Digital BW, The Print

> But did those prints suffer to the same extent from surface
artifacts that the newer 
> technology prints do? 

No. I think paper choice in "new technology" results in prints with
surfaces as abrasion resistant as traditional papers. However unlike
photo papers, most inkjet papers are more absorbant at the surface...
some kind of protection might make sense for that reason. 

Photo papers have never (I think) been sprayed to create blacker blacks. 

Few ever coated traditional photo paper, many sprayed color
paper...mostly to cover retouching...most big, traditional studio
color portraits have been retouched. 

Paintings in museums are/were commonly waxed by curators. I doubt they
ever wax photos. 

HP Designjet prints would seem to absolutely require some sort of
coating to prevent water damage. Epson pigment prints don't run readily. 

In other words was the motivation to solve the problems associated 
> with coating as great as it is now? How about painters? Why can't we
treat things a little 
> more like they do in terms of prep and coatings?
> 
> Dave L.