Colour Photograph Life
-
A
- Thread starter Kodiak
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
For Sale Canon EOS-1 with 50mm f/1.8 STM lens
- Started by SocalAstro
-
For Sale Mamiya M645 1000s film camera w/ 35mm Wide Angle Lens
- Started by SocalAstro
-
For Sale FS: Custom built 4x5 wide camera w/ (modern) 65mm f/5.6 Super Angulon
- Started by dirkfletcher
-
Free 4.5inch tiffen 85b filter
- Started by Gram Nylén
-
For Sale Film: B&W and Color
- Started by wjlapier
Forum statistics
MattKing
Moderator
Four colour carbon prints - Tod Gangler comes to mind: http://www.colorcarbonprint.com/
Any true gum dichromate print as well.
Are you looking for an answer as to how long a RA4 print will last on a house's inside wall before noticeable fading begins compared to an inkjet print in the same location?
If so there may be no easy answer in the sense that no-one knows how many hours of UV light will hit the print in your house, nor its strength although we do know your latitude which helps. Is the picture going to be in shade all the time during daylight hours but in a light that is strong enough to view without additional light or is it subject to direct sunshine some of the time?
I have a couple of RA4s hanging on my wall in a well lit room during daylight hours but which never have any direct sunlight on them They have been on the wall for about 11-12 years now and look much the same as when I put them up. As I never made a replica print that I keep in a dark drawer I cannot say there is no fading but I can see none and no-one who visits the house and see them for the first time comments on fading
I hope this helps
pentaxuser
The answer is "IT VARIES" and the variation is due to light intensity, air pollutants and other factors such as dye set for digital prints and print generation for color papers. There is a lot posted here on PHOTOTRIO in both the analog and digital forums and this has been brought up a lot elsewhere.
PE
PE
I am looking for permanence or Light-fastness of colour-Photographs that reproduces colours faithfully enough when just made.
Ph. Eng., there is a standard how the permanence or Light-fastness are measured, and is outlined in ANSI standard. It relates more to Oil-Paintings but the system is there.
Ph. Eng., there is a standard how the permanence or Light-fastness are measured, and is outlined in ANSI standard. It relates more to Oil-Paintings but the system is there.
Kodiak, I am aware of the system and have run thousands of dye stability tests on color papers from 1965 onward and this includes Cibachrome and Polaroid as well as "Kodaroid"!
There is no single answer as there is a huge variation in tests and dye responses. There is even reciprocity failure in temperature, humidity and light intensity to consider. So, again, there is no single answer. Fade is different at 500 fc vs 250 fc and different in the presence of H2O and some pollutant gases.
PE
There is no single answer as there is a huge variation in tests and dye responses. There is even reciprocity failure in temperature, humidity and light intensity to consider. So, again, there is no single answer. Fade is different at 500 fc vs 250 fc and different in the presence of H2O and some pollutant gases.
PE
PE
it is good to try to find the permanence. However you was unsuccessful just because you was not able to make even your own standard for the testing.
Here is one suggested system:
Make two near identical prints. One store on the safe place and another expose on the window for e.g. 6 months to direct Sun-Light, Sunny or cloudy, and count only days. After that time is over put the prints beside each other. Disregard all that changes as humidity, pollution, ...
If you see ANY change in the print this is bad news, but might be not catastrophic. It is what painters do for their Pigments.
The only concern for Photography is that there is no protection for the Colour-prints, like Resin (Copal, Amber, ...) or drying-Oil as in Oil-Paintings.
I would really like to know result, if anyone have it already.
Remember, art-work is not intended to be kept in the concrete walled room somewhere underground, but anyone should see it, have it in their own house and so exposed to sooo different conditions, and MUST survive all of them, except abuse.
it is good to try to find the permanence. However you was unsuccessful just because you was not able to make even your own standard for the testing.
Here is one suggested system:
Make two near identical prints. One store on the safe place and another expose on the window for e.g. 6 months to direct Sun-Light, Sunny or cloudy, and count only days. After that time is over put the prints beside each other. Disregard all that changes as humidity, pollution, ...
If you see ANY change in the print this is bad news, but might be not catastrophic. It is what painters do for their Pigments.
The only concern for Photography is that there is no protection for the Colour-prints, like Resin (Copal, Amber, ...) or drying-Oil as in Oil-Paintings.
I would really like to know result, if anyone have it already.
Remember, art-work is not intended to be kept in the concrete walled room somewhere underground, but anyone should see it, have it in their own house and so exposed to sooo different conditions, and MUST survive all of them, except abuse.
We had many standards for testing and ran more than you suggest. Did you know that cyan dye fades less under magenta and thus a blue fades more slowly than a cyan? Blacks fade more slowly than the individual dyes that make up the black? All of these are relevant. Who says we or anyone is unsuccessful? All dyes fade.... ALL. None can be made absolutely permanent. Permanent dyes do not exist.
Your comment about protection is not correct. The protections for oil paintings destroy some photographic materials, and so we use another. A Sorbitol soak with or without Formalin can do wonders as can a pH adjustment to about 4.5.
PE
Your comment about protection is not correct. The protections for oil paintings destroy some photographic materials, and so we use another. A Sorbitol soak with or without Formalin can do wonders as can a pH adjustment to about 4.5.
PE
Yes, very true, its good to try, and from that effort things are discovered. But Time is change, and there is nothing that is permanent in its cycle..
I did not say that photography should be coated with Linsed-Oil or anything like that. I just say how pigment are protected in OIL-PAINTINGS. That protection does not exist on colour-Photographs, and it is why now I do not know permanence of that Photographs. It should be some other protection(s) and it should be tested.
If you have test why you do not come out with results.
Permanence does not relate to for-ever. It has unit which is time. So there is no permanence as "very long" or like that. It should be as Permanence is 50-70 years e.g.
Can you please post result of what I defined as an example for the test?
If any part fade, no matter colour. it is cyan or ..., it fades. But after what time is the first noticable change?
If you have test why you do not come out with results.
Permanence does not relate to for-ever. It has unit which is time. So there is no permanence as "very long" or like that. It should be as Permanence is 50-70 years e.g.
Can you please post result of what I defined as an example for the test?
If any part fade, no matter colour. it is cyan or ..., it fades. But after what time is the first noticable change?
I've tested in the sun only. Cibachrome, Fuji Archive, Metal prints are best.
Dye transfer terrible and will fade from room light, but have good dark fading resistance.
Pigment inkjets pretty stable and will last in the sun for a year and a half before showing slight loss. Laser prints are also excellent, but they are not common for photogs.
See other thread on scanning versus wet prints for my rundown.
Bottom line...only display copies of color prints if you are worried about fading. But under normal lighting and no sun, a Fuji or inkjet may last 15 years with little loss, but am just guessing. To be sure you would have had to measured how much light was delivered over my tests in the sun versus how much light they get in a room and extrapolate.
Dye transfer terrible and will fade from room light, but have good dark fading resistance.
Pigment inkjets pretty stable and will last in the sun for a year and a half before showing slight loss. Laser prints are also excellent, but they are not common for photogs.
See other thread on scanning versus wet prints for my rundown.
Bottom line...only display copies of color prints if you are worried about fading. But under normal lighting and no sun, a Fuji or inkjet may last 15 years with little loss, but am just guessing. To be sure you would have had to measured how much light was delivered over my tests in the sun versus how much light they get in a room and extrapolate.
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2005
- Messages
- 1,619
- Format
- Large Format
Carefully study *everything* on these two websites...
http://wilhelm-research.com/
https://www.aardenburg-imaging.com/
...and then re-think your question.
http://wilhelm-research.com/
https://www.aardenburg-imaging.com/
...and then re-think your question.
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2011
- Messages
- 14,086
- Format
- 8x10 Format
You're asking for a simple answer to a question which itself is worthy of a book in length. There are a multitude of potential variables. And there is no resource that can begin to answer all the possibilities. Wilhelm's work was a big contribution, but is now known to contain quite a bit of premature assumptions or errors based on extrapolation, though his observations about the aging of older extant media is valuable. I find a lot of his methodology excessively dependent upon accelerated aging "torture tests", which do not in fact always accurately represent real-world conditions. Aardenburg's subsequent work addresses a number of Wilhelm's shortfalls concerning newer media. Incidentally, inkjet prints are NOT pigment prints, but complex blends of dyes, micro-pigments, and lakes (dyed inert pigment particles, kinda like flavored eggplant). So it all depends on exactly what colorants are involved in any specific image. Same with dye transfer prints - all kinds of dyes could be potentially chosen, so making any blanket statement about them is bunk. I specialized in Cibachromes, and now mostly do chromogenic Crystal Archive prints. UV ruins just about anything sooner or later, even the Sphinx of Egypt !
To start with, Wilhelm is not truly an accurate source of some information. After all, they are funded by industries. I know Henry personally and have spent up to 3 hours talking about this subject. He is trying to do the best, but sometimes this is not enough in the face of other pressures.
As for publishing, well, which data--- Light stability (high or low intensity??), high temperature keeping (wet or dry), pollution (SO2, O3, or what), or a mix of these plus various levels of UV and then you get into the problem of process... Do you look at skimpy wash, wash with bad water or what and then do you look at neutral scales or color scales (so you can measure density loss accurately).
This list goes on and on, but a typical dye stability test is huge. I have the course book here by my side, published by the ICPS and it is complex, believe me.
It seems to me that the OP may have not considered the complexity of this topic.
PE
As for publishing, well, which data--- Light stability (high or low intensity??), high temperature keeping (wet or dry), pollution (SO2, O3, or what), or a mix of these plus various levels of UV and then you get into the problem of process... Do you look at skimpy wash, wash with bad water or what and then do you look at neutral scales or color scales (so you can measure density loss accurately).
This list goes on and on, but a typical dye stability test is huge. I have the course book here by my side, published by the ICPS and it is complex, believe me.
It seems to me that the OP may have not considered the complexity of this topic.
PE
Yes indeed.
Slackercrurster: Thanks a lot, it helps. That is the way to go. Lightfastness relate to “Sun test only” (accelerated test).
Bob, I expected you know more about the matter, but thanks for a try.
PE, you spent so much time on testing and have no answer, just because you worry even will a fly land on your test sample during the test. You failed because you did not know your way.
go to: wetcanvas.com to find out how painters handle Lightfastness
go to: w.handprint.com, a lot of information
go to: Google-Lightfastness-wikipedia and see ASTM standard and way of rating
Saying the Sun-UV in my area is different than in Holland, and pollution vary from area to area, ..., is of no use to anyone.
Sir Joshua Oil-Paintings fade (PR83 problem) and no one ever blamed anything, be it fog, rain, pollution, UV, ..., but how he used the pigment. When I buy, say Michael Harding, Oil-Pain tube, on the label is Lightfastness of that paint. And he have a lot of different pigments. So how he arrived to that data, for each of them. If he went your path he will spend whole his life on one single Pigment and complaining on so complex conditions.
When I test some Oil-Paints I just make two samples and put one on the window, and from time to time I compare them, and it says to me a lot. Just so simple.
It seems that Photographers tends to complicate any question to un-answerable condition, while Painters are just opposite. Might be the reason is that Photography is highly technical and Camera owners tend to make it even more technical so it all looks so complex and difficult, while actually is not.
My problem here is that I do not practice colour Photography so can’t make a test.
Thanks to all for your time
Bob, I expected you know more about the matter, but thanks for a try.
PE, you spent so much time on testing and have no answer, just because you worry even will a fly land on your test sample during the test. You failed because you did not know your way.
go to: wetcanvas.com to find out how painters handle Lightfastness
go to: w.handprint.com, a lot of information
go to: Google-Lightfastness-wikipedia and see ASTM standard and way of rating
Saying the Sun-UV in my area is different than in Holland, and pollution vary from area to area, ..., is of no use to anyone.
Sir Joshua Oil-Paintings fade (PR83 problem) and no one ever blamed anything, be it fog, rain, pollution, UV, ..., but how he used the pigment. When I buy, say Michael Harding, Oil-Pain tube, on the label is Lightfastness of that paint. And he have a lot of different pigments. So how he arrived to that data, for each of them. If he went your path he will spend whole his life on one single Pigment and complaining on so complex conditions.
When I test some Oil-Paints I just make two samples and put one on the window, and from time to time I compare them, and it says to me a lot. Just so simple.
It seems that Photographers tends to complicate any question to un-answerable condition, while Painters are just opposite. Might be the reason is that Photography is highly technical and Camera owners tend to make it even more technical so it all looks so complex and difficult, while actually is not.
My problem here is that I do not practice colour Photography so can’t make a test.
Thanks to all for your time
Last edited:
How about some confusing real data? This is a real test on the stability of a digital printer dye under different conditions. The data seem to make no sense, but they do really when you consider that reactions take place differently at different temperatures.
As for the Wilhelm Institute, I remind you that they are sometimes funded by industry (but never by EK) and that they have never published data in any peer reviewed scientific journal. Other agencies and companies have done so.
I refer you to the ICPS book on image stability. It is available through ICPS. I have published the relevant information here a while ago.
PE
As for the Wilhelm Institute, I remind you that they are sometimes funded by industry (but never by EK) and that they have never published data in any peer reviewed scientific journal. Other agencies and companies have done so.
I refer you to the ICPS book on image stability. It is available through ICPS. I have published the relevant information here a while ago.
PE
Attachments
Kodiak, it might have helped if you had made your position clearer in your opening post. What seemed to me to be a straight question turned out not to be a straight question at all on which you wanted an answer. Had I known this I could have saved you time in reading or even quickly skimming my post and me time by not responding.
In future I will try and save both our times
pentaxuser
In future I will try and save both our times
pentaxuser
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2011
- Messages
- 14,086
- Format
- 8x10 Format
Painters that know what they are actually doing are even more nitpicky! Sure, some great painters didn't always care about the longevity of their pigments - but those works either aren't around anymore, or else a small fortune has been spent restoring them.
Gee, I post some real data as requested, to show how complex it can be, and it seems that the OP has folded.
PE
PE
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2008
- Messages
- 57
- Format
- 8x10 Format
Wich method do you recomended to protect the ra-4 prints when stored in museum quality boxes?
Clearfile , printfil polipropylene, glassine?
best regards
I have some prints stored every way and found that the biggest problems come from how they were processed and what they are stored next to. I find that a longer wash is better all around than the one recommended in the literature, and I have found that storing Cibachrome next to other materials is not good.
PE
PE
| Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:  |