Digital BW, The Print

That is exactly right. HW did many tests, especially 4 or 5 years ago
that a lot of people didn't like, including the big outfits, Epson,
Hp, Kodak, and a lot of the smaller ones, Lyson, Media Street, Mis,
etc. Can you imagine how many heated discussions went on. Some of
their products faired well, others failed miserabley.

As far as other factors affecting the life of an inkjet print, apart
from uv, Wilhelm's published info was the first I read on the subjet.
He was the first person that I was aware of who made a public issue of
the problems of ozone, and other airborne substances being as much or
more of a threat to inkjet longevity than blue light. The first Epson
glossy media did well in light tests but quickly had detorioraton
problems anyway. That was a big shock to all of em. It takes a lot of
time to do those tests correctly and in good faith. We're all learning
a step at a time. 

These days the thing that I wonder the most about is media. That is a
hard one to crack. When a new paper comes along there is so much we
don't know, such as what is in the paper during production and
probably more importanly, what is in the coatings. That is a hard
thing to deconstruct. Everything is evolving so rapidly.

John





> As far as I know, he has never produced a test for a client that they
> didn't like.

I do not know whether his sympathy covers his customer base
only and entirely but if you mean that he didn't test for
small companies you are wrong. John Nollendorfs had his
Lincoln Inks tested, Mediastreet had their Generation Enhanced
tested, Lyson had their Fotonic and Lysonic ink tested and the
result wasn't favorable for the biggest of the three. That it
is expensive to have a test done is another matter.