19th Century Varnished Prints and Other Observations
2001-11-16 by Martin Wesley
This last weekend I had the great experience of participating in an all too short workshop at Stanford University. The workshop consisted of spending 4 hours in the basement of the Stanford Cantor Art Center for Visual Arts viewing a selection of photographs from their extensive permanent collect. Most of the prints were passed around the table and the participants got hold them in their own hands without any glass or plastic in the way. I can't quite describe the experience of seeing and holding prints made by Henry Fox Talbot in the 1840's! Cameron, Muybridge, Russell, Bresson, Frank, Nixon, and many others. A paper negative by Talbot and some of Muybridge's glass negatives. Among the prints were three 20 X 24" albumen contact prints from wet plate glass negatives by Lorent of the Acropolis in Athens done in the 1860's. These had been varnished. While it is impossible to know by inspection what was used for a varnish it is certainly based on a natural resin and is likely a Demarr varnish. None of the prints showed any cracking or decay of the varnish. The prints had a strong yellow tint to them that I believe is a result of the yellowing of the varnish. They were no more yellowed than silver gelatin prints of the 1920's by Adams and others. Given that these varnish prints have withstood the test of 140 years, I feel much more comfortable from an archival point of view that the use of modern varnishes on inkjet prints will not be detrimental and would most likely increase the life expectancy of the prints. Overall the very old prints were doing well except for the paper. In many cases the image appeared to be just fine but the paper underneath was disintegrating. Something to keep in mind when selecting papers for printing. Those pH pens are of value and the papers that test well with the pens will stand the test of time better than those that do not. There is an opportunity to use papers with inkjet printing that are more durable than the paper used for silver fiber. Due to wet processing silver prints cannot be buffered with an alkaline reserve. Image permanence aside, a nice piece of Hahnemule or Crane paper will outlast the paper substrate of Ilford fiber. From a conservation point of view what was brought up was exposure to light. These pieces are only rarely displayed and the amount of time they are out of dark storage is tracked. The understanding is clearly that the life of the prints in not forever and that the goal is simply to extend it as long as possible. None of these will last forever and light is their enemy. The light issue was reinforced two days later when I visited the "Ansel Adams at 100" show at the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art. In this show and in the show of photographs from the SFMOMA permanent collection, all the prints were rather dimly lit. Halogen lighting was the only light source and the fixtures appeared to have UV filters. So dim the pictures were a bit difficult to see. So print light and, if you are dealing with metamerism, opt for the solution that looks good under halogen and tungsten light. Keep your prints away from bright lights with high UV content. Seeing all of these photographs from different eras and then getting the last print exchange prints makes me realize that the inkjet prints would have held their own in this array of prints. If you took Bill Morse's wonderful print (MIS VM on EAM) of his grandfather's 1915 negative and laid it on the table amongst photographs from that era it would be completely at home and fitting. While ink jet prints may look jarring in comparison to modern silver prints, against the full history of photography they are right at home and do not stand out as something particularly different. Digital did come up during the workshop. Joel Leivick was the instructor. He is a professor of photography at Stanford and at one time the curator of the Cantor Museum's photography collection. Joel has a show at the Scott Nichols Gallery in San Francisco, which includes a panorama that he created in Photoshop from three 4x5 negatives. He had it professionally printed quite large 24" by ?" with Piezo and declared Piezo to be very wonderful and that it would last a very long time. I hope to make it back to SF in the near future to take a look. So the lowly inkjet print is seeing acceptance by very high-end galleries and prestigious universities. Good news. It is possible to view photographs in the Cantor's collection if you contact the museum and make arrangements in advance. http://www.stanford.edu/dept/ccva/ Might be a good place for a SF Bay Area digital B&W meeting some time. Compare our prints to the great masters! Martin Wesley