Digital BW, The Print

No confusion.  Some are already using glop to get rid of bronzing.  Carl
Schofield, for example, already has a full set of glop curves for use with
his FSN/UT2 setup including a workaround for an OS-X issue.  But this is not
the same thing as protecting a print so that it doesn't need to sit behind
glass.  Print shield's primary use is for this.  But its application is a
hazardous affair with mixed results.  Hence my suggestion as to whether it
is possible to design a protective coating that can be laid down by a
printer rather than a spray.

If you want to use glop - just use the printer to put it down, pure and
simply. But you then still face the task of protecting the print.


> From: Chris Hargens <chargens@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 00:34:49 -0000
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Coating prints-why not?
> 
> 
> 
> The confusion here is my fault. I've been thinking about Print Shield
> mostly in terms of its ability to reduce/eliminate bronzing rather
> than what it does in protecting prints. For me, any protective
> coating for RC papers is probably not worth using if the bronzing
> problem is not addressed either through that coating or by some other
> means. For that reason I've been thinking about what might be the
> best way to apply glop -- if a spray application doesn't have
> problems with mottling, blotches, etc., then it may be the best route
> for someone, like me, who only owns a 2200 and doesn't want to go
> through the hazzle of filling and switching carts to coat. Again, as
> you point out Steve, this doesn't address the issue of protection. In
> this regard I suspect that carts loaded with nonwaterbased products
> with chemical properties similar to Printshield might damage the
> print head...just a feeling. That's why I'd be interested in hearing
> reviews of some of the other water-based inkjet coatings that are
> being used. 
> 
> Chris Hargens