Digital BW, The Print

I've summarized my latest findings in this effort at 
http://www.paulroark.com/BW-Info/Arches.pdf

One of the significant things I've found is that briefly rinsing Arches has very little impact on the image.  

(A watercolorist and I are currently in a collaborative effort to see what happens when the media are mixed.  We're using the Cold Press version of Arches for this.  They also have a "Rough" version for even more texture.  I'll look at that at some point.)

I've noted in my PDF that Jon Cone's carbon sepia should behave similarly to the dilute Eboni I'm using.  It would be interesting to see what a very warm Arches looks like.  I'd say we ought to have a medium sepia that is better than any of the traditional methods.

I've posted my QTR setup.  Note that this is for the 7800 C6 "Dual."  Other inksets will need different arrangments, but the key is to keep the midtone ink limits very low.  (The limits I show in the PDF are when a "toner" channel -- still carbon -- is used.  So, the ink limit is split between them.)

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

On 21 Dec 2009, at 4:31 PM, pr_roark wrote:

> One of the significant things I've found is that briefly rinsing Arches has very little impact on the image.  

Exciting experiments!  In my very first forays into quadtone printing, back in the late 1990s, I used a lot of uncoated Somerset Velvet (with Piezography inks, as I recall), and really enjoyed the look.

I'm familiar with rinsing/soaking paper when doing intaglio etching work.  That's done in part to remove the sizing, and in part to make the paper more pliable for the impression of the plate.  Obviously inkjet is a whole different thing, but I wonder whether you've experimented with any sort of pre-moistening of the paper, and whether that would reduce the ink saturation?

--John

> pr_roark wrote:
> > One of the significant things I've found is that briefly 
> > rinsing Arches has very little impact on the image. 

John Labovitz <johnl@...> wrote: 

> ...
> I'm familiar with rinsing/soaking paper when doing intaglio etching work.  That's done in part to remove the sizing, and in part to make the paper more pliable for the impression of the plate.  Obviously inkjet is a whole different thing, but I wonder whether you've experimented with any sort of pre-moistening of the paper, and whether that would reduce the ink saturation?

The only pre- & post-soaking I've done is to get rid of water marks in jet black skies.  With a try of distilled water I've quickly pulled the print through first, done a brief surface rinse with tap water and then pulled the print through a second time and patted it dry.  This results in less paper curl and no water marks.  

With respect to curl, a dry mount press flattens Arches very well.  If both sides of the paper are soaked with a pull through the try, however, no press is needed at all.

One would assume, of course, that the more washing, the more ink is lost.  There have been too many variables in my experiments so far to know what the ink loss to rinse time curve looks like.  I think it's non-linear, in that the loss stuff comes off first.  Randy Rancier has done more extensive soaking, and at some point the gelatin apparently becomes transparent.  Oddly, both Randy and I have noticed a very slight increase in mid-tone densities.  I'm not sure if this is real or an artifact.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

Hello Paul,

  I have been following with much interest your work on Arches paper, that complement what I have been doing in the two-three years. I still use Eboni for testings.

Regarding washing the paper, I use a sligthly different approach.
1) Ink is allowed to dry a very minimim of 48h, otherwise the carbon pigments have a high chance to go leave the paperr during the washing phasr
2) First phase washing
The print is layied on a moschito net. The whoele thingh is, then, totally immersed in still water for about three hours. Most of the stuff the ink is made of other than pigments (mostly glycols and preservatives) are softened by the bath and dissolved into the water.
3) Second phase washing 
This is done with running water. Its pourpose is to carry away the dissolved substances

Dmax of the print is very much unaffected.

Few words about Fine Art papers.
I never liked very much Arches Watercolor Hot Press; although the Dmax is very nice for B&W, its tooth daes not appeal to me.
I have been recently in the US to promote my photography. While there, I stopped at Blick's to look for new papers (much easier than in Souhern Italy where choices are very limited). While I am perfectly happy with Magnani pesci for Carbon-Gelatine process, its Dmax is much too low (to my taste) for regular Giclee.
In fact I found three papers which I liked very much, and I purchase them to test with Ebony and an Epson 7800.
You know what? I forgot thos papers in my Hotel.
If you like to experiment, here they are:
1) Arches Multimedia (it was in the Arches rack, bottom place, with no name). I was not aware of this paper at all, nor could find any info on Internet. The store attendant checked on her computer and confirmed it is a 100% cotton paper
2) Arches Cover (also 100% Cotton)
3) Arches 88 (also 100% Cotton)

The latter two are for ink processes (as etching), much like Magnani Pescia while the first is, to my understanding, a watercolor paper.

Ciao,

  Mantinieri

P.S. Thanks for quoting my work in your document

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "pr_roark" <paul.roark@...> wrote:

>
> I've summarized my latest findings in this effort at 
> http://www.paulroark.com/BW-Info/Arches.pdf
> 
> One of the significant things I've found is that briefly rinsing Arches has very little impact on the image.  
> 
> (A watercolorist and I are currently in a collaborative effort to see what happens when the media are mixed.  We're using the Cold Press version of Arches for this.  They also have a "Rough" version for even more texture.  I'll look at that at some point.)
> 
> I've noted in my PDF that Jon Cone's carbon sepia should behave similarly to the dilute Eboni I'm using.  It would be interesting to see what a very warm Arches looks like.  I'd say we ought to have a medium sepia that is better than any of the traditional methods.
> 
> I've posted my QTR setup.  Note that this is for the 7800 C6 "Dual."  Other inksets will need different arrangments, but the key is to keep the midtone ink limits very low.  (The limits I show in the PDF are when a "toner" channel -- still carbon -- is used.  So, the ink limit is split between them.)
> 
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com
>

"mantinieri" <mantinieri@...> wrote:

>...
> 3) Arches 88 (also 100% Cotton)

That's the only one of the papers you mentioned that I've tested.  The dmax was very low.  Too bad, because the tone was amazingly neutral.

Do you have before and after dmax readings for your washing technique?  I have not done enough experimenting to nail down the time-loss curve.

Thanks for sharing your washing technique.  

Note that I'm not at all sure I'm going to be using any washing as a routine procedure.  While there does seem to be an immediate positive effect of reducing rub-off, the net effects of washing, both short and long run, are not at all clear to me. Among other things, I've found no information that suggests what the long term impact of the inkjet base chemicals (like glycerol, glycol and surfactants) is on longevity, if any.  (Chemists' opinions include that they'll just evaporate or stay on the paper as essentially inert components.  I'll probably do some fade testing at some point to see if I can detect any differences there.  I'm not particularly concerned with the marketing issues.)  At a minimum, it's nice to know that the Arches (and probably other un-coated watercolor paper) prints can be washed without significant impact to the image.  


Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

I realize this was a private post to Paul Roark but I feel that I have a
comment to make concerning the washing technique.

Paper is a relatively complex material in its chemistry and gets more so
as it ages and as it is manipulated.  Long bath or washing times using
pure water (which is really quite aggressive in leaching the good with
the bad) can result in a paper which is less stable than it was prior to
the bath.

Paper conservators will often post treat a work of art on paper (if it
can stand the wetting) with a fresh water bath prepared by pure water
which has been standing for some days (at least the night before) in a
container with dolomite stone chips.  The formerly aggressive pure water
preferentially leaches several minerals (Calcium being the predominant
one).  This good mineral rich water is used to complete the washing
process and to return the mineral balance of the paper.  There are other
stabilizing post treatment regimes but you get the picture.

I am not suggesting that you should follow this procedure.  However, I
am suggesting that long bath or wash immersion times can in some cases
lead to reduced longevity.

Regards

Mark MacKenzie
Alcalde, New Mexico

Mark, thanks for the post.  At this point I am not washing my Arches prints.  I've heard other opinions by chemists that also make me question whether there is a net benefit to the procedure.  At this point I'm more inclined to think Arches' tolerance of water is mostly important for things such as combining it with water colors (we'll have a sample in the Jan-Feb Gallery Los Olivos Featured show -- see http://www.gallerylosolivos.com/), tinting, and washing -- by knowledgeable people -- if and only if it really needs it in the future. 

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com 

Mark MacKenzie <mjmackenzie22@...> wrote:

>
> ...
> Paper is a relatively complex material ...
> Long bath or washing times using pure water (which is really 
> quite aggressive in leaching the good with
> the bad) can result in a paper which is less stable than 
> it was prior to the bath.
> 
> Paper conservators will often post treat a work of art on 
> paper (if it can stand the wetting) with a fresh water 
> bath prepared by pure water which has been standing for 
> some days (at least the night before) in a
> container with dolomite stone chips.  The formerly aggressive
> pure water preferentially leaches several minerals (Calcium 
> being the predominant one).  This good mineral rich water 
> is used to complete the washing process and to return the
> mineral balance of the paper.  There are other
> stabilizing post treatment regimes but you get the picture.
> 
> I am not suggesting that you should follow this procedure. 
> However, I am suggesting that long bath or wash immersion 
> times can in some cases lead to reduced longevity.