Black and White Resin Print Archivalness

[jp498]

I've got RC prints from the late 80's that still appear perfect. Some have been behind glass and on display most of this time. That's 20+ years. I used mostly Ilford multigrade and a little Kodak polycontrast RCIII. I suspect things are even better now. I know image quality has improved a bit for RC paper.

 

[Photo Engineer]

what would the retained hypo test be?

These are available from many photo suppliers.

It is a solution that turns brownish yellow when dropped onto the border of a print that is improperly washed. It is mainly AgNO3 and Acetic Acid.

This is described in many textbooks on photo processing.

PE

 

[Ektagraphic]

I have some that I have been using to check my fixer if that is the same thing....I didn't know that it could be put on prints...

 

[removed account4]

I have some that I have been using to check my fixer if that is the same thing....I didn't know that it could be put on prints...

nooo patrick
that is hypo check for checking the amount of silver in your fixer ( exhaustion )
you want what is called residual hypo test kit ... or something like that ..

 

[Ian Grant]

This is not correct according to the article by Ctein.

Overwashing of RC prints led to the problem which was caused by atmospheric effects. By reducing the wash, Ctein showed that small amounts of Sulfur were retained, which by forming Ag2S helped stabilize the image. This is similar to the effect of Sistan and Ctein showed the relationship.

However, one must treat image stability (Ctein's study for example) apart from the stability of the support itself. Early RC supports tended to crack after years of exposure to the sun and to the atmosphere. In most cases, the images were fine.

After about 1970, the RC papers were fine and image stability was fine for B&W prints as long as they were not overwashed.

PE

The issues I'm talking about occurred with Ilfospeed papers which were only introduced in 1974, and a problem is that not all manufacturers papers were the same base/support. Earlier images made on unbranded ex-Governmement PE waterproof papers were fine, this was probably made by Kentmere.

The images that suffered image bleach were all printed between 1974 and 1977/8.

Ian

 

[Tim Gray]

Search for 'hypo test' at Freestyle or Photo Forumulary. They both sell the Photo Forumulary's residual hypo test.

 

[Simon R Galley]

Dear All,

When in doubt read Photo engineers posts..............

RC mono paper is very, very stable in terms of the image, provided it is not grossly overwashed.

The issue is the dimensional stability of the RC base versus that of the coatings and the way they
age together. We have many thousands of coating samples going back over 40 years of coating RC
that are absolutely fine so, so far so good.

To make 'archival' prints use FB correctly washed ( as per the ILFORD system ) and then Selenium tone.

I have many, many original prints in excess of 100 years old, yes, some have a degree of 'silvering' but these were not 'archive washed' and certainly not selinium toned.

Simon ILFORD photo / HARMAN technology limited :

 

[Marco B]

Well, since most of the discussion seems to focus on the RC's plastic layers, which are polyethylene, why not read up a bit on that?:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polyethylene
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dyneema
Dead Link Removed
The degradation and stability of polyethylene with small additions of metal oxides under UV-irradiation

In never knew there were so many types of polyethylene. Especially the "bullet-proof" vest variant is also new to me... Next time someone tries to shoot me, I'll hold up my box of Ilford Multigrade RC!

The only real reference to instability of polyethylene is a reference to UV light susceptibility ("In principle the chemical resistance of PE with the density rises. The gas and steam permeability are higher than with most plastics. By sun exposure an embrittlement can occur, soot as UV stabilizer is usually used with PE."). Considering decomposing plastic bags in the countryside, this is probably not a nonsense argument.