Many years ago, I prepared some black and white photos for a
time capsule to be opened in 100 years. I had to fix them
archivally using two baths of hypo and washing them for a longer
length of time than usual. However, I never remember purchasing a
photograph, a silk screen, a batik, or a print either from a store,
a gallery, or from a booth at a fair and asking how light stable it
was or whether it was created with dye or pigment inks (if inks
were used). Yet this has been a big topic of controversy in the
computer arena. Some key words in this controversy are:
- acid free paper
- dye based inks
- pigment based inks
- archival inks vs non-archival inks
- specific paper-ink combinations
- longevity of different types of paper, etc.
- While there are custom printers such
as Glicee and Iris printers, many people want to be able to print
from their studio or from their home. Epson has filled this market
with printers from the dye based 870/1270/1280 models to the
pigment or shall I say non-dye based inks of the 2000P and 2200.
These models were all geared toward the home market. The dye based
models boasted a longevity with matte paper under good conditions
of about 20 years. The 2000P boasted well over 100 with certain
papers and the 2200 boasts less but has a wider color gamut. This
information is only necessary to set the stage. Aside from these
native manufacturer inks, there are third party archival inks, both
dye and pigment for the Epson printers (as well as for some other
printers) that can be used on different substrates and will give
different longevities as well as different color gamuts. Archival
black inks in shades of grey are also available for the printing of
black and white prints. This column will ignore the artistic
attributes of the inks and focus on the question of permanence and
how important it really is or how it really should be. I have
worked with a number of media through the years and have belonged
to many art leagues where artists used many types of media
including pen and ink, and no one ever questioned the longevity of
the piece of art work. Why then has it become so controversial in
the graphic fine arts field? I have prints that have been upon my
wall for over eight years now that have been printed on paper that
was not archival with inks that were not archival and they have not
faded. Why? Because like any art print I have not subjected them to
direct sunlight and I have put them under glass or Plexiglas. In
other word, I have treated them as I would any other piece of art
work that I own. Right now I am in the process of experimenting
using different papers and coating them with different substrates.
No matter what ink I use, I cannot tell how it will react to the
different substrate in time. If I were putting together a
multimedia collage using photos, glue, magazine pictures, etc., no
one would question me. Does that mean I should not do this using
the computer? In any other medium I wouldn't even think of this
question, but the longevity of graphic prints has become an area of
controversy. What is your opinion? The final installment in this
series will be on creating your own substrates using precoaters,
adding texture to a print, and a few other secrets that are not
generally revealed.
- As always, I invite you to visit my web site, Perpetual
Visions
- The Paula Sanders Report is a regular Renderosity
Front Page featured column, where Paula investigates and comments
on graphic software, techniques, and other relevant material
through her reviews, tutorials, and general articles.
|
Comments