Digital BW, The Print

>...
> Are you experiencing the warm chocolate color shifting
>that I found?  I've also been using the VM set.

My tests show that the original vm inks warmed about 8 of 256 units with
light exposure.  This is similar to or less than what the other pigmented
quads did at the time.  That was why the "nc" curve was 4/256 cool.  That
amount of off-neutral tone looks OK when isolated.  However, when hanging
next to each other, it is noticeable.

My need for a neutral quad that did not warm-shift is what caused me to make
the FS-N formula.  This was the first non-warming B&W inkset.
(Additionally, the VM-S uses the FS-N inks.)  Also, now the new PiezoTone
midtones (definitely not the original PiezoTone black) are non-warming.

For some of us, the non-warming is important.  When in close proximity, the
warming of prints is the most obvious defect that one sees in these
products.  In my view it exaggerates the fading that will happen and reduces
the perceived quality of our prints.

Warming is seen as deterioration, but there appears to be an irony in this.
The warming is probably mostly the formation of a layer of broken colorant
molecules on the surface of the pigment particle.  This layer appears to
actually protect the pigment from further damage -- similar to the
protection that a layer of oxidized aluminum or iron gives to the underlying
metal.  In my tests the rate of fading decreases after the warming has taken
place.

Paul
http://www.PaulRoark.com

----- Paul Roark wrote: -----
> My need for a neutral quad that did not warm-shift is what caused me to 
make
> the FS-N formula.  This was the first non-warming B&W inkset.

Having never seen the FS and FS-N inksets side-by-side, what I'm wondering 
is exactly how warm the FS inkset is -- both initially following printing, and 
then after fading/warming has taken place. Can anyone tell me? And how 
long does that warming process take, by the way?

I happen to like the warm look of a selenium-toned or platinum print, but I 
certainly wouldn't want to sell someone a print that was going to start fading 
like a comfortable pair of jeans within, say, 5 or 10 years (behind glass, away 
from direct sunlight). So because I like a warmer print, my only reasons for 
considering FS-N would be if it truly is a more stable inkset. Also, if regular FS 
appears more brownish than selenium tone, I might choose FS-N if it provides 
a more traditional-photograph-like appearance in comparison to FS.

Any thoughts/guidance on this? And does anybody in or near Seattle have 
prints from these 2 inksets that I might be able to take a look at?

> For some of us, the non-warming is important.  When in close proximity, the
> warming of prints is the most obvious defect that one sees in these
> products.  In my view it exaggerates the fading that will happen and reduces
> the perceived quality of our prints.
> 
> Warming is seen as deterioration, but there appears to be an irony in this.
> The warming is probably mostly the formation of a layer of broken colorant
> molecules on the surface of the pigment particle.  This layer appears to
> actually protect the pigment from further damage -- similar to the
> protection that a layer of oxidized aluminum or iron gives to the underlying
> metal.  In my tests the rate of fading decreases after the warming has taken
> place.

That's interesting, but I'd hate to have to try and explain that to someone if 
they'd actually paid me for a print and were wondering why it looked like was 
disappearing ... !

I suppose that means that FS-N is really my only option then? I'm not using 
the Piezography/R9 software, by the way. (At least not yet.)

Thanks,
Peter