Digital BW, The Print

Mark,

Now don't go assuming things. It was a statement to everyone I see 
agonizing over this issue, which is one that needs discussion. That 
wasn't a suggestion to stop, just me sticking in my 2 cents.

In looking at it all, there is simply little hard data with inkjet at 
this time. We do have some information though. We know that Epson's 
(or any other company) initial color dye ink jet prints don't last 
long which has lead to the poor reputation of inkjet. I think there 
are sound reasons to pick pigment inks over dye inks in both color 
and B&W. It would seem prudent to use quality acid free papers with 
little or no optical brighteners.

B&W carbon pigment prints will warm shift to some degree depending 
upon the paper used. The speed of the shift is proportional to 
exposure to light but some shifting occurs in the dark. If exposed to 
intense light the prints fade. From Paul Roark's comparison test 
Piezo and MIS fade to the same point and then the fading slows down. 
The Piezo reaches this point sooner than MIS.

Coating the prints slows the fade by 50%. Even just using one of the 
aerosol sprays.

My own opinion is that if the prints are treated like we would a fine 
silver fiber print, these B&W inkjet prints should be good for many 
decades. But I cannot be sure. As you say I am whistling in the dark 
here with all finger crossed. The risks are big but inkjet seems so 
compelling people seem willing to accept it.

So you either have to continue with inkjet, live with that 
uncertainty and relax; continue with inkjet, live with that 
uncertainty and driver yourself totally nuts with worry or work in 
another print medium. A harsh assessment but that seems to sum up the 
situation and options at the moment. Whatever we do we need to have 
some peace of mind.

The other think to remember is that this is the situation today. Next 
year or the year after or somewhere down the line the whole archival 
issue of inkjet may be solved. Not much help at the moment other than 
to realize that the current situation is temporary. Either the inkjet 
problems will be solved or improved or some other technology will 
supplant it.

Considering anyone who is attempting to make it as a "fine arts" B&W 
photographer and printer, I would think that working in both silver 
and inkjet would be the way to go. Breaking into this is hard enough 
without championing a new medium at the same time. Not that it 
couldn't be done, but you would need to be very positive about it. 

Random thoughts here for a situation that simply doesn't have many 
satisfying answers.

Martin


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "Mark Tucker" <mark@m...> 
wrote:
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "Steadman Uhlich" 
> <steadmanuhlich@k...> wrote:
> >   I cannot think of a better way to "warranty" the image/print 
than 
> to offer to replace it if needed.  That is standing behind your 
work.  
> I see nothing "cheap suit" about that.
> 
> 
> Steadman,
> 
> Just to be clear, I would certainly make another print for 
> someone if their print faded. No question about that. That would 
> be automatic.
> 
> But my point was that it just seems so shaky to sell someone a 
> print that you know is "iffy" right out of the gate. Even when a 
> used car salesman tells me that a car will probably need brakes 
> soon, I'm still a bit miffed when they go out so quickly. And even 
if 
> he fixed the brakes for free, I've still gotta carry the car back 
over 
> to him, wait around, yada yada.
> 
> I agree with most people who've responded that it's not perfect 
> now, nor will it probably be perfect in the near future. All I'm 
trying 
> to do is find the VERY best solution that exists today, and to try 
to 
> have some hard evidence to back up my decision. And then to 
> pick that and get to work.
> 
> In addition, until I get some degree of certainty about about a 
> lifespan of these prints, the prices I charge for these will remain 
> very low. I just couldn't feel good about putting this type of 
print 
> alongside an archivally-processed B/W silver print.
> 
> I'm sorry if I've belabored this point. I assume that Martin's 
> comment in Message 4152 is directed toward me. If so, I'll be on 
> my way. I'm just shocked that more people aren't concerned with 
> this issue. It's one of the main reasons that inkjet prints can get 
> NO respect in the gallery world. I personally think there's a good 
> bit of "The Emperor's Clothes" going on with inkjet; everybody's 
> just printing away, thinking everything's fine and good, but 
> nobody knows FOR SURE about the behavior of their materials, 
> and the town's citizens snicker a bit when they walk by the 
> window of the inkjet print shop. Conversation overheard on the 
> sidewalk: "Are you in line to buy a print?" "No, I'm 
> in the line to have mine remade..."