From: TERRYAKING@aol.com
Subject: Archivity
Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 14:32:37 -0500 (EST)
> We do know that those that were not processed properly had a few
> problems. But that is the point.
You initially stated that:
properly processed silver image --> archival
and now stating
improperly processed silver image --> not archival
These are different arguments.
> You should look into the proceedings of the 1850s 'Fading Committee"
I've gone much farther than that. We have much more knowledge on the
mechanism of image fading than 1850s.
The relevant question is how many percents of properly processed
images survived with or without toning over the course of 100+ years,
and whether gold toning significantly increased the percent survival.
Modern conservation scientists would say yes to the latter question.
Since 1950s there are rising concerns for archival properties of
properly processed silver image, which has to do with oxidative
attacks rather than inadequate processing standard. Proper processing
(without toning) provides no protection against oxidative attacks but
noble metal toning or polysulfide toning provides this protection.
Received on Wed Mar 29 14:20:46 2006
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 04/10/06-09:43:47 AM Z CST