Digital BW, The Print

>My prints, UT-FS ink on Photo Rag, get a lot warmer 
>after some weeks or months, ...

This debate on inkjet stability has both real and imagined issues, in my
view.  

Among the real issues is the warming of prints.  This is the first thing
most people see, but it is very paper specific.  The burning out of the OBAs
can happen quickly, though some are apparently much better than others.  I
think, however, most OBAs are dyes that will "fade" as quickly as we are
accustomed to dyes fading.  When they fade, the image will appear to warm as
the paper warms.

I think there are probably other aspects of tone changes that relate to
other aspects of the paper and probably mostly its coating.  I don't pretend
to know all the factors here. 

However, I prefer papers with no OBAs.  I use Premier Art 205 a lot due not
only to its good price but also because Epson claims it's version is its
most archival paper, and that also appears evident in my fade tests.  For
example, in a fade test of UT7, which has the same pigs in it as the UT-FS,
after what would be approximately 13 Wilhelm years the 50% neutral patch
showed only a 0.75% density change.  Lab A decreased only 0.13 and Lab B
increased only 0.07 units.  The tone changes on EEM were dramatically more:
Lab A -0.95, Lab B + 2.57.  (Note that the Lab B changes slow dramatically
after all the OBAs are burned out.)

So, in my tests, the paper makes a huge difference.  I, unfortunately, do
not have the information (or time to develop it) as to which papers cause
what tone changes.  And, my tests would not be accepted by the people we
need to convince.  So, I rely on Epson (as well as my own tests of PA 205).


In addition to these real concerns, which can be accelerated many times with
humidity, heat, UV exposure, and airborne oxidizers, we still face what I
think is a partially emotional bias in the larger art field.  Walker noted
on Monday that he knew of 3 galleries that refuse inkjets.  The co-op
gallery I'm in and president of had to waive its rules limiting
photographers and digital prints to get me in.  In the New York Times on
June 5, 2007, (web article at
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/05/technology/circuits/05print.html?ex=133869
6000&en=dc4cfd74a33153d1&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss )  there was an
article entitled, "It Isn't That Images Fade, It's That They Can Vanish."
This article included statements that, "traditional color prints have an
advantage over inkjet prints." And, "Conventional black-and-white prints,
which are made up of tiny grains of silver, remain the undisputed longevity
champions."  Implicitly and explicitly, inkjet prints were given second
class treatment.

In short, there is still a negative perception of our favored output among
many.  Some of it is based on real fact, but some of it is based on what I
think is simple prejudice.  In my gallery, for example, a digital
photographer who managed to get in is our Featured Artist this month.  He's
doing very well, selling among other things huge 9800 color prints of Canon
DSLR close-ups of grapes for $750.  (The link at the bottom of
http://www.gallerylosolivos.com/ gets to some of John's work but not the
color work that is selling the best.)  The reaction of the watercolor and
other (non-photo) artists is along the lines of "it's not fair -- it's too
easy for him ..."  I see this as a prejudice based in part of simple
jealousy, but I'm not going to get into it with them.

So, I think we still have both real and public relations issues that hurt us
in at least some markets -- and markets that I'm interested in.  We can do
something about some of the real issues, but the PR issues are going to take
time.  

What I'm doing with the 100% carbon printing is actually aimed at both the
real and PR issues.  I think I can make an incremental improvement in the
already very good materials, but I also think the approach can help with the
perception issue.  We'll see.  I hope that my attempts along these lines are
not seen as disparagement of the other very good materials that are already
out there.  My fade tests show the current MIS, Piezo, and UC inks
(particularly when sprayed with Print Shield and when excess color is
eliminated) to be very close.  (The UC inks appear to be more sensitive to
UV, but the Epson magenta is the best I've tested.)

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com