Bill Pierce
Well-known
I guess I’ve grown a little tired of hearing foks say that inkjet prints don’t last; only prints from a wet darkroom last.
Wet darkroom, black-and-white “silver” images last a long time if they are properly fixed, washed and toned. They probably won’t last as long as cyanotypes, carbon pigment and platinum prints, but properly processed and stored and not made on the early RC papers, they’re going to outlast us.
Already pigment inkjets outlast chemical color prints, even those on Fuji Crystal Archive. But black-and-white inkjets, even with 3 or 4 times the predicted life span of color inkjet, are estimated by experts to only last somewhere between 200 and 800 years before some fading occurs even when properly dark stored.
Is this sufficient reason to print silver?
If you print silver, do you properly fix, wash and store the images to give them an extended life? Do folks really know the proper procedures for producing long lasting silver prints? ( I ask this because I once heard an instructor at a leading photography school tell students they should fix their prints for 10 to 15 minutes if they wanted them to last.)
Wet darkroom, black-and-white “silver” images last a long time if they are properly fixed, washed and toned. They probably won’t last as long as cyanotypes, carbon pigment and platinum prints, but properly processed and stored and not made on the early RC papers, they’re going to outlast us.
Already pigment inkjets outlast chemical color prints, even those on Fuji Crystal Archive. But black-and-white inkjets, even with 3 or 4 times the predicted life span of color inkjet, are estimated by experts to only last somewhere between 200 and 800 years before some fading occurs even when properly dark stored.
Is this sufficient reason to print silver?
If you print silver, do you properly fix, wash and store the images to give them an extended life? Do folks really know the proper procedures for producing long lasting silver prints? ( I ask this because I once heard an instructor at a leading photography school tell students they should fix their prints for 10 to 15 minutes if they wanted them to last.)
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Dear Bill,
Well, if I want them to last, yes. Why would I bother otherwise?
There are excellent recommendations in most of the standard works, such as Leclerc, Glafkides and Haist, and often, these have been updated by subsequent manufacturers' research.
And a lot depends on whether you're using 'hypo' or a modern ammonium thiosulphate fixer.
Cheers,
R.
Bill Pierce
Well-known
Roger -
I'm an ammonium thiosulphate user, pretty much sticking to the Ilford recommendations of using "film strength" fresh fixer for 1 minute. I follow their water wash, washing aid, water wash recommendations with a tendency to increase the last wash time if I have the leisure. If I can really evaluate the prints, I'll often go back and give a minimal selinium toning and more washing aide treatment to the best prints.
But, I don't want to give the impression I spend a lot of time in the wet darkroom. When I am there, I do what I always did before journalism became digital. But that was a long time ago. Any updates in technique that I should be aware of?
Harry Lime
Practitioner
I'm hedging that bw carbon pigment based piezography prints made on proper archival paper will be around for a long time.
monochromejrnl
Well-known
I believe that the main reason to make a print using any given print process is primarily because the resulting print is what you envision for your image and permanence is secondary.
Having said that, given the amount of time and resources I devote to making prints, I want the images to be the most 'permanent' I can create while maintaining the image quality that I prefer.
I've been experimenting with Pt/Pl prints (made from digital inkjet pigment based negatives) for this reason. I also tone (selenium and sepia) my silver fibre prints to increase 'permanence'.
If I made inkjet pigment prints I'd buy the very 'best' (i.e. fade resistence/permanent) paper I could get my hands on. I have little down that inkjet pigments are high on the permanence scale - however, I've seen a number of inkjet papers fade and discolour over less than five years.
Just made a few platinotypes earlier today...
Having said that, given the amount of time and resources I devote to making prints, I want the images to be the most 'permanent' I can create while maintaining the image quality that I prefer.
I've been experimenting with Pt/Pl prints (made from digital inkjet pigment based negatives) for this reason. I also tone (selenium and sepia) my silver fibre prints to increase 'permanence'.
If I made inkjet pigment prints I'd buy the very 'best' (i.e. fade resistence/permanent) paper I could get my hands on. I have little down that inkjet pigments are high on the permanence scale - however, I've seen a number of inkjet papers fade and discolour over less than five years.
Just made a few platinotypes earlier today...
monochromejrnl
Well-known
for those in Toronto in early May with interest in 'permanent' alt process - check out these workshops (carbon/platinotype/wet plate etc...):
www.alternativeprocess.ca
Bill Pierce
Well-known
If today, Monday, you go to The Online Photographer you will find two very interesting articles on print life.
http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/blog_index.html
http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/blog_index.html
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Dear Bill,
Not that I'm aware of. 'Minimum wet time' is the current fashion. Probably, prints that are processed today according to best practice (current manufacturers' recommendation, with maybe more wash if you have the time) will last even longer than old ones.
Your point about 'the best prints' is something everyone should note. If it's not important, it doesn't need archival processing. A much shorter life may be enough.
Cheers,
R.
Chuck Albertson
Well-known
Ilford's advice is what I still follow, for both film and paper. Ilford developed that after a drought in the UK in 1976 caused a re-think of water consumption in the darkroom. We had a similar drought in Seattle that year, so the techniques were relevant here. Looking at film and prints I processed then, they still look good. I go through more fixer, but less wash water. A half-gallon of water washes two rolls of conventional b&w film, using the invert-and-dump method.