Digital BW, The Print

Hello Clayton.

If you ever take a look at an "estate auction" where many antiques--or
just antiquated--objects are sold you will usually see quite a few old
prints. Those from the early 1900s are generaly very yellow brownish
but not necessarily stained in patches etc. Many people are enamoured
of these and the nice ones sell very well with sometimes vigorous
bidding. Even acid containing papers may age fairly gracefully and
well outlive their owner. The stained and ugly ones are most often
photographs that were poorly processed or very poorly stored prints.
Old books of that era are another case in point.

I think you are correct in your view. One caveat, don't let EEM prints
lay around on a stack that is fanned out. The yellowing can occur very
rapidly and only on the uncovered part so would be extremely evident
in that case. This comes from my experience not conjecture.

Regards
Duane



--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Clayton Jones"
<cj@...> wrote:
>
> Hello Djon43,
>  
> >>So, assuming that the current EEM will exhibit these same
> >>characteristics as this older EAM...
> 
> >IMO that's not a reasonable "assumption" in view of the time and 
> >money that goes into making important prints.
> 
> The only assumption I made is that EEM will be like EAM.  Are you
> saying that isn't reasonable?
> 
>  
> >Think what an embarassment it would/should be, if someone actually
> >buys one with you knowing what sometimes/often/usually/always (?)
> >happens to an EEM print within a year or so. 
> 
> My suggestion was based on the conditional statement "If it's not
> meant to be permanent...".  Perhaps you missed that.  Of course if
> the print is advertised as archival then it shouldn't be used.  But if
> not, then an EEM print could give at least three years of viewing
> pleasure according to my test, probably more.  
> 
> That's what I was getting at when I listed my observations.  EEM
> prints don't suddenly turn horrible looking.  The paper simply goes
> warm rather quickly and then stops, and does it evenly without spots,
> blotches or streaks, and can go at least three years without any acid
> stains showing.  I was not trying to give bad advice.  I'm usually one
> of the people who warns beginners against using EEM for archival prints.
> 
> 
> >...knowing what sometimes/often/usually/always (?)
> >happens to an EEM print within a year or so...
> 
> Another reason I outlined my observations is that it occurred to me
> that perhaps many readers here _don't_ know what happens to an EEM
> print.  About all that's said about it here is don't use it for
> archival prints because it's not acid free and it yellows quickly.  My
> test print has just passed the 3-year point and this seemed like a
> good time to give a report on it.    
> 
> It's actually not all that bad looking, other than being warmer than
> it started out. If you never saw the original you'd not know the
> difference.  It's not nearly as yellow as the old Concord Rag which
> lots of people liked (and ocasionally lament the loss of).  We don't
> know how long it will take before acid stains appear.  Might be 5 or
> 10 years, might be next year - I've never heard or read anything about
> that.  All I know is that it doesn't happen in 3 years.  I plan to
> leave the test print on the windowsill indefinitely and will continue
> to watch it.
> 
> Regards,
> Clayton
> 
> 
> Info on black and white digital printing at    
> http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm
>