Re: Archival Prints

Judy Seigel (jseigel@panix.com)
Wed, 6 Sep 1995 15:44:56 -0400 (EDT)

Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
Next message: Thomas Blomkvist: "Re: Film for enlarged negatives"
Previous message: Bret W Buckman: "Re: Film for enlarged negatives"
In reply to: SCHRAMMR@wlsvax.wvnet.edu: "Archival Prints"
Next in thread: Imageworkers@eworld.com: "Re: Archival Prints"

On Tue, 5 Sep 1995 SCHRAMMR@wlsvax.wvnet.edu wrote:
> I recently heard that modern RC papers may not
> be so bad, archivally speaking, as everyone thought. Has anyone else
> heard this?

Yes, 5-6 years ago B&W "expert" wrote article to that effect in, probably,
Camera and Darkroom. (Blakey? Can't remember the name, tho think it was a
retired PhD expanding a former hobby.)

David Vestal might also have some knowlege/hearsay/experience here.

Judy

Next message: Thomas Blomkvist: "Re: Film for enlarged negatives"
Previous message: Bret W Buckman: "Re: Film for enlarged negatives"
In reply to: SCHRAMMR@wlsvax.wvnet.edu: "Archival Prints"
Next in thread: Imageworkers@eworld.com: "Re: Archival Prints"