Digital BW, The Print

>... Does anyone have recommendations for which
>varnishes/sprays are best for both (1)
>increasing Dmax and (2) archival permanence?

There are no 100% answers for these questions.  For Dmax increase, the best
luck I've had is the wire-rod application of water-based, gloss acrylic.
Liquitex and Golden are major suppliers to art stores, where you'll find the
products.  I have also now identified a polyurethane that is supposed to be
free from yellowing (Polyshield by Hydrocote).  Polyurethane may have some
advantages if it does not yellow, but most of the popular ones do yellow.

For archival permanence, don't use anything.  Conservators do not like any
coatings.  (Of course, they also don't like any inkjet products anyway, so
I'm not sure how much we lose by coating.)  Although I recently posted
excerpts from a speech by the National Gallery's Chief of Conservation that
indicated they fix pastels with Krylon acrylic spray (which the conservator
rated at 400 years), Krylon representatives do not have any public data that
supports that.  They make no claims of archival life for their products.
(The Krylon rep could not find any reference to the product number the
National Gallery person mentioned).

At this point, I'm not sure anything more than a light coat of Krylon
Crystal Clear for protection from physical damage is warranted -- and only
where the print is expected to be subject to such abuse.  It lowers the
dynamic range slightly but has no significant visual impact on the print.
In my mind, it is a good idea if the prints are not going to be under glass.
These inkjet pigments are easily marred.

The thicker coatings we are experimenting with must currently be considered
for artistic effect only.  What I hope we get to eventually is an
"encapsulated carbon print" that is so tough that it can be displayed
without glass and has stability that approaches the silver print.  Whether
we get there is an open question.  However, the coatings we have today are
so much tougher than the gelatin of a silver print, that I think there is
hope for a very interesting product.

Paul
http://www.PaulRoark.com

I just got my refill kit + ink from MIS--but the wrong ink! (I wanted FS; 
I got original quad). I think, but am not positive the error was 
theirs...I guess I'll get in touch on monday. Has anyone else had an 
experience like this with MIS, and if so, how did they deal with it.

thanks

mattMatt Haber
dance, portrait and fashion photography
http://www.matthaber.com

Matt,

> I just got my refill kit + ink from MIS--but the wrong ink! (I 
wanted FS; 
> I got original quad). I think, but am not positive the error was 
> theirs...I guess I'll get in touch on monday. Has anyone else had 
an 
> experience like this with MIS, and if so, how did they deal with it.
> 

Yes. When I ordered my VM inkset through their online ordering pages, 
they shipped me the standard Quadtone inks. I called them the 
following day and explained the problem. The lady that answers the 
phone there can be a little short BTW, however once they realized it 
was their mistake they shipped the VM inks that day and told me to 
keep the standard quads which I still have to this day.

All in all MIS gives pretty good service considering that they are a 
small outfit.

My 2 cents worth,

Don Bryant

> I just got my refill kit + ink from MIS--but the wrong ink! (I wanted FS;
> I got original quad). I think, but am not positive the error was
> theirs...I guess I'll get in touch on monday. Has anyone else had an
> experience like this with MIS, and if so, how did they deal with it.
> 
> thanks
> 
> mattMatt Haber

I would agree with the other responses. I have had one or two mistakes on
shipments and they were very gracious about making the corrections. As a
result I am very cautious about having plenty of ink in stock - I build in a
little extra time for possible re-shipments. But all in all I love the
product and the people have always been very nice and professional.

Wendel