Digital BW, The Print

even with family snap shots, years down the road your children may 
care about the photos you take now and if you pay some attention to 
Wilhelm predictions etc. your family photos will have a better chance 
of surviving than if you go with a ink/paper combination known to be 
less stable.  With regards to the HP 7760/7660 printers, Wilhelm 
gives a predicted life of 100+ years for b&w on HP Premium Plus 
Glossy paper and less for other papers.  Sure, you can save a few 
dollars printing on some 3rd party paper, but you are starting out 
with a predicted print life that is about 70% shorter, so why 
bother?  It's gotta be worse, right?  I'm not saying freak out over 
archival stability, but if there is an easy option for getting more 
stable prints you'd have to be crazy not to use it, at least in my 
mind... I mean you spend all this money on equipment and spend all 
kinds of time on you photography, so why shrug your shoulders and 
think, "who cares if it fades in a few months?"

I also sell some of my prints, so I have to feel that I am doing my 
best to provide a quality product... even if I'm ultimately not going 
to be the next so-and-so.

mark    

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "D. Hill" 
<hill14701@y...> wrote:
> The problem with EEM is that the paper will yellow as
> the OBA's burn off, not fade.  If you were to try a
> matte paper a good test would be Epson's Heavyweight
> Matte, as it is a more robust paper than EEM without
> such severe burn-off or yellowing.
> 
> The problem with inkjet printing is that we are still
> in the medium's infancy - or at least the terrible
> two's.  Take an "archival" ink and print it on an
> untested base or a paper not matched by the inks
> manufacturer, and usually the results will be quite
> bad.
> 
> For some reason, hobby printers have rallied for
> accurate proof or level of archival output.  That in
> and of itself is a misnomer, as archival deals with
> storage conditions and not long term display. 
> Consider that Cibachrome/Ilfochrome prints that were
> once believed to be the pinnacle of archival color
> methods.  Most tests have given that specific paper a
> 29 year fade rating.  This fade rating is exactly what
> is achieved with Epson dye inks printed on Epson's
> Colorlife paper.
> 
> Every print made is not going to be on long term
> display.  Also, all prints hanging on the wall are not
> under fade test lights; so how reliable are the
> independent longevity ratings?  A friend that I shoot
> weddings with had a customer return an extremely faded
> print, made on Premium Glossy Photo Paper from the
> Epson 1280.  The excessive orange fade gave it a 70's
> Kodak color print vibe, and was returned 3 months
> after printing (it was hung with direct sun exposure).
>  I have a print that was made immediately after that
> one, on the same batch of paper from the same
> printer/ink.  It has been stored in a notebook and is
> still as vibrant as the day it was printed in May
> 2000.  The point being that non-ideal dark storage
> adds considerable longevity even to volatile or
> fugitive materials without spray or sleeving.
> 
> Statistically, everyone on this list is not the next
> Ralph Eugene Meatyard and will not be discovered after
> their death; so lighten up about archival ratings. 
> Make prints to the best of your ability, and store
> them under ideal conditions; sleeved or sprayed if
> possible.  They will last and your family will be able
> to enjoy them.  Besides, your prints are like your
> children - nobody cares about them but you.
> 
> Don
> 
> --- Mark Hahn <markhahn2000@y...> wrote:
> > I've read that it gives pleasant warm tone prints,
> > but I've never 
> > tried it because anything you print on EEM with the
> > printer will not 
> > last... and I don't like wasting time making prints
> > that I *know* are 
> > going to fade within my life time.
> > 
> > mark
> > 
> > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com,
> > "lancscott" 
> > <lancscott@y...> wrote:
> > > Anyone using EEM with HP 9760.  What are the
> > reults like?
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> 		
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we.
> http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail