Digital BW, The Print

Dave,

Your point is well taken, but when we ask if the brighteners are the same as
those used for silver papers, we also need wonder if the gelatin coatings of
those papers better preserve those brighteners.

Todd

> I've read with interest the posts about optical brighteners in inkjet
> papers. I have just a comment or two to add.
> 
> The absolute safest thing in terms of permanence is probably to
> use papers with no optical brightening agents. However, this
> comes with a trade-off in terms of how white the paper can be.
> 
> I think that in the long run, brighteners will be routinely used in
> fine art inkjet papers. I base this on the history of darkroom
> papers. It may be true that the Library of Congress wants its
> storage materials to be OBA-free. Why not? There's nothing lost
> for them if the paper is a little less white. But I wonder what their
> position is on the photographs that may be inside those very
> storage materials? Optical brighteners are in the prints of
> virtually every black and white photographer since the 1960's. Are
> the prints by Ansel Adams, Brett Weston, Paul Caponigro, etc,.
> etc. now to be deemed "non-archival?"
> 
> We are in a shake-out period for inkjet papers. We should be
> cautious, but not panic.
> 
> I'd like to know whether the brighteners used in, say, Legion
> Photo Matte, are the same ones that are used in Oriental Seagull
> or Agfa Brovira. Or are they something new and untested? I do
> feel leery about trusting a paper with unknown brightening
> agents unless it has at least been lab-tested. But this doesn't
> change the overall fact that bright whites are a major aesthetic
> issue. And in the case of fine art photography, the decision was
> made long ago that brighteners could be safe enough, and were
> valuable enough, to include in archival materials.
> 
> --David