Digital BW, The Print

Hello All,

While buying matting supplies online at Dick Blick (excellent prices and service, BTW), I stumbled on a Krylon spray product which claims to de-acidify anything on which it's sprayed.  Hmmm... maybe this would make cheap Epson Photo Paper more archival?  Comments, Paul?

See it here: http://www.dickblick.com/zz128/96/products.asp?param=0&ig_id=4427

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I went and looked at this product at the site you mention below.  Quite 
interesting.  I copied a portion of the ad:

> One application instantly neutralizes acid by raising the paper's pH 
> level, preventing brittleness and deterioration.

So, this is operating by putting an alkaline material into the paper.  
Neutralization occurs of the current acid radicals.  Perhaps there is 
some residual alkalinity to act as a future buffer.  However, the 
underlying cause of acidity in the paper remains and in time will 
produce more, eventually overcoming the buffering abilities of this 
spray.  Therefore a respray will be needed if you could figure out when 
to do it and still had access to the paper.

We call this process buffering and it is not the way to go for 
permanence.  However, it will prolong the print/paper life.  If this is 
all you need then maybe it will work for you.

I think this product's widest appeal will be for those trying to 
preserve things like newsprint and lignin containing book papers.  I 
don't think that this product works like the old Wei'To sprays we used 
to be able to get.  That family of sprays and liquid deacidifiers 
actually left a strong amount of buffering materials in the paper.

But this is an interesting product and I would like to find out more 
about it.  Perhaps to Krylon will I go!

Mark MacKenzie


John Broski wrote:

> Hello All,
>
> While buying matting supplies online at Dick Blick (excellent prices 
> and service, BTW), I stumbled on a Krylon spray product which claims 
> to de-acidify anything on which it's sprayed.  Hmmm... maybe this 
> would make cheap Epson Photo Paper more archival?  Comments, Paul?
>
> See it here: 
> http://www.dickblick.com/zz128/96/products.asp?param=0&ig_id=4427 
> <http://www.dickblick.com/zz128/96/products.asp?param=0&ig_id=4427>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
-- 
Mark MacKenzie, M.A.C.
Art Conservator/
Past Ink Publishing
1628 Sommerfeld Ave.
Saskatoon, Sask.
S7H 2S6

email: mmackenzie(at)digitalheritage.ca
         mmackenzie(at)pastink.com

>...I stumbled on a Krylon spray product which claims to 
>de-acidify anything on which it's sprayed.  
>Hmmm... maybe this would make cheap Epson Photo Paper more archival?
>Comments, Paul?

>See it here: www.dickblick.com/zz128/96/products.asp?param=0&ig_id=4427

I have had the same thoughts.  Here is where I'm at with this approach:

I suspect the Krylon product is essentially a private label version or total
rip off of Preservation Technologies' spray.  See http://www.ptlp.com/  

That product, sold also as Bookkeeper, uses a micron-size suspension of
magnesium oxide (in some form) particles that act as a buffer.  When sprayed
on paper, they stay on the surface of the paper.  The good news is that they
will not soak through to the image and possibly yellow it.  The bad news is
that the buffer is further away from the acids in the paper.

Wei T'o is the competitor.  They make a magnesium oxide (speaking roughly)
buffer that is dissolved in a solvent.  As such, when it is sprayed on the
paper, it soaks in.  This gets the buffer closer to the problem, but in a
fade test of a treated matte paper the paper yellowed more than an untreated
control strip.

So, I don't think the buffer should be allowed to hit the surface -- image
side -- of the paper.  This makes the dissolved version inappropriate for
matte paper, and the solid particles sprayed on the back are probably not
much more effective than the use a buffered back matte board.

On the other hand, the dissolved, Wei T'o spray on RC paper may be useful.
The inkjet RC paper is just resin coated on the image side.  So, the back
paper is open to the spray.  The polyethylene barrier then protects the
image side.  The images look good in my fade tests.  (Buffering does not
stop the photo-sensitive lignin from yellowing with UV exposure.)

So, cheap, artifact-free Epson Glossy Photo paper might also be made a bit
more archival.  But I still would not trust it all that much.  If the paper
has a lot of lignin in it, it'll take a lot of the buffer to keep it in
check for very long.  Some might be better than none, however. 

If you want things to last, I recommend you stick with "carbon on cotton."

(Then there is this Hahnemuhle coating yellowing thing.  You'll recall I
made curves for Arches Hot Press on the 2200.  Me, I use UltraSmooth [which
is probably PremierArt Hot Press] or PermaJet Alpha for archival uses.  I
like a light spray of Lascaux for more protection.)

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Mark MacKenzie 
<mmackenzie@d...> wrote:

> So, this is operating by putting an alkaline material into the 
paper.  
> Neutralization occurs of the current acid radicals.  Perhaps there 
is 
> some residual alkalinity to act as a future buffer.  However, the 
> underlying cause of acidity in the paper remains and in time will 
> produce more, eventually overcoming the buffering abilities of this 
> spray.  Therefore a respray will be needed if you could figure out 
when 
> to do it and still had access to the paper.
> 
> We call this process buffering and it is not the way to go for 
> permanence. 

FIRST OF ALL:

A buffer and an alkaline are NOT the same thing.   An alkaline has 
excess hydroxides (OH)(usually) whereas an acid has excess H+ ions.  
(NB that (typically) combining the two yields HOH (water) plus 
whatever salt results.  (e.g., NaOH+HCl yields HOH + NaCl)   But a 
true buffer resists excess OH **or** excess H+.   For instance, 
CaCO3.  Buffers are never just an acid or a base; a buffer is a weak 
acid or base COMBINED with its conjugate salt.

SECOND:

We have not established that "acid" is even the main cause of paper 
discoloration or color shifts of the inks.   The purpose of the 
Krylon product is to prevent or slow down the deterioration of old 
newspaper or documents.    

I know I sound like a broken record - - - 

(Speaking of broken records, BOTH of my home town teams the Red Sox 
and the Patriots broke records this week.   Te Patriots broke the 
record for most regular season wins formerly held by the 1933-34 
Chicago Bears, and the Red Sox broke the record for most consecutiv 
wins in a playoff series)

 - - - ut we CANNOT talk intelligently on this subject if we don't 
understand the CHEMISTRY.

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Mark MacKenzie 
<mmackenzie@d...> wrote:
> So, this is operating by putting an alkaline material into the 
paper.  
> Neutralization occurs of the current acid radicals.  Perhaps there 
is 
> some residual alkalinity to act as a future buffer.  
. . . 
> We call this process buffering and it is not the way to go for 
> permanence. 

FIRST OF ALL:

A buffer and an alkaline are NOT the same thing.   An alkaline has 
excess hydroxides (OH)(usually) whereas an acid has excess H+ ions.  
(NB that (typically) combining the two yields HOH (water) plus 
whatever salt results.  (e.g., NaOH+HCl yields HOH + NaCl) )   But a 
true buffer resists excess OH  **or**  excess H+.  Buffers are never 
just an acid or a base; a buffer is a weak acid or base COMBINED with 
its conjugate salt.

SECOND:

We have not established that "acid" is even the main cause of paper 
discoloration or color shifts of the inks.   The purpose of the 
Krylon product is to prevent or slow down the deterioration of old 
newspaper or documents.    

I know I sound like a broken record - - - 

(Speaking of broken records, BOTH of my home town teams broke records 
this week.   The Patriots broke the record for most regular season 
wins formerly held by the 1933-34 Chicago Bears, and the Red Sox 
broke the record for most consecutive wins in a playoff series)

 - - - but we CANNOT talk intelligently on this subject if we don't 
understand the CHEMISTRY.

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Peter Nelson"
<pnweb@s...> wrote:
> 
> (Speaking of broken records, BOTH of my home town teams the Red Sox 
> and the Patriots broke records this week.   Te Patriots broke the 
> record for most regular season wins formerly held by the 1933-34 
> Chicago Bears, and the Red Sox broke the record for most consecutiv 
> wins in a playoff series)
> 
>  - - - ut we CANNOT talk intelligently on this subject if we don't 
> understand the CHEMISTRY.

So, what you are trying to say, if I'm reading this right, is that an
intelligent person understands that the Patriots and Sox performance
is due to chemicals?

And I thought we had enough problems at the Olympics this year.