Digital BW, The Print

Hello All,

On a hunch I just applied some hardware store caliber Johnson's wax to
part of an SR print, let it dry, then buffed it.   The result was
greatly reduced glare, pebbly-ness, and GD.  This wax is not clear
though, and I'm wondering if Renaissance Wax might be good.  Does
anyone who is using SR have any and can try it?

One thing I found, the wax spreads easily on the dark zones where lots
of ink is, but not on the higher zones.  The tacky paper surface
doesn't like anything remotely moist.  So the wax has to be applied
liberally in such a way that the application tool (finger, cloth,
whatever, does not contact the paper surface.  

Seems to me this has some potential...


Regards,
Clayton


Info on black and white digital printing at    
http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm

Hello Clayton,

You may be on to something. 

However, I would look into what ingredients are also mixed in with the
the wax that may over time pose a treat to the longevity of the print
itself: cedar oil, turpentine, vaseline, fungicides.

I know that certain waxes have been specially developped for the care
and restoration of the leather covers of ancient books. I don't know
if these waxes would be appropriate or not for applying on inkjet prints.

Cheers,
Andre

Clayton,

I've done this with CSR and Silver Rag using Renaissance paste wax.   
Works better if you first apply a light coat of Printshield.  As you  
noted it does smooth out the grainy surface and increases gloss a bit.

Carl

On Jul 5, 2006, at 12:02 AM, Clayton Jones wrote:

> Hello All,
>
> On a hunch I just applied some hardware store caliber Johnson's wax to
> part of an SR print, let it dry, then buffed it.   The result was
> greatly reduced glare, pebbly-ness, and GD.  This wax is not clear
> though, and I'm wondering if Renaissance Wax might be good.  Does
> anyone who is using SR have any and can try it?
>
> One thing I found, the wax spreads easily on the dark zones where lots
> of ink is, but not on the higher zones.  The tacky paper surface
> doesn't like anything remotely moist.  So the wax has to be applied
> liberally in such a way that the application tool (finger, cloth,
> whatever, does not contact the paper surface.
>
> Seems to me this has some potential...
>
>
> Regards,
> Clayton
>
>
> Info on black and white digital printing at
> http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor -------------------- 
> ~-->
> Something is new at Yahoo! Groups.  Check out the enhanced email  
> design.
> http://us.click.yahoo.com/SISQkA/gOaOAA/yQLSAA/ucIolB/TM
> -------------------------------------------------------------------- 
> ~->
>
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other  
> resources as they are often being updated.
>
> 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:
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages  
> to keep them short.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or  
> flames. Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed  
> from the membership without notice.
> - Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital  
> B&W printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be  
> removed from the membership.
> - By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules  
> and guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the  
> group Owner and Moderators. See “Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines”  
> in the Files section:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/
>
> BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE  
> PRINT YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE  
> “OWNER” AND “MODERATORS” OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL  
> NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL,  
> CONSEQUENTIAL OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO,  
> DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS, GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER  
> INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF THE  “OWNER” AND “MODERATORS” OF DIGITAL  
> BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF  
> SUCH DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE INABILITY TO USE  
> THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO  
> OR ALTERATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR  
> CONDUCT OF ANY THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO  
> GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE  
> PRINT YAHOO GROUP.
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>

Clayton

I have not tried it.

But if you are going to seems like a good choice. Since you know of 
it, you likely know it has been used for years in (semi) archival 
situations. Others may not. Here is a good blurb on that brand.

http://apps.webcreate.com/ecom/catalog/product_specific.cfm?ClientID=15&ProductID=17865
"High-quality blend of refined micro-crystalline waxes which remain 
neutral. Formulated by a renowned British conservation scientist. 
Cleans and polishes all solid surfaces including metal, wood, marble, 
onyx, shell, stone, ivory, plastic, leather and even paper, neither 
staining nor discoloring. Has high moisture resistance, and can be 
used to protect paper book covers from finger prints and as a 
protective coating on photographs. Reduces gloss of picture varnish 
and prevents blooming. Also adds luster to water colors and other 
works on paper. "

More generally, folks might like to review
http://www.museumservicescorporation.com/consemp/catalog/w.html

And if you want to research conservation practice here is a good start
http://palimpsest.stanford.edu/

Eric

At 11:02 PM 7/4/2006, you wrote:

>Hello All,
>
>On a hunch I just applied some hardware store caliber Johnson's wax to
>part of an SR print, let it dry, then buffed it.   The result was
>greatly reduced glare, pebbly-ness, and GD.  This wax is not clear
>though, and I'm wondering if Renaissance Wax might be good.  Does
>anyone who is using SR have any and can try it?
>
>One thing I found, the wax spreads easily on the dark zones where lots
>of ink is, but not on the higher zones.  The tacky paper surface
>doesn't like anything remotely moist.  So the wax has to be applied
>liberally in such a way that the application tool (finger, cloth,
>whatever, does not contact the paper surface.
>
>Seems to me this has some potential...
>
>
>Regards,
>Clayton
>
>
>Info on black and white digital printing at
>http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other 
>resources as they are often being updated.
>
>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:
>- As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages 
>to keep them short.
>- Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or 
>flames. Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed 
>from the membership without notice.
>- Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital 
>B&W printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be 
>removed from the membership.
>- By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and 
>guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group 
>Owner and Moderators. See "Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines" in the 
>Files section:
>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/
>
>BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE 
>PRINT YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE 
>"OWNER" AND "MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL 
>NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, 
>CONSEQUENTIAL OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, 
>DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS, GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE 
>LOSSES (EVEN IF THE  "OWNER" AND "MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE 
>PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH 
>DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE INABILITY TO USE THE 
>DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR 
>ALTERATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR 
>CONDUCT OF ANY THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; 
>OR (iv) ANY OTHER MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP.
>
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>--
>No virus found in this incoming message.
>Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
>Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.9.9/382 - Release Date: 7/4/2006


-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.9.9/382 - Release Date: 7/4/2006

I think Renaissance Wax will work and it should offer a lot of surface
and airbourne contaminant protection. It sure will be time consuming
and labor intensitve though. I hope you're not doing big prints.

john



--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Peter De Smidt
<pdesmidt@...> wrote:

>
> I have a 2400, I just received some SR, and I have Renaissance Wax.  
> When I get a chance, which probably won't be for a little while, I'll 
> try the combo and see how it works.
> 
> -Peter
>

I have a 2400, I just received some SR, and I have Renaissance Wax.  
When I get a chance, which probably won't be for a little while, I'll 
try the combo and see how it works.

-Peter

Hello Eric,

Nice links, thanks.


Regards,
Clayton

Hello Andre,

>However, I would look into what ingredients are also mixed in with the
>the wax...

These are valid concerns, but R. Wax is appropriate stuff I think. 
Look at the links in Eric's msg.


Regards,
Clayton


Info on black and white digital printing at    
http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm

Clayton,



I have routinely used Renaissance Wax on my silver gelatin prints. It
protected the surface, made spotting and etching invisible, and "enriched"
the shadows.  By "enriched" I mean the shadows had a greater luminosity -
they "glowed" more.  I didn't darken the shadows, just made them richer.



I did some tests of coatings on Innova F Type Gloss Ultra Smooth paper
using Premier Print Shield and  Chem Jet Semigloss spay coatings and the
Renaissance Wax from Light Impressions.  The prints were made on an Epson
2400 using the stock Epson K3 inks with PK. I treated a print after it had
air dried for 24 hours by masking sections to allow for a 6 fold test on
one print  The best "look" was from the wax treatment with no initial
spray - It had the most shadow luminosity and detail plus no gloss
differential that I could see.  The 2nd best was an initial spray of
Premier Print Shield followed by a wax job after letting the sprayed print
dry for a day.  The 3rd place winner was just the Premier Print Shield.
The 4th place was the plain print with no spray or wax.  I didn't like the
Clear Jet Semigloss spay as it seemed to dull the print but did make a
uniform look with no gloss differential.  All of the coating techniques
eliminated the gloss differential. The waxed only print had a uniform
"shine" to the surface just barely a little more than the unwaxed print
but without the gloss differential.  This is a non-issue to me as I mount
everything behind Tru-Vue Museum Glass which eliminates glare as well as
knocking out the UV.



I have just received some Crane Museo Silver Rag and am doing the same
tests I did with the Innova F Type Gloss paper.  I'll report back in a
couple of days with results on coatings for Silver Rag.



Cheers,





TK



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

Clayton,

A quick search via Google turned up a link from early 2004 on this 
forum.  Go to message 40459 and thread.
Obviously not about Silver Rag - but there seems to be experience of its 
use.

Steve Gledhill
http://www.virtuallygrey.co.uk/
------------------------------------------------------------------------


Clayton Jones wrote:

> Hello All,
>
> On a hunch I just applied some hardware store caliber Johnson's wax to
> part of an SR print, let it dry, then buffed it. The result was
> greatly reduced glare, pebbly-ness, and GD. This wax is not clear
> though, and I'm wondering if Renaissance Wax might be good. Does
> anyone who is using SR have any and can try it?
>
> One thing I found, the wax spreads easily on the dark zones where lots
> of ink is, but not on the higher zones. The tacky paper surface
> doesn't like anything remotely moist. So the wax has to be applied
> liberally in such a way that the application tool (finger, cloth,
> whatever, does not contact the paper surface.
>
> Seems to me this has some potential...
>
> Regards,
> Clayton
>
> Info on black and white digital printing at
> http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm 
> <http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm>
>
>
>  


		
___________________________________________________________ 
Yahoo! Messenger - with free PC-PC calling and photo sharing. http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com

This is interesting.  For some time, darkroom printers have used Renaissance
for a little extra glow and depth.  I used to use it on my Portriga and
Oriental prints before I went over to the dark side.  Now I will have to
pull out some of those beta prints with SR and UC inks and see what
happens...

BTW I don't know if you are into music, but it is also a great guitar wax
for fine instruments.

Ken

> -----Original Message-----
> From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Clayton
> Jones
> Sent: Tuesday, July 04, 2006 11:03 PM
> To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Digital BW] Possible Non-Toxic Silver Rag Solution
> 
> Hello All,
> 
> On a hunch I just applied some hardware store caliber Johnson's wax to
> part of an SR print, let it dry, then buffed it.   The result was
> greatly reduced glare, pebbly-ness, and GD.  This wax is not clear
> though, and I'm wondering if Renaissance Wax might be good.  Does
> anyone who is using SR have any and can try it?
> 
> One thing I found, the wax spreads easily on the dark zones where lots
> of ink is, but not on the higher zones.  The tacky paper surface
> doesn't like anything remotely moist.  So the wax has to be applied
> liberally in such a way that the application tool (finger, cloth,
> whatever, does not contact the paper surface.
> 
> Seems to me this has some potential...
> 
> 
> Regards,
> Clayton
>

Thanks Ken. I'll consider putting it on my old Gibson archtop.
First though, what is in it? I'm even a little concerned about putting
it on prints until I find out exactly what it is made of.

John


 
> BTW I don't know if you are into music, but it is also a great
guitar wax

> for fine instruments.
> 
> Ken

This is the company that makes it ... http://www.picreator.co.uk/  
Perhaps they can tell us all.  If you find out then please tells us.  If 
it is both beneficial and benign then it make be of real value.
Steve Gledhill
http://www.virtuallygrey.co.uk/


john dean wrote:

> Thanks Ken. I'll consider putting it on my old Gibson archtop.
> First though, what is in it? I'm even a little concerned about putting
> it on prints until I find out exactly what it is made of.
>
> John
>
> > BTW I don't know if you are into music, but it is also a great
> guitar wax
> > for fine instruments.
> >
> > Ken
>
> _,___ 


		
___________________________________________________________ 
Try the all-new Yahoo! Mail. "The New Version is radically easier to use" \ufffd The Wall Street Journal 
http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html

I am interested in what happens to this wax long term.  We know that 
the rag substrate and pigment can go well over 100 years with 
excellent stability but what about the wax? Yellowing and flaking 
(even if it occurs after I am long gone) are my concern.


charlie

I did a little reading on that website he gave us.

http://www.picreator.co.uk/articles/3_renaissance_wax.htm 

Apparently Renaissance Wax was created in the 19th century to act as a
substite for traditional waxes for the purpose of preserving antique
furniture, and later rare documents. It was designed for this purpose
from petroleum  products to replace bees wax and other natural waxes
that had been used by conservators because of the acid content of
these "natural" waxes. 

I wrote them an email asking for all information they may have about
the suitability of using this product on rag papers and pigment inkjet
prints in particular. If they write me back I'll post it. Usually
Light Impressions does their homework on this kind of thing since
their primary clinet base involves conservators museums and galleries
and they have sold it for years.

The interesting part of all this for me was finding out that bees wax
was destructive to documents and developed a very acidic environment
over time. What does that mean? Well, all the encaustic art work out
there in collections all over the world from artists ranging from
Jasper Johns to Doug and Mike Starn are coated with it. There has even
been commentary by some artists that coating their inkjet prints with
encaustic, composed of bees wax, gave them protection and greater
longevity; apparently not. I could be missing something? 

As to Renaissance Wax, sounds like it does protect long term. It would
be nice to know for sure. Where is Wilhelm when you need him?

John




--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Charlie"
<psiempyo@...> wrote:

>
> I am interested in what happens to this wax long term.  We know that 
> the rag substrate and pigment can go well over 100 years with 
> excellent stability but what about the wax? Yellowing and flaking 
> (even if it occurs after I am long gone) are my concern.
> 
> 
> charlie
>

On Wednesday 05 July 2006 14:30, Steve Gledhill wrote:
> A quick search via Google turned up a link from early 2004 on this
> forum.  Go to message 40459 and thread.

The beauty of the web is that you can supply a specific URL.
I don't know how to find the message you mention, since I
read this list by email, and I'm too lazy to spend ten minutes
digging around on yahoo.

Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Wednesday 05 July 2006 14:30, Steve Gledhill wrote:
>   
>> A quick search via Google turned up a link from early 2004 on this
>> forum.  Go to message 40459 and thread.
>>     
>
> The beauty of the web is that you can supply a specific URL.
> I don't know how to find the message you mention, since I
> read this list by email, and I'm too lazy to spend ten minutes
> digging around on yahoo.
>   
Argh. The beauty of the web is that you can find out things for yourself.

You've got all you need to find it. Make an effort.
--
Bruce Watson

Bjorn,
... speechless was my first reaction to your effrontery to criticise my 
providing what for some might be helpful information.
... then irritation that you openly boast of your laziness.
... then ... what the hell ... 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/messages/40459.
... join the list, you might learn even more.
Steve Gledhill
http://www.virtuallygrey.co.uk/


Bjorn Helgaas wrote:

> On Wednesday 05 July 2006 14:30, Steve Gledhill wrote:
> > A quick search via Google turned up a link from early 2004 on this
> > forum. Go to message 40459 and thread.
>
> The beauty of the web is that you can supply a specific URL.
> I don't know how to find the message you mention, since I
> read this list by email, and I'm too lazy to spend ten minutes
> digging around on yahoo.
>
>
>  


		
___________________________________________________________ 
The all-new Yahoo! Mail goes wherever you go - free your email address from your Internet provider. http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html

On Friday 07 July 2006 12:08, Steve Gledhill wrote:
> Bjorn,
> ... speechless was my first reaction to your effrontery to criticise my
> providing what for some might be helpful information.
> ... then irritation that you openly boast of your laziness.
> ... then ... what the hell ...
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/messages/40459.
> ... join the list, you might learn even more.
> Steve Gledhill
> http://www.virtuallygrey.co.uk/

I'm sorry this came off as criticism.  I've been burned before by
the impersonal nature of email communication, but I guess I haven't
learned my lesson yet.

My point was merely that since this list is a "one-to-many" form
of communication, a simple unambiguous link can save time for
everybody who reads the message.  A few minutes digging around
is not a big deal for one person, but multiplied by the hundreds
who might be interested, it's a waste.  Unfortunately, I ruined
this attempt at improving communication by being ungracious in my
email.

Thanks for the information (and the link :-)).

(Sigh, Yahoo says "The group DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint is
temporarily unavailable."  All the great data in the archives
is essentially held at the good will of Yahoo.  I maintain
another archive of the mailing list here:
  http://helgaas.com/photo/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/
but my history doesn't go back far enough.  Oh, well.)

> Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> 
> > On Wednesday 05 July 2006 14:30, Steve Gledhill wrote:
> > > A quick search via Google turned up a link from early 2004 on this
> > > forum. Go to message 40459 and thread.
> >
> > The beauty of the web is that you can supply a specific URL.
> > I don't know how to find the message you mention, since I
> > read this list by email, and I'm too lazy to spend ten minutes
> > digging around on yahoo.

Bjorn,
Thanks for your apology.  It's appreciated, as is your good suggestion!
All the best.
Steve Gledhill
http://www.virtuallygrey.co.uk/ <http://www.virtuallygrey.co.uk/>

Bjorn Helgaas wrote:

> On Friday 07 July 2006 12:08, Steve Gledhill wrote:
> > Bjorn,
> > ... speechless was my first reaction to your effrontery to criticise my
> > providing what for some might be helpful information.
> > ... then irritation that you openly boast of your laziness.
> > ... then ... what the hell ...
> > 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/messages/40459. 
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/messages/40459.>
> > ... join the list, you might learn even more.
> > Steve Gledhill
> > http://www.virtuallygrey.co.uk/ <http://www.virtuallygrey.co.uk/>
>
> I'm sorry this came off as criticism. I've been burned before by
> the impersonal nature of email communication, but I guess I haven't
> learned my lesson yet.
>
> My point was merely that since this list is a "one-to-many" form
> of communication, a simple unambiguous link can save time for
> everybody who reads the message. A few minutes digging around
> is not a big deal for one person, but multiplied by the hundreds
> who might be interested, it's a waste. Unfortunately, I ruined
> this attempt at improving communication by being ungracious in my
> email.
>
> Thanks for the information (and the link :-)).
>
> ._,___


	
	
		
___________________________________________________________ 
All new Yahoo! Mail "The new Interface is stunning in its simplicity and ease of use." - PC Magazine 
http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html

I am in the process of putting together a portfolio that is going to  
be handled by many people. The prints will be matted just like I  
frame them in white mats, has anyone tried spraying the mats with  
some type of coating to keep them looking nicer longer? I will be  
spraying them separate from the prints before they are assembled.

Thanks,

cort