Digital BW, The Print

Just for the record, I call what I do "carbon pigment" printing, and then
usually tell what printer I've used.  If I'm using cotton-base paper, I say
so.  I think it is accurate and true.  Moreover, I suspect the archival
(dark storage) life of these prints may be longer than the old "carbon"
prints due to the buffering in the paper.  I have no idea about
lightfastness comparisons.

I don't really like the "selenium" description and typically put it in
quotes.

I really think the carbon pigs on cotton are so good they can stand on their
own now.

Paul
http://www.PaulRoark.com
___________________________________

-----Original Message-----
From: Tim Atherton [mailto:timatherton@...]
Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2003 10:44 AM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Digital BW] Digital B&W dissing


an amusing if somewhat sad thread here:

"Anybody else getting heartburn with the new 'Carbon Print' ?

But am I just being a curmudgeon for thinking that calling an inkjet print a
'carbon print' is just a little disingenuous? There is a 100+ years of a
traditionally accepted meaning of the phrase 'carbon print', and to have
this term co-opted in the interest of avoiding 'calling a spade a spade'
just seems shameful...."

more:

 http://www.largeformatphotography.info/lfforum/thread.php?topic=496940