Digital BW, The Print

EAM yellows because of the burn out of the optical brighteners.  Jon is
using a Xenon source which is rich in UV...this burns out brighteners more
quickly than a fluorescent source or indoor light...but EAM will
yellow...eventually...that is absolutely certain.

I agree with Paul, traditionally it is dyes not pigments that tend to be
very UV sensitive.  Its important to remember that you really don't know
what light source your prints will be viewed under.  In an office building
its likely to be fluorescent and halogen, in a gallery incandescent or
halogen and in a home it may be daylight.  That said, a Xenon source is the
standard in the fading business.  Its high UV content may make both dyes and
pigments fail faster than a fluorescent source...but the ultimate character
of the fade should not be different from a fluorescent source for
pigments...the changes will just happen quicker.  There is no doubt from the
data that he reported that the Museum Black is much more stable than the MIS
FS black and the grays...as we already suspected...are much more stable as
well.  What remains to be seen is how this translates into actual longevity.
But from my perspective I want to be using the winner of relative
testing...because this will also be the winner in longevity.  In the end the
difference in ink costs is pretty minimal compared to the total cost of a
print...particularly if you are printing on archival papers.

Robert

On 11/7/02 5:14 PM, "Bill Morse" <willym@...> wrote:

> Hi Paul-
> 
> In talking with Jon Cone at PhotoPlus, he repeatedly emphasized his findings
> with EAM- that it yellows significantly in a short time.  Since this is
> somewhat contrary to yours and other's findings, both in tests and
> anecdotally, I wonder if these lamps are doing something different than
> would be experienced in real life.
> 
> Bill
> 
> on 11/7/02 12:04 PM, Paul Roark wrote:
> 
>> 
>> It is good to see some data.  I've always liked the fact that MIS published
>> its RIT test results for the MIS Archival inks.
>>  
>> I'm also not sure about note 3 on the "Test Condition."  It says,
>> "Lightfastness: Irradiation UV (Xe) 10,000 Kj/m2/200 hours."
>> 
>> If the lamp was strong UV, then I wonder if the results correlate well with
>> actual lighting.  Most of us are oriented to indoor display, where the UV
>> from fluorescent lights or window-filtered (thus no deep UV) light is the
>> main problem.  Unlike the outdoor signage market, I don't think we have that
>> much of a UV problem with our prints.
>> 
> 
> 
> 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
> 
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to
> unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same
> page.
> 
> 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
> &amp;amp;quot;flames.&amp;amp;quot;
> - 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/
> 
> 
>