Digital BW, The Print

I can certainly attest to these experiences... I used a paper for platinum many years back, one day suddenly it wouldn't work at all any more, no matter what I tried. I'm sure whatever changes they made did not affect it's intended use at all... drawing. It was a high end cotton fine art paper from one of the oldest companies.

Regarding any potential longevity advantage, I'd advise taking a look at the 2 Arches tests I submitted to Aardenburg a few years a go, both ABW and color. There is fade, and certainly some coated papers outperforming it in those tests. Of course there are other factors for effecting the life of a print that creates uneasiness regarding coated papers, delicacy, sucking everything terrible out of the atmosphere, etc etc.. But for the kind of conventional fade most of us are concerned with, and testing evaluates, I see no real advantage to uncoated papers.

I prefer uncoated papers, including Arches, for "some" of my projects, but for esthetic reasons, not longevity issues.
Tyler

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "E.Neilsen" <e.neilsen2@...> wrote:
>
> NO David, these would be changes based on current environmental  issues and
> may be something that suits one intended use, but has unintended
> consequences for other users. The former happens to platinum printers all
> the time. We may find a paper that "works". And the manufacture will change
> it based on it's intended use; watercolors, lith, monoprints, etc. The next
> time you go to order it, it all appears the same, but a lengthy series of
> phone calls reveals a change in this or that. sorry. .. Or as might happen
> to glass. There was a glass used in printing that had a very specific
> spectral transmission. PPG changed the transmission specs without consulting
> platinum printers that were using it and having had our pieces of glass that
> work fine as expected we saw no reason to order sheet after sheet since it
> is just to hold the negative down, not travel with the piece, didn't think
> any more about it. STOP!!! Someone else buys it and claims the glass doesn't
> work . 
>  same glass because it has the same name. NO  totally different from a
> printers view point.
>  
> It can happen with papers too.  Same name, same general look but different
> ingredients and the change takes place.    
>  
> Keep track of batch numbers while you can because they can help uncover a
> change. 
>  
>  
> Eric Neilsen
> Eric Neilsen Photography
> 4101 Commerce Street, Suite 9
> Dallas, TX 75226
>  
> www.ericneilsenphotography.com
> skype me with ejprinter
> Let's Talk Photography
>  
>   _____  
> 
> From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of David
> Kachel
> Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2013 12:25 PM
> To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Re: grainy appearance on watercolor papers
>  
>   
> "E.Neilsen" wrote:
> 
> >And sure as .. after I ran those experiments, the sizing would change,
> 
> Eric, the changes you talk about to watercolor papers, wouldn't they
> consist primarily of changes the manufacturers are forced to make in order
> to make the paper characteristics come out the same in the aggregate from
> batch to batch?
> 
> David Kachel
> 
> ___________________
> 
> Artist-Photographer
> Fine B&W Photographs
> 
> www.davidkachel.com
> david@... <mailto:david%40davidkachel.com> 
> 
> Gallery:
> www.reddoorfinephotographs.com
> director@...
> <mailto:director%40reddoorfinephotographs.com> 
> 
> PO Box 1893
> Alpine, TX 79831
> (432) 386-5787
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>