Paul, Thanks for your thoughts on the Museo, etc. for dark storage. All of my photo restoration work to date has been for individuals who plan to display the new prints. Like you, I haven't had a lot of time to experiment with all the new papers, plus I just got my MIS HEX variable tone inks set up last night. So, basically, I'm starting by learning as much as I can from the pioneers in this group who've already been testing and working with the various papers. Like you, I tend to be cautious. I don't want to over-promise customers when it comes to the archival qualities of their prints. In many cases they're expecting these photo restorations to be heirlooms someday and I don't want to disappoint them even if I'm not around when these prints are passed on to the next generation. Your insight is very helpful, and hopefully I can contribute to this discussion in the not too distant future. Thanks... Tom Keesling --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "Paul Roark" <paul.roark@v...> wrote: > Paul Roark wrote: > > Although for most purposes I find EAM to be what I like the best, I do worry > about EAM's apparent acidity for very long dark storage. I'd like to be > able to tell people that the paper is acid free. I'm really not comfortable > saying that for EAM.
Message
[Digital BW] Re: EAM Archivability WAS Fade test: Museo v. EAM
2001-09-01 by Tom Keesling
Attachments
- No local attachments were found for this message.