause. My post was really just to
> see if anyone has noticed any density loss with their inkjet negs over
> time. I suspect that the dye based inkjet negs will show some loss,
> whereas the pigment based inks that I'm guessing that Sandy uses on his
> 2200 will show much less of a loss over time.
>
> Clay
>
Received on Wed Dec 31 11:29:35 2003