Digital BW, The Print

> ... I don't think we are ever going to see any inkjet technology
>that produces a print identical or even close to an air dried 
>silver fiber print.

I would expect that each medium will always have its unique look.  Some will
be closer than others.

As a B&W photographer, the more options I have for output, the better.  

I've obviously been a huge fan of the traditional air-dried silver print.  I
like the neutral tone and high dynamic range.  As a life-long visitor to the
areas where A. Adams made many of his great photos, I've always had a great
love for the subject matter as well as the craft and artistry of his work. 

The air-dried, glossy, fiber-based paper surface has been widely accepted as
a good compromise between the mirror-like glossy prints with their
distracting reflections and matte prints that, especially when viewed with
good cross lighting, can suffer a dmax/dynamic-range disadvantage.

I, personally, don't like the process of matting & framing, nor the look of
prints behind glass.  Glazing too often results in reflections that rob
dynamic range and are distracting, similar to a real glossy print surface.
The gelatin coating of the silver print, however, seems too delicate and not
sufficiently cleanable to leave un-protected.  Whether spraying a protective
coating is less of a hassle than framing is an open question.

The use of a "barrier-paper" to protect the pigments has appeal.  Between a
barrier at the back of the pigments and a tough barrier that is sprayed on
the front, I think I can get a good encapsulation of the image-forming
pigments.  It's possible that encapsulated carbon could be better than
carbon-on-cotton in terms of protecting the image from damage, including
from moisture, air pollution, and oxidizing gasses.  Moisture seems to be a
major factor in fading, for example.

What I have been and will continue to pursue, among other things, is a way
to get a high-dynamic-range, durable, long-lived B&W medium that allows me
to easily and safely display my photos without glass -- maybe not a Holy
Grail, but a worthwhile goal.  Encapsulated carbon pigments may be a good
way to get there.

> The problem is that with a silver print your pigment, 
>the silver particles, are suspended in a transparent gelatin.

I think that is where my inkjet display experiments are leading me also.

A few months ago I thought some of the nicest inkjet prints for display that
satisfied my "wet paper towel" test (being washable) was the
polyurethane-coated, matte inkjet print.  Several of us were very enthused
about that process of using a wire-wound rod to apply the coating.  Other
priorities came along, however, and I was never successful at scaling the
system up to large prints.

Now I think some of the Epson barrier-papers (I hope to try the semi-matte
today), when coated with an appropriate spray might be an interesting option
to explore.  I'm impressed so far, but I don't want to say it's in the bag.


(Perhaps I should avoid the "RC" label.  It carries a lot of negative
baggage from the past, un-happy experiences some of us had with RC silver
prints.  Polyethylene (the barrier/resin) is, according to my chemist
brother, a large generic category within which there are many different
materials.  The past mixes may have little in common with the many modern
variations.  My reading suggests that some of these can be very tough and
durable materials.  To dismiss all barrier-papers as "RC" may be wrongly
disparaging them as inferior.  Wilhelm rates several Epson barrier-papers at
display and dark storage lives that are very good -- >200 years of dark
storage for both barrier-papers and cotton.)

On the other hand, traditionally-matted prints under glass/acrylic are where
the fine-art sales will probably be for a while.  (I just received a call
for the SLO gallery that one of mine sold.)  I'm not dropping
carbon-on-cotton.  

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com