Digital BW, The Print

The lowered rating of EAM for the new printers (2200/7600/9600) may have 
more to do with the new inks than the paper. Epson tried to make the new 
Ultrachrome inks work better with third-party fine-art papers and will be 
introducing a version of Somerset Velvet (don't know if it is 'Photo 
Enhanced' or not) made specifically for Epson and these printers.

Jeff Greer

At 12:54 AM 05/05/2002 -0700, you wrote:
>Its interesting to note that in their new brochure on the Ultrachrome inks
>that Epson only rates Enhanced Matte (the EAM sequel) at 30 years while
>"Fine Art Papers" are rated at 90-100 years.  I think that is probably
>reflective of how Epson views the paper.  But then again its 1/4 the price
>of good paper...and only 1/3 of the life...so I guess it is a good deal!
>
>Robert
>
>On 5/4/02 11:55 PM, "Paul Roark" <paul.roark@...> wrote:
>
> > bjornaagedk wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi everyone!
> >>
> >> Do someone know if Epson's Archival Matte paper is 100% acid
> >> free?
> >
> > This debate has raged on several forums, and I'm not sure we have a good
> > answer to the more difficult question of whether EAM can be expected to 
> last
> > for long enough to be considered "archival" -- whatever that means.
> >
> > (I've never seen Epson admit that they changed the name due to concerns
> > about pigments on EAM not being "archival."  The concern I've seen from
> > Epson related only to the dye-based inks not being particularly 
> long-lasting
> > on EAM, and, this I believe, has nothing to due with acid in the 
> paper.  The
> > EAM surface is optimized for pigments, not dyes.  On the other hand, I
> > strongly suspect that Epson really changed the name to avoid having to
> > substantiate the representation that EAM was "archival.")
> >
> > At any rate, I have used one of the acid-testing pens on a number of 
> papers.
> > EAM does appear to have some acid in its base.
> >
> > So, it is not "acid free."
> >
> > But whether enough acid in the paper to do significant, long-term 
> damage may
> > be a much more difficult question. I believe EAM is made of wood pulp that
> > has had the lignin removed.  So, it is lignin free, and lignin is 
> apparently
> > the source of most of the acid in modern wood-pulp papers.  (The older pulp
> > processing apparently used acid, but I beleive such processes are no longer
> > used for good, wood-pulp paper.)
> >
> > Cotton is the purest natural source of cellulose.  So, it is the starting
> > material that is traditionally preferred for archival paper.  However,
> > whether modern, lignin-free wood-pulp can make equally-pure or pure enough
> > cellulose is unclear to me.  I assume that cellulose is the same 
> chemical no
> > matter whether it is from trees or cotton.
> >
> > I might add that the acid-testing pen appears to be easily fooled by cheap
> > buffering.  As such, cheap newspaper that yellows and deteriorates quickly
> > tests out with the pen as more acid-free than my fiber-based,
> > archivally-processed silver prints.
> >
> > The fiber-based silver prints are probably not buffered, because such would
> > be inconsistent with the acid stop bath we use.  (It might be fun to 
> see how
> > much a buffered paper sizzles in an acid stop bath.)  I've also read that
> > Epson does not buffer EAM because buffering was not consistent with the
> > maximizing image permanence -- which was (along with affordability, no
> > doubt) a primary goal of EAM.
> >
> > I use EAM without much concern for the question of whether it is acid free
> > or not.  My conclusion is that image permanence is the more important 
> issue,
> > and EAM is hard to beat on that score.  Of the papers I've tested, only
> > Eclipse did arguably better -- but it's blacks were not as good.  I 
> also use
> > EAM because I like a smooth matte paper, and it produces about the best
> > images I've seen.  When these attributes are added to the fact that EAM is
> > just plain cheap, it's hard to find a better value.
> >
> > If I found that someone was willing to pay big bucks for my prints, but 
> only
> > if they were on a more "acid free" paper, I'd gladly print on Eclipse.  To
> > date, no one has raised the issue (or offered big bucks for the prints,
> > unfortunately).  So, I continue to use EAM.
> >
> > Paul
> > http://www.PaulRoark.com
> >
> >
> >
> > Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls 
> and other
> > resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
> >
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
> >
> > Please follow these basic guidelines:
> > - Include your full name with your message.
> > - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
> > - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep
> > them short.
> > - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
> > - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or "flames."
> > - Complete your Yahoo profile.
> > - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various
> > resources on the homepage.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> >
> >
>
>----------------------
>Robert Morrison
>rmorrison@...
>
>310-397-2704
>
>4131 Bledsoe Ave.
>Los Angeles, CA 90066
>
>
>
>Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and 
>other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
>
>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>
>Please follow these basic guidelines:
>- Include your full name with your message.
>- Include the address of your website, if you have one.
>- As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep 
>them short.
>- As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
>- Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or "flames."
>- Complete your Yahoo profile.
>- Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various 
>resources on the homepage.
>
>
>
>
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/