Digital BW, The Print

Test Description:
- Test began on July 3, 2006
- Printer is R2400 with K3 inks
- A print on Silver Rag, ABW setting 4,16
- Print placed on south-facing picture window sill in south Florida
(sub-tropic zone).  The window has an awning, so the print receives
some direct sunlight in morning and late afternoon when the sun is low
enough to get under the awning ends, plus very bright indirect
daylight all day.
- Room is A/C, so temperature and humidity ranges are moderate. 
- Print is partially covered with a piece of 4-ply mat board.
- Periodic checking for visible changes.

Current Results:
- Now at 1 year and 9 months
- No visible change in paper color (SR is a non-OBA paper)
- No visible change in the ink color or density in any zone

Additional Interesting Info:
- Some MIS R2W-LM ink (carbon w/out toners I think) in a Staedtler pen
was used to label the print.  That writing has faded substantially to
where it's getting hard to read.

The Silver Rag/K3 combination seems to be quite fade resistant.


Regards,
Clayton


Info on black and white digital printing at    
http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm
I-Trak 2.1   http://www.cjcom.net/itrak.htm

With all due respect Clayton, where are the numbers? Visual inspection means nothing. If you really care about longevity and don't trust Wilhelm, join this project...

http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com

some results here
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com/news.html

It is just getting off the ground, but is non commercial and artist based.

This group is dedicated to helping with questions and communication

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

cheers

david

-----Original Message-----
From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com on behalf of Clayton Jones
Sent: Sat 29/03/2008 9:56 AM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Digital BW] Silver Rag / K3 Fade Test Report
 

Test Description:
- Test began on July 3, 2006
- Printer is R2400 with K3 inks
- A print on Silver Rag, ABW setting 4,16
- Print placed on south-facing picture window sill in south Florida
(sub-tropic zone).  The window has an awning, so the print receives
some direct sunlight in morning and late afternoon when the sun is low
enough to get under the awning ends, plus very bright indirect
daylight all day.
- Room is A/C, so temperature and humidity ranges are moderate. 
- Print is partially covered with a piece of 4-ply mat board.
- Periodic checking for visible changes.

Current Results:
- Now at 1 year and 9 months
- No visible change in paper color (SR is a non-OBA paper)
- No visible change in the ink color or density in any zone

Additional Interesting Info:
- Some MIS R2W-LM ink (carbon w/out toners I think) in a Staedtler pen
was used to label the print.  That writing has faded substantially to
where it's getting hard to read.

The Silver Rag/K3 combination seems to be quite fade resistant.


Regards,
Clayton


Info on black and white digital printing at    
http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm
I-Trak 2.1   http://www.cjcom.net/itrak.htm





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

Hello David,

>With all due respect Clayton, where are the numbers? Visual 
>inspection means nothing. 

I understand where you're coming from, however I disagree.  Visual
inspection means a lot.  If it can't be seen it's irrelevant.  Prints,
after all, are meant to be looked at with human eyes.  There is a
place for this type of testing and there is a long tradition in this
forum of members posting their own test results of various sorts. 
Over the years, member input has contributed to the rich and useful
knowledgebase of real world experience that has helped keep this forum
a good place to keep up with what's happening at the cutting edge of 
BW digital printing.

My reports are not meant to replace, nor are considered superior to,
any numbers-based scientific tests by Wilhelm or anyone else.  I make
no claims about them and they are offered here FWIW to forum readers.
I have a number of ongoing tests on which I report now and then
(the longest one still running is an Eboni BO print which began in
November 2003).

I posted this particular one because I have not seen any Wilhelm
report for the SilverRag/K3/ABW combination.  When SR first came out I
wondered about it's fade resistance so I began this test.  I
understand that this report may not satisfy number crunchers, but it
is significant to me that a K3/SR unprotected print can get bright
daylight and some direct sunlight every day for 21 months and show no
signs of fading or color shifting.  That's one of the best results
I've had during over 5 years of testing numerous paper/ink combinations.

This takes on even more significance next to the fact that a K3/VFA
print on the same window sill began showing signs of fading at 10
months.  It's relative, and shows that K3/SR is considerably more fade
resistant than K3/VFA.  There ARE Wilhelm numbers for that combination:
 
   http://www.wilhelm-research.com/epson/R2400.html

 on Page 3 of 9, rates K3/ABW mode prints as follows, depending on the
paper:

 Framed under normal glass: 110 to >205 years
 Framed under UV glass: 110 to >300 years
 In dark album storage: > 200 years

For me this is a significant comparison and worth mentioning here in
the forum.




>If you really care about longevity and don't trust Wilhelm...

I never said or implied that I don't trust Wilhelm.  I'm sorry if my
report gave that impression.  I sometimes quote Wilhelm's test results
in posts here, as I just did.

Thanks for your reply.  Good luck with the Aardenburg project.


Regards,
Clayton


Info on black and white digital printing at    
http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm
I-Trak 2.1   http://www.cjcom.net/itrak.htm

How do you consider it non-commercial? Looks like there are fees to  
participate, unless I am reading it wrong.
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com/pdfs/AaI_participation.pdf

Mark
http://www.stillrivereditions.com

On Mar 29, 2008, at 1:52 PM, Emerick, David N wrote:

> With all due respect Clayton, where are the numbers? Visual  
> inspection means nothing. If you really care about longevity and  
> don't trust Wilhelm, join this project...
>
> http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com
>
>
> It is just getting off the ground, but is non commercial and artist  
> based.



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

Hi Mark,

What I meant was that the tests are not sponsored by any ink, paper, or printer manufacturers.

Clayton, I respect your knowledge and dedication and certainly didn't mean to belittle your tests.

Sorry if I came across wrong.

cheers

david

-----Original Message-----
From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com on behalf of Mark Savoia
Sent: Sat 29/03/2008 6:59 PM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Silver Rag / K3 Fade Test Report
 
How do you consider it non-commercial? Looks like there are fees to  
participate, unless I am reading it wrong.
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com/pdfs/AaI_participation.pdf

Mark
http://www.stillrivereditions.com

On Mar 29, 2008, at 1:52 PM, Emerick, David N wrote:

> With all due respect Clayton, where are the numbers? Visual  
> inspection means nothing. If you really care about longevity and  
> don't trust Wilhelm, join this project...
>
> http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com
>
>
> It is just getting off the ground, but is non commercial and artist  
> based.



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




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

Clayton:

I appreciate you sharing your observations with the group. I believe 
that relatively simple real-world tests are both relevant and 
important. 

Paul Glombick

great stuff Clayton - very useful

i don't suppose you've had any traditional silver gelatin prints (Fibre 
and RC?) testing alongside all these have you?

tim a

Tim Atherton wrote:

> great stuff Clayton - very useful
> 
> i don't suppose you've had any traditional silver 
> gelatin prints (Fibre and RC?) testing alongside 
> all these have you?

I want to add my support to Clayton's fade testing.  All the informal 
testing does add to the general knowledge base even if controls and 
numbers are lacking.  Moreover, the non-accelerated, perfect tests 
simply do not exist and would take way too long even if all the 
variables could be eliminated.  We'll all be dead by the time there 
is enough data to be useful.  So, I wish those doing the more perfect 
tests the best of luck, but we need to move forward based on what is 
doable within our time frames.  Luckily, B&W is much simpler than 
color, and carbon has a very long history.

I have put silver gelatin test strips in with my fluorescent light 
fade tests.  They are rock solid, with barely measurable yellowing.  
Only the best pure carbon on non-brightened paper has a chance of 
being in the same league.  As a practical matter, the pure carbon 
(Eboni) and the silver print change so little in a "Wilhelm decade" 
that I simply don't worry much about that any more.  I don't have the 
time or patience to test to the point where fade is an issue.

In the real world, my old silver prints are showing some yellowing of 
the paper due to atmospheric pollution -- acids, I assume.  (At one 
point I found an RIT paper that also found the atmospheric issues 
were, in the real world, what was limiting silver printn lives.)  I 
also find in the old photo digital restorations I do that physical 
damage, including cracking of the emulsion surfaces is the worst 
problem.  

Resistance to airborne acids may be where our buffered inkjet papers 
will prove to be superior.  I also think the Art Care matte board may 
be a good investment. (The alpha cellulose versions are not that 
expensive at Michaels.)  

With respect to cracking, I, frankly, don't trust any of the plastic 
papers -- inkjet or silver, but I know Kodak and others will argue 
otherwise.  I just don't think one can expect a sandwich of 
substances with differential expansion factors to not show the 
effects of the internal stresses such will involve -- but we'll all 
be dead before that shows up.  

Sadly, as complex as some think fade testing is, accelerated "age" 
testing is much more complex and uncertain.  Some of the companies 
that even make the products in that area are basically just shoving 
things into an oven -- crude.  We basically have to rely on the 
history of similar papers and pigments/dyes (and gas attacks) to 
guess what will happen due to non-light aging factors.  So, the cyan 
that is do solid in visible light fade testing just happens to be 
weak with respect to other factors (and some UV).  Thus my solution 
for B&W -- simply get ALL the color out of the image and learn to 
control the best carbon possible.


Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

Hello Tim,

>great stuff Clayton - very useful

Thanks, glad it's helpful.


>i don't suppose you've had any traditional silver gelatin prints
>(Fibre and RC?) testing alongside all these have you?

My only silver test was done several years ago when I placed an
Oriental Seagull fiber print out in direct sun every non rainy day for
a couple of weeks.  I don't recall the total number of hours, but I
gave up after awhile and it had never shown any signs of change. 
Paul's report seems to show similar durability.


Regards,
Clayton


Info on black and white digital printing at    
http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm
I-Trak 2.1   http://www.cjcom.net/itrak.htm

David, Shame on you for being precise. I remember reading in an Ansel 
book where he say's of himself ..."I prefer to be precise" when it 
came to calculating exposure. So at 
least you are in good company.
Keep crunching those numbers, as an archivist I guess validating 
something quantitatively holds more weight than saying "looks pretty 
good to me".
Jack

Thanks for your work Clayton.

I'm going to start doing a basic fade test soon with the materials I
use the most.
Here's the methodology- can you improve upon it?

I'm going to make 2 letter size prints which have a good range of
tones.  I'm also going to have Paul Roark's 21 step grayscale on the
paper.

I will store one print in a south-facing window and another at the
bottom of a dark metal filing cabinet in the same room.

I'll measure the 21 step grayscales with my Print Fix Pro at the
outset so I have a control.

I'm planning to test the papers I use the most- Innova SW 315, Epson
Premium Semi-gloss and Harmon FB Al glossy.  I use the MIS UTR2 inkset.

Would this be a useful test?

Roger

Well, I'm a numbers guy too, but Clayton's a real stand-up guy who's done a
lot for this group.  I'm also pretty certain that he does use a "control"
sample that he keeps in dark storage in order to judge both fading and
yellowing.  Is that correct Clayton?

Clayton, have you done any K3 fade testing with any fiber matte papers?  VFA
for instance?  HPR?  Would love to hear an update on those as well.

Josh

On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 3:58 PM, Jack <jacknadelle@...> wrote:

> David, Shame on you for being precise. I remember reading in an Ansel
> book where he say's of himself ..."I prefer to be precise" when it
> came to calculating exposure. So at
> least you are in good company.
> Keep crunching those numbers, as an archivist I guess validating
> something quantitatively holds more weight than saying "looks pretty
> good to me".
> Jack
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> 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
>
>
>
>


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

"Keep crunching those numbers, as an archivist I guess validating 
something quantitatively holds more weight than saying "looks pretty 
good to me".

Those numbers - which, by the way, are meaningless without real-world 
calibration - are meant to simulate real-world aging 
using "accelerated" methods. They are a substitute for being able to 
put a number of prints up for 200 years and then looking at them 
before making ink/paper decisions. They do not replace "real-world" 
tests, they simulate them. Frankly, even if Clayton had managed to 
somehow quanitify the fading in his prints, would the numbers 
themselves have any meaning? They only have meaning in relation to 
fading detectable to the human eye. If you have fading that can be 
quantified, but is not visible to the eye, then what does it matter? 
To collect data for the sake of collecting data is both ridiculous 
and pointless.

As for precision, one can be extremely precise without being accurate 
at all.

Paul G.

Jack, Roger, Josh,

Thanks for your replies.  I'll try to address all of them in one post.

I'm sorry that there seems to be a tone emerging of people taking
sides on an issue that, in my opinion, doesn't exist.  I guess I
wasn't clear enough in my response to David, so let me try again:  I
don't discount the scientific testing at all.  I have quoted Wilhelm
numerous times here.  I do feel that my kind of testing also has
validity.  I don't see it as some sort of contest.  I do not consider
my testing superior or better than scientific testing.  Nor do I
consider it inferior.  They are just different, apples and oranges,
and both have something to offer.   Again, I feel there is a place for
both.  Please don't make this a controversial issue.  


>Here's the methodology...Would this be a useful test?

I really don't want to be in a position of passing judgement on that.
 I am not trying to set myself up as an "expert" by posting my
reports.  I do my tests because of an innate curiosity in general and
because I have questions that I'm not finding answers for elsewhere. 
So my instinct here is to help you answer the question yourself: Why
do you want to do the test? What is it you want to find out from the
test?  Will your test method provide the information you seek?  I
think if you can answer those you'll have it.

Basically, my approach is that I do a test because I want to see what
happens.  If at some point I find anything that seems significant I
post it here in case someone else might benefit from it.  It's that
simple.  I'm not trying to be another Wilhelm, I'm not trying to
compete in any way with anyone.  21 months ago I was trying out some
SR and I wondered how fade resistant this new wonder paper was.  So,
in the motivation of the moment, I added one of the test prints to my
windowsill collection (there are currently 12 prints there of various
sorts).  I happened to look at it the other day and said, "Wow!  It's
been 21 months and no sign of anything, that's really good", and so I
posted a report.


>I'm also pretty certain that he does use a "control" sample that 
>he keeps in dark storage in order to judge both fading and
>yellowing. Is that correct Clayton?

Well, yes and no.  Of course I have some sort of control for
comparison.  What I do is place a strip of 4-ply matt board across the
print so that it crosses over different tonal areas (many of my test
prints are ramps) and tape it in place.  I place small pencil marks at
the edges to show where the strip is located so I can put it back in
the same place each time after I lift it up for a look.  I label the
print with the date, paper name and ink used. Periodically I remove
the cover strip for a look.  At some point if I begin to see some sort
of change I make a notation on the back of the print.  That's pretty
much it.



>Clayton, have you done any K3 fade testing with any fiber matte
>papers? VFA

Yes, and I have commented on some of them occasionally over the past
few years.  I currently have two VFA tests going, a windowsill test
and a torture test.  BTW, my comment in my reply to David that a VFA
print showed signs of fading at 10 months was a mistake.  That was a
Merlin Smooth print, I grabbed the wrong one - my apology for the
mistake.  The windowsill VFA print is only 3 months old.

The torture test is putting an unprotected print, with a cover strip,
out in direct sunlight (S. Florida is sub-tropical and the sunlight is
intense), and I'm logging the amount of hours.  Right now it's at 83.2
hours and showing no sign of fading.  

As for OBA burn off, at 62 hours I thought I saw some "lessening" of
whiteness, but I'm not really sure.  If it has changed, it's
minuscule.  Sometimes I think I see it and sometimes I don't.  If it
did change, right now after 20 hours more exposure it hasn't
increased.  I still can't make up my mind if I'm seeing any change or
not, and I'm looking for it, trying to find some.  

I'm not sure what 83 hours of direct sunlight translates to for a
framed-under-glass print on an interior wall, but it's certainly a far
cry from EEM which will turn yellow after two weeks on the kitchen
counter.


Regards,
Clayton


Info on black and white digital printing at    
http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm
I-Trak 2.1   http://www.cjcom.net/itrak.htm