Digital BW, The Print

>... going through the Wilhelm site to compare glossy ...

>On Paul Roark's pages for the R220 UT-R2 he listed Epson 
>Premium Semigloss as the most archival paper with 
>no uv-brighteners, but under the K3 printers on 
>Wilhelm's site, the Semigloss doesn't seem to do as 
>well as luster and Epson Premium Glossy and apparently 
>does have brighteners.

See http://www.wilhelm-research.com/epson/R2400.html, where the Semigloss is
listed as having no UV Brighteners.  (No lightfastness figures are given.)

Most of the k3 printer tests list only the Semi-MATTE paper.  That is a
different paper and does have brighteners.  It is available in rolls and is
what I do sometimes use on my 7500 because of that and the semi-matte finish
I prefer.

I did not do any relative fade tests for the different Epson Premium Glossy,
Semigloss, Luster, and Semimatte papers as far as I can remember.  My
comment probably related to the fact that they were among the few glossy
papers at the time of that I worked with that printer that had buffered
paper, as opposed to acidic paper that can be expected to yellow in 30
years.

Wilhelm's tests typically give Premium Glossy excellent ratings.  I just
don't like the glossy surface or bronzing.  I don't believe I listed this or
the UPGPP as not having brighteners.  They clearly do.  By the way, the
brighteners do not seem to shorten the lives of these paper in Wilhelm
tests.  Brighteners are generally dyes that will fade rather quickly and
give the appearance of yellowing the paper.  That is one reason I'm not
enthusiastic about them.  The market clearly likes them, however, as they do
make the print appear to be brighter and have a higher dynamic range.

I do not have any fade data on the newer glossy papers like Crane Silver
Rag.  However, they do have good, buffered paper bases.  I expect them to be
very good.  

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com