archival transparencies was Re: Pointless discussion?

Sandy,

I'm sorry, I should have mentioned it, my limited knowledge is empirical and
come mostly from polyvinyls and others that I don't the family of. Below you
mention the material tested is white polyester and I don't question these
number, I'll just add my limited experience with clear material seems to
show clear materials are more difficult to stabilize or something like that
but I don't know why.

Additionaly, practically most (many) "plastic" are succeptible to heat and a
fine print under glass can be even more at risk because of "effet de serre".
Sorry for the french I have no idea how to translate this one, maybe someone
can help me here.

Does Wilhelm's provide any data for the type of transparencies used in the
experiments mentioned here. (Marek, Katherine and others)

Regards
Yves

----- Original Message -----
From: "Sandy King" <sanking@clemson.edu>
To: <alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca>
Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2006 7:31 PM
Subject: Re: Pointless discussion?

Yves,

Henry Wilhelm's research on the archival
qualities of pigment images on white polyester
(as in the Ultrastable printing system) was on
the order of 500 years.

What is the source of the information about the
fugitive nature of the transparency materials to
which you refer?

For sure, you pose an important question.

Sandy

>Katharine,
>
>I don't want to speak about Terry's message and I surely don't want anyone
>to think that's what I'm doing here, hope that's settle matter.
>
>One relatively important question I have about using transparencies is
this,
>how long they last? And I want to say I like the idea of doing prints from
>the back like that, it's not the method I'm concerned with it's the
material
>used. The limited knowledge I have of them is that they are in general
quite
>succeptible to UV and degrade relatively fast in poor conditions. I saw a
>few times that pigments on paper can last as long as a few centuries, if my
>information is exact these transparencies would be dust by the first
century
>and probably useless in about 10 to 25 years, yellowing, lost of
>transparency and even physical deformation. Nothing I would like better
then
>be wrong on this one.
>
>Regards
>Yves
>
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Katharine Thayer" <kthayer@pacifier.com>
>To: <alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca>
>Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2006 2:24 PM
>Subject: Pointless discussion?
>
>
>I hadn't been aware of this controversy until having my attention
>drawn to it by Kerik's post, and then John's. I don't see Terry's
>posts, and I suspect I'm a happier person for it. Having seen only
>the snippets quoted in these two posts, I can only guess that his
>criticisms have to do with the top-down discussion, since it's been
>the most active thread of late.
>
>I still don't understand why people insist on reading things that
>annoy them, and then complaining about being annoyed, but I'll say
>this about the top-down discussion: To my mind, this has been a very
>intelligent and useful discussion; anyone who would say that this
>didn't produce useful information or any real help to the community,
>either hasn't been paying attention to the discussion, or hasn't seen
>Marek's print this morning, or having seen it, doesn't understand
>what it means. Six months from now everyone (or a lot of people
>anyway) will be printing gum on transparencies, back-exposed, as a
>direct result of this discussion, and of the tests that accompanied
>it, and of Sandy's original challenge. So, I guess I don't quite
>get what the problem is, why this discussion would be considered
>pointless or useless by anyone. I do, however, think the sniping
>from the sidelines *is* pointless, and harmful to the community.
>Katharine
>
>
>On Apr 13, 2006, at 10:30 AM, john@johnbrewerphotography.com wrote:
>
>> TK:
>>
>> "People come to this list hoping for information and intelligent
>> debate. When they find long drawn out accounts related to pointless
>> tests, they leave. Do you consider that to be acceptable ?"
>> People may leave the list after reading your patronising and
>> pompous comments too Terry.
>>
>> Just my tuppence worth.
>>
>> John.
>>
>> www.johnbrewerphotography.com
>>
>> Life shrinks or expands in proportion to one's courage. Anas Nin.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
Received on Thu Apr 13 17:56:36 2006