I believe that, in the ancient past, RC paper was, just that, resin coated paper. When fixed, the hypo would migrate into the edge of the paper where is was impossible to be extracted by washing. Over time, the hypo trapped in the paper would lead to the ruination of the print. OTOH, Ilofochrome (sp?) uses a polyester base. No paper to absorb anything. So, does modern VCRC "paper" contain no actual paper that could absorb the hypo/fixer? Another consideration is the fact that whatever material we spray ink onto, it will not be subjected to B&W fixer nor to color fixer/bleach. Plastics do age, often becoming brittle. Perhaps a combination of factors leads to the life expectancy Epson states. That might also include marketing's wishful thinking. I'm 56, whether something fades, or turns yellow, in 49 or 68 or 70 years is something I won't be calling them on! (lol) Jim San Diego On Thursday, October 31, 2002, at 08:27 AM, Mark Savoia wrote: > Plastic technology is getting better I guess. > Mark > > Robert Morrison wrote: > > > The papers that epson is rating for 60-75 years with the new > > Ultrachrome > > inks are simply RC base as well...so I wouldn't necessarily write off > > RC's > > based on the plastic base. I think the issue here is what happens > > with the > > emulsion. > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Message
Re: [Digital BW] Carbon-pigment inkjet print life vs.Conventional VC/MG RC print life?
2002-10-31 by James Downs
Attachments
- No local attachments were found for this message.