Digital BW, The Print

Roger,

You may be misunderstanding.

Wilhelm only is making predictions of light stability - not paper
archival qualities. This particular paper should never be used for
anything which you wish to be archival or last a very long time. The
presence of Acid is the most defeating issue in regards to this
subject (Archival). These are commercial grade papers, not fine art grade.

Paul was just pointing out the prediction of ink fade on them to you.

Unfortunately, Wilhelm is not equipped to nor does he make predictions
on how long the actual media might last. Fortunately, there is
centuries of data available and there is no doubt that papers with
acidic content will yellow and deteriorate in time - sometimes as soon
as 3 years.

Also there is a very sobering read for those using color inks or color
inks which also include multi-level blacks to print black&white - that
read is about the failure of the current Wilhelm ratings to pick up
fade in near neutrals etc... The article is actually by Wilhelm himself:

www.wilhelm-research.com/istar/WIR_IST_2007_09_HW_DS.pdf 

Fortunately he has proposed a new standard which is now open to the
public. New fade prediction facilities which can handle the larger
targets (more than 300 patches should be tested rather than less than
12) are beginning to surface! I bought an Atlas and am now testing
these materials with the new i*metric to see how close or how far they
are from the original Wilhelm predictions. I am also using a more
realistic light source (sunlight filtered through glass instead of
fluorescent.)

But try not to confuse "Archival" and "Light Stability" as they are
two different subjects all together. Think of a sheet cake. You can
print on one actually with Epson K3 inks. (don't ask, but you actually
can...)  You could test to see how long before that ink might fade...
 But certainly you know the cake will eventually rot - and these two
life ratings are mutually exclusive of each other. The cake is
obvious, but unfortunately acid paper is not when respected
institutions make ink light stability predictions on them. Its like
turning back all the archival education done in the 1970s...

Paper with an acidic content should never be used for fine art or for
photography which is intended to have a long life. While it is
possible to limit the exposure of light to a work of art made with
fugitive inks and preserve it well into the future, you can not
prevent a paper that is self-destructing from self-destructing. Sheets
with acidic surfaces or bases will eventually yellow and then  their
structures will begin to decay. 

There is no use printing with pigment inks on such an inferior support
base! Spend your money on acid-free papers, and use these commercial
grades for just proofing.

regards,

Jon Cone



--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Roger"
<rsmith02@...> wrote:
>
> Thanks.  It's odd that luster does so much better than Epson
semi-matte.  
> 
> It's too bad, too- I don't really like the luster surface- to me it
> looks "wet" with the K3 inks.  I much prefer Epson premium semi-matte,
> Harman FB Al, Innova white semi-matte 300, etc.
> 
> Roger
>  
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "pr_roark"
> <pr_roark@> wrote:
> >
> > >...
> > > Epson Premium Luster: acidic surface, basic base
> > ...
> > 
> > Take a look at the B&W ratings Wilhelm gives Epson Premium Luster in 
> > his latest tests, for example 
> > http://www.wilhelm-research.com/epson/11880.html 
> > 
> > The B&W display for Premium Luster -- bare bulb (no glass) -- is >315 
> > years.  Nothing else is close for that bare bulb category.  (Color is 
> > 45 years for that paper bare bulb.)
> > 
> > Paul
> > www.PaulRoark.com
> >
>