Digital BW, The Print

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "paulmwhiting" <paulmwhiting@...> wrote:

> I want to underline how valuable I think your work is. As I said above I had contacted the National Register of Historic Places and they accepted my Eboni 3MK on PremierArt paper as meeting their standards. 

Thanks so much for joining the AaI&A digital print research program. Please consider submitting a test sample of the R1800/Eboni 3MK on your PremierArt Paper. Paper choice can make a difference, and your PremierArt paper as I recall is OBA-free as compared to the HN photorag sample with Eboni 3MK now in test, so it deserves its own test.  Then we will also have an exact data set to bolster acceptance of this print process with institutions like the Nation Register of Historic Places. You will find both color and monochrome test targets (obviously you only need to print the monochrome target) in the testing.zip folder available to members at the AaI&A website on the "test results" page.

> I never thought I'd hear myself saying this but I now believe these Eboni carbon prints are more archival than the darkroom prints. Your work will strengthen my case as I work with architects and preservation groups. Thanks for your good work!

Agreed, traditional silver gelatin prints, especially when selenium, gold, or brown toned, are considered to be exceptionally lightfast, but ironically no one that I Know of has ever run a light fastness confirming test on them! Even if they are totally light fast, the usual image discoloration methods occurring in only a few decades are related to lack of thoroughness in "archival" processing procedures. Hence, full carbon inkjet prints have a very good chance of statistically outperforming. History will be the final arbitrar, but so far so good in my accelerated light fade tests for the R1800/ Eboni 3MK system!

Thanks again for joining my research team.

Mark
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com
> 
> Paul
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Mark" <mark@> wrote:
> >
> > 
> > 
> > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "tboleyyh" <tyler@> wrote:
> > 
> > > Didn't mean to step on your question to Paul, but had some thoughts.. I hope he jumps in.
> > > Tyler
> > >
> > 
> > Oh boy, Tyler, you issued an invitation of sorts? Here's my story in a nutshell. I have been doing image permanence research for over 20 years. I love doing this kind of research because I love the history, science, and art of photography. I'm recognized in the museums and archives community as one of the "experts" in the field though I don't much like the term because I will never run out of new things to learn. My expertise in print permanence testing came through the conservation science and museum & archives community, only partly from my involvement directly with the imaging industry. I'm also an avid amateur photographer and printmaker for over 40 years. And yes, I know Henry Wilhelm very well.  I count him as a good friend, and we have collaborated on many research projects over the years including the development of the I* metric.  
> > 
> > All that said, I concluded in 2005 that in the long run, the only way to test the many interesting inkjet combinations that we as printmakers want to try, is to take control of the testing process ourselves.  Remove the manufacturers' direct underwriting of the testing and just do it ourselves.  I have establishied AaI&A to this purpose and also to conduct new real-world studies of modern digital prints as well. I have also adopted the latest and best test methods since I have no legacy issues, political or otherwise to contend with. Companies and institutions are also welcome to participate by sponsoring group memberships rather than actual tests, but they can't control what the total membership elects to test, so the testing will always remain truly independent.  
> > 
> > Essentially, the AaI&A business model relies on end-users to fund the research. It's a "consumer reports" type of model rather than a "laboratory testing services" type of business model. I've seeded the AaI&A program with my knowledge, labor, and personal capital for over three years now, but very soon some solid end-user support is going to have to kick in or I will have to finally conclude that printmakers, for whatever reasons, really aren't that interested in image permanence testing anymore.  Perhaps the vast majority don't care or perhaps they simply feel that the issues have already been resolved to their satisfaction, or perhaps they feel it's still the vendor's responsibility to provide this information for free (well, you can see the limitations on how that works already). However, careful examination of the AaI&A light fade test results to date reveals that there is still much to understand about these new technologies, hence I press on.
> > 
> > So, there you have it. This group in particular has good reason to support testing of unique product combinations.  At the present time less than 1/10th of 1 percent of you are members, and if I can't ultimately win this group's support at much higher levels than that, then it's pretty unlikely that others would feel any more strongly about my research.
> > 
> > kind regards,
> > 
> > Mark
> > http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com
> >
>