Digital BW, The Print

It's about time Epson stopped mentioning Wilhelm. 

There's no basis in anybody's experience that Wilhelm's info is
meaningful, which properly puts Epson and any photographer who has
used Wilhelm's "archival" numbers at serious litigation risk.

Might be nice for Epson to pay Wilhelm to get out of the business and
start themselves to take responsibility for such research, but just as
with photographers, it'd be stupid of Epson to keep claiming "x"
number of years.

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com,
"scott_now_coming" <scott_now_coming@...> wrote:
>
> Looks to me like Epson may have broken their ties with Wilhelm 
> Reasearch.
> 
> Check out this footnote from the dpreview article:
> 
> 
> 
> * Phenomenon where one colour looks different under different light 
> sources
> ** Light source: Fluorescent light, Intensity: 70,000 lux. 
> Temperature : 24¡æ, Humidity : 60% RH
> Glass mount: 2mm, soda lime. Fade criteria: Pure YMC 30% Loss at OD=.
> Display-life Calculation: Total illuminance/(500 lux x 10 hours x 365 
> days = 1 year).
> The data is calculated using Epson's accelerated test and does not 
> mean Epson guarantees lightfastness.
> Tests developed and conducted by Epson.
> *** Standard ISO Bike image 11x14" used
>  
> --------------------------------------------
> 
> Also, nothing on the Wilhelm site that I could find, mentionin g this 
> new printer.
> 
> Interesting...
> 
> Scott
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Andre Moreau" 
> <andre1moreau@> wrote:
> >
> > There is a Santa Claus and he's early!
> > 
> > http://www.dpreview.com/news/0710/07100401epsonr1900.asp
> > 
> > Cheers,
> > Andr¨¦
> >
>