From: TERRYAKING@aol.com
Subject: Archival qualities
Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 17:21:46 -0500 (EST)
> Perhaps you misunderstood.
No.
> The other rather obvious point was that prints which are properly processed
> are likely to last longer, see my post in rreply to that from Sandy..
No one is talking about improperly processed stuff. It goes without
saying that those are outside the scope of archival handling.
> What is your objection to that ?
As I said before, you are the one who responded with the following:
From: TERRYAKING@aol.com
Subject: Re: archivalness
Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 02:44:32 -0500 (EST)
> adequately processed silver prints not involvong iron, have survived
> in good condition for i60 years.
It's ok if you quietly withdraw this statement and try to get me or
Sandy to agree with you, but please don't tell me I'm misunderstanding
on this one.
Received on Wed Mar 29 16:54:24 2006
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 04/10/06-09:43:47 AM Z CST