Digital BW, The Print

I use commercial spray fixatives to help the pigments stick on the paper and
make them more resistant to scuffing.  It really seems to work well.  (Some
one asked about these recently, but I forgot who -- sorry.)

My interest in these sprays is due, in part, the de facto endorsement of the
products by Ross Merrill, Chief of Conservation at the U.S. National Gallery
of Art (at least in 1997) in Washington D.C.  In a 1997 speech regarding
pastel conservation he said as follows regarding fixatives:

"Today there are a number of alternatives. Krylon Acrylic Varnish B72 is
used by conservators. This product will remain unchanged for 400 years, but
does have a tendency to saturate the surface. Grumbacher B77 varnish or
"tough film" is the same as B72, but will not saturate. Krylon workable
fixative and Sennelier fixative are both good products. One should stay away
from Grumbacher's "blue label" fixative." See
<http://www.bmi.net/knapp/iapsmerrill.html>

He was basically saying that any pastel that was bought by a museum would be
sprayed with one of these fixatives to avoid the pastel from being damaged.
It occurred to me the our pigments may not be much different.

Rolm & Haas's Paraloid B72 is very well accepted in the conservation and
preservation industry.  It has apparently been used by major world galleries
to coat old masters for about 40 years with good success.  The only spray
version of it that seems to be available now is Lascaux's Fixativ.  This is
a rather expensive and hard to find product.

The Krylon B72 is gone.  I suspect when the company was acquired, the new
parent decided to stop paying royalties and came out with it's own
formula -- the Krylon Kamar.  This is supposed to be archival and
non-yellowing, but Krylon will not give any specific information.  So ...

I recently found that the Grumbacher B77, know as "Tuffilm" is readily
available at art stores and fairly cheap.  So, I'm going to try this product
next.

With these products my goal is to have no visible change in the print.
Three very light coats may be all that can be done before the dynamic range
actually starts to decrease.  So, these products are not for getting a
better dmax.  Also, don't expect a washable surface.  They are still
sensitive.  However, the snapshots that have been had fingers all over them
and been of the refrigerator for months still look perfect.  So, the
toughness of the surface has clearly been improved.

Paul
http://www.PaulRoark.com

Paul-

At the risk of getting flamed from others, I'd have to disagree.
Pastels are chalk, layed down without an agent (liquid), so are
necessarily more delicate.  

Having worked with conservators (in a prior life) I can understand how
they would want to spray pastels. But, transposing that official
okee-dokee to inkjets, well, I don't see the stretch.

My argument has never been with spraying, but adding ANY encapsulation
other than glass or Mylar that could stress fracture over years.

A couple of questions for the testers:

1. Color shifts.  Not only when initially applied, but after some
sunlight testing.

2. How long before it stops giving off volatiles? Weeks, months, ever?
(There are tests like that on paints and how they affect photographs)

Not argumentative; just inquisitive.

Seth

=My interest in these sprays is due, in part, the de facto 
=endorsement of the products by Ross Merrill, Chief of 
=Conservation at the U.S. National Gallery of Art (at least in 
=1997) in Washington D.C.  In a 1997 speech regarding pastel 
=conservation he said as follows regarding fixatives:
=
="Today there are a number of alternatives. Krylon Acrylic 
=Varnish B72 is used by conservators. This product will remain 
=unchanged for 400 years, but does have a tendency to saturate 
=the surface. Grumbacher B77 varnish or "tough film" is the 
=same as B72, but will not saturate. Krylon workable fixative 
=and Sennelier fixative are both good products. One should stay 
=away from Grumbacher's "blue label" fixative." See 
=<http://www.bmi.net/knapp/iapsmerrill.html>
=
=He was basically saying that any pastel that was bought by a 
=museum would be sprayed with one of these fixatives to avoid 
=the pastel from being damaged. It occurred to me the our

Seth,

>...Pastels are chalk, layed down without an agent (liquid),
>so are necessarily more delicate.

As I understand it, the pastels have a very weak binder.  I have no doubt
that our inkjet pigments are held to the paper better than pastels, but
still, I think the risk of physical abrasion is the weak point now for our
medium.  With the latest inks and papers (or those soon to be available),
lightfastness and longevity of the paper substrate are up to the point where
I doubt they will be serious issues any more.

In my old photo copying, what I see as the most serious problem is physical
damage, and these old albumen and silver prints were far more tolerant of
abrasion than our current matte carbon prints.

So, I think making our prints more able to take an occasional finger print,
etc. seems like a useful step.

>Having worked with conservators (in a prior life) I can understand how
>they would want to spray pastels. But, transposing that official
>okee-dokee to inkjets, well, I don't see the stretch.

I see no reason why the coatings that have a long life on pastels (and some
other media at the Tate) would have any shorter life on inkjet prints.

>My argument has never been with spraying, but adding ANY encapsulation
>other than glass or Mylar that could stress fracture over years.

I understand the feeling, but, realistically, most of our prints are not
going to stay under glass or mylar.  The light spraying I'm talking about is
invisible and, even if it develops some micro-cracking, I don't think it
would be visible.  Theoretically it's all removable by just dissolving the
coating.  (This is very unlike the polyurethane coatings some of us are
experimenting with.)

>A couple of questions for the testers:

>1. Color shifts.  Not only when initially applied, but after some
>sunlight testing.

I've fade tested sprayed prints in my fluorescent light fader, and there is
no yellowing of the sprays I've tested so far.  The Tate has apparently had
B72 on a painting for over 30 years with no yellowing.  I don't know where
the National Gallery got it's 400 year figure.  However, people have been
very wary of yellowing due to the old Dammar varnish yellowing.  So, it's an
issue that I'm sure the testers focused on.

>2. How long before it stops giving off volatiles? Weeks, months, ever?
>(There are tests like that on paints and how they affect photographs)

I don't know.  With my 3 light coats, with drying between coats, the print
seems to stop smelling in a reasonable time (a few days, maybe).  I don't
have specific information on this, however.

Paul
http://www.PaulRoark.com

____________________________________________

=My interest in these sprays is due, in part, the de facto
=endorsement of the products by Ross Merrill, Chief of
=Conservation at the U.S. National Gallery of Art (at least in
=1997) in Washington D.C.  In a 1997 speech regarding pastel
=conservation he said as follows regarding fixatives:
=
="Today there are a number of alternatives. Krylon Acrylic
=Varnish B72 is used by conservators. This product will remain
=unchanged for 400 years, but does have a tendency to saturate
=the surface. Grumbacher B77 varnish or "tough film" is the
=same as B72, but will not saturate. Krylon workable fixative
=and Sennelier fixative are both good products. One should stay
=away from Grumbacher's "blue label" fixative." See
=<http://www.bmi.net/knapp/iapsmerrill.html>
=
=He was basically saying that any pastel that was bought by a
=museum would be sprayed with one of these fixatives to avoid
=the pastel from being damaged. It occurred to me the our



Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and
other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint

If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to
unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same
page.

Please follow these basic guidelines:
- Include your full name with your message.
- Include the address of your website, if you have one.
- As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep
them short.
- As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
- Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or
&amp;amp;quot;flames.&amp;amp;quot;
- Complete your Yahoo profile.
- Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various
resources on the homepage.




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/