Yahoo Groups archive

Digital BW, The Print

Index last updated: 2026-04-28 22:56 UTC

Thread

Kodak paper on stability

Kodak paper on stability

2005-10-12 by claudej1@aol.com

In other words, the >100 years means "we are approximately as good as Epson, 
using their inks, we cost more, and need custom profiles to work." I gues for 
some it's worth getting the Kodak copyright logo on the back, as opposed to 
the Epson logo, getting out customer to think our prints are actually inkjet 
(which they think they can do themselves), thereby devaluing the value of our 
work.

Claude

In a message dated 10/12/2005 7:52:27 AM Eastern Daylight Time, 
DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com writes:
Hello Everyone,

Here's a link to Kodak's Image Stability White Paper for those who 
understand this kind of technical stuff.


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

Re: Kodak paper on stability

2005-10-13 by steveh0607

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, claudej1@a... wrote:
>Originally, this just started out with a comment on the Kodak Lustre paper, which I said I 
liked. Someone asked about stability and I provided a link to Kodak. 

I know nothing about image testing, and I wasn't trying to carry water for Kodak.

I do like the paper though. Perhaps Wilhelm will test it.

Steve
Show quoted textHide quoted text
> In other words, the >100 years means "we are approximately as good as Epson, 
> using their inks, we cost more, and need custom profiles to work." I gues for 
> some it's worth getting the Kodak copyright logo on the back, as opposed to 
> the Epson logo, getting out customer to think our prints are actually inkjet 
> (which they think they can do themselves), thereby devaluing the value of our 
> work.
> 
> Claude
> 
> In a message dated 10/12/2005 7:52:27 AM Eastern Daylight Time, 
> DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com writes:
> Hello Everyone,
> 
> Here's a link to Kodak's Image Stability White Paper for those who 
> understand this kind of technical stuff.
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

Re: [Digital BW] Re: Kodak paper on stability

2005-10-13 by Editor P.O.V. Image Service

steveh0607 wrote:

>
>I do like the paper though. Perhaps Wilhelm will test it.
>
>  
>

Not unless someone (Kodak)  pays him to test it..

Given Kodak is using their own methodology, I wouldn't hold my breath.
Keith

 
Keith Krebs

"Just some guy," caretaker of the Multiverse's largest EPSON printer 
User Community (highly recommended by Vogon Poets and MegaDodo 
Publications), at:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EPSON_Printers/
and  the Multiverse's largest Canon printer User  Community at:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Canon-printers
"For the rest of you out there, the secret is to bang the rocks together 
guys"

 

****************************************************************
CONFIDENTIALITY & COPYRIGHT NOTICE:
This e-mail message, including attachments and contents, is \ufffd Copyright, 
Keith Krebs, 2001-2004, All Rights Reserved. It is expressly for the 
sole use of the intended recipient and may contain confidential and 
privileged information. Absent the express written authorization of the 
author, any unauthorized review, use, disclosure, transfer, or 
distribution is explicitly prohibited and taken at your own risk. If you 
are not, or are unsure whether you are, the intended recipient, please 
contact the sender immediately and destroy all copies of the original 
message. Violations will be prosecuted to the FULL extent allowed under 
applicable civil and criminal law. Imagery published or distributed in 
violation of these conditions shall be subject to a $1500/image 
liquidated damages charge, in addition to any applicable Copyright 
violation penalties.

POV IMage Service Banner
****************************************************************
{ The P.O.V. Image Service Website is still at http://www.p-o-v-image.com/ }

Move to quarantaine

This moves the raw source file on disk only. The archive index is not changed automatically, so you still need to run a manual refresh afterward.