HARMAN technology Limited...our little surprise.....

[Simon R Galley]

If you look in the Silver Gelatin thread you will see a link to a new web page....

www.ilfordphoto/gelatin/silvergelatin.asp

HARMAN technology for the last couple of months have been including ultra high quality stickers in all rolls and packets of our Fibre Base products, these are packaged in a foil pack.

This initiative is to help educate buyers of photographic images to understand what is meant by Silver Gelatin, and especially people who make and sell images printed on our FB products to be able to identify these as high quality silver gelatin prints by attaching the stamp. As the weblink is on the stamp buyers can understand what a silver gelatin print is and why it is important and value added.

A press release will be released in the next couple of weeks or so giving a fuller explanation, I will post it on APUG of course...

As they will be in every pack and every size it will take some time for them to move through the supply chain, so when you do get a shiny foil pack in your ILFORD paper box you know what it is!.

We hope this adds to your offering if you are selling genuine 'silver gelatin' prints made on ILFORD FB paper.

These stamps will continue to be added to all packs of ILFORD FB paper, it not a 'special' and of course they are free of charge and no price change to any FB product has been made.

Simon ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology Limited :

 

[Steve Smith]

Excellent... but are RC prints not silver gelatin too?


Steve.

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

Great initiative, Simon!

 

[andrew.roos]

Great idea!

The correct link is http://www.ilfordphoto.com/gelatin/silvergelatin.asp.

Does this imply that Ilford does not believe that RC papers have the archival permanence required to qualify?

Regards
Andrew

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

More importantly, collectors who are interested specifically in silver gelatin prints don't believe that RC prints have the archival permanence required to qualify. If the goal is to strengthen the position of silver gelatin in the fine art market with respect to inkjet, then it's probably best not to confuse the issue by treating RC as equivalent to FB.

 

[GuyS.]

I've just found 18 stickers in a box of 50 sheets of MGIV FB. I think you are slightly over estimating my ability to make the final print

 

[Simon R Galley]

Dear Andrew: Thanks for the correct link, I am truly analog!

As to the RC v FB....well, David gives a very good answer.

We have had many debates on RC v VB on APUG, but technically, in terms of true archival permanence FB is more stable due to the base characteristics, the emulsions are equally stable. But the fact is that RC is incredibly stable as well.

Simon. ILFORD photo / HARMAN technology Limited :

 

[tkamiya]

Simon,

Can you possibly make those stamps available to those of us who bought a large (to me) stock of paper and still working on the existing inventory?

Also, in years to come, and certainly within the time frame these fine FB prints are expected to last, the Internet will become thing of the past. Having a web URL for full explanation will become meaningless then. It would be nice if you could make a small brochure of some kind and make them available with explanation of Silver Gelatin prints. I always thought putting URL on something is like the "fax back" of the past.... of course none of these fax back stuff are available now. (for those who has never seen a fax back... it was a service in 70s and 80s where a consumer can get a printed something get immediately by dialing a fax number from a fax machine) I will be willing to pay for a reasonable amount for a pack of brochures if such things were available.

 

[Steve Roberts]

As an RC user I find myself feeling a little confused and/or short changed on this one.
Collectors may or may not have a preference for FB products but the selling point of many of our products to Joe Public is usually that the print uses traditional silver-gelatine technology rather than any implied longevity. Unfortunately, this seems to be labelling RC as the poor relation of FB, however stable RC is upheld to be by the manufacturers.

I'd have welcomed something like this that could be applicable for both FB and RC users but now feel somewhat left out in the cold!

Steve

 

[Michel Hardy-Vallée]

I had a quick look at the archival processing sequence (http://www.ilfordphoto.com/gelatin/silvergelatinprinters.asp) and the steps for selenium toning go: fix, tone, hypo-clear, wash.

I'm not an expert, but I've seen everywhere (i.e. Kodak and Tim Rudman) the need to do at least a first wash before toning, in order to avoid uneven toning.

Might be worth a wee correction?

 

[Simon R Galley]

Dear T.Kamiya,

I will look into making the stickers available as an item:

Dear Steve,

Sorry you feel 'short changed' and we are certainly not labelling RC as the poor relation of FB, nothing like it.

Dear Michel,

I have boundless admiration for KODAK, always have, and as for Tim Rudman, a true darkroom hero who's photographs stand proudly in our boardroom ( and in my home ).

But the sequence as described by our technical service is the one I will always recommend.

Simon ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology Limited :

 

[Shawn Dougherty]

I've just found 18 stickers in a box of 50 sheets of MGIV FB. I think you are slightly over estimating my ability to make the final print

Ha!!! =D

 

[Ektagraphic]

Very cool! I believe it has been brought up before, but why not just putting a backprint on the paper?

 

[Shawn Dougherty]

why not just putting a backprint on the paper?

I sure hope not!!!!!!!!! I use Ilford MGIV to make paper negatives. Plus, I (and many others) drymount our prints so a back-print would not be visible.

 

[Simon R Galley]

Back printing is no longer an option that is available, we would not do it anyway. :

Simon ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology Limited :

 

[Toffle]

This is great, Simon! Thanks. The stickers were not in the packs of MGWT I purchased last week here in Canada, but no doubt that is older stock.

I had not heard of using Washaid to dilute Selenium. What is the benefit of this?

 

[Oren Grad]

Photographers/printers using this stamp have agreed to follow a strict archival processing sequence that will ensure your print has an extremely long life...

BIG can of worms, now open. Yes, I saw the disclaimer of liability.

I think developing more distinctive branding for silver products is a great idea. But I also think it's a mistake to base it on "archival" hype. Even when the recommended processing sequence is followed, there are no guarantees. Beyond that, the integrity of this branding is at the mercy of printer behavior and environmental conditions that are far beyond Harman's control. When someone shows up with a deteriorating print with the stamp on it, you will be placed in a very awkward position, regardless of any defensive hair-splitting based on the disclaimer.

It would be wonderful to call attention to the distinctive beauty that can be achieved with silver gelatin paper - which, alas, the wording associated with the stamp doesn't do. It's reasonable to point out that silver-on-fiber has a relatively favorable track record of stability when processed properly and stored appropriately. I don't think it's wise to offer what sounds like a guarantee, unless you are actually promising to replace deteriorated prints - which, of course, is not practical for you to do. I have great respect for those photographers selling prints who do offer such a guarantee. But when I see a photographer carrying on about how "archival" his/her prints are but without the necessary caveats, not only does it not give me extra confidence, it sets off alarm bells.

Sorry I can't be more enthusiastic.

 

[vic vic]

agree with oren grad,
no such remote-guarantee can be given,
and mentioning the unique qualities and character of fine crafted silver print in traditional way is at least as important as permanence of the print.

 

[Marco B]

I think developing more distinctive branding for silver products is a great idea. But I also think it's a mistake to base it on "archival" hype. Even when the recommended processing sequence is followed, there are no guarantees. Beyond that, the integrity of this branding is at the mercy of printer behavior and environmental conditions that are far beyond Harman's control.

agree with oren grad,
no such remote-guarantee can be given,
and mentioning the unique qualities and character of fine crafted silver print in traditional way is at least as important as permanence of the print.

Yes, I've read the "guidance", but as the word says, it's "guidance", not a rule, and Harman isn't making any claims about archivability on the stickers, just offering and notifying a potential future owner a silver gelatin print another way to identify it as such... Just look at what the stickers really tell:



Whatever the limitations, I still think this is a nice initiative.

 

[Nicholas Lindan]

Can opener, can of worms, open ...

The web site to which the purchaser of a stickered print is led says: "...Prints made in the same way over 100 years ago are still in good condition today..."

Well, that pretty much excludes RC prints.

Even in FB, I don't know of a single 100 year old print that was made to Ilford's 'archival methods'.

Ah, well, "made in the same way" gives a whole lot of wiggle room. And anyway, we know what it means. We think. Or maybe it's best not to think on it too much.

 

[SuzanneR]

Yes, I've read the "guidance", but as the word says, it's "guidance", not a rule, and Harman isn't making any claims about archivability on the stickers, just offering and notifying a potential future owner a silver gelatin print another way to identify it as such... Just look at what the stickers really tell:

View attachment 53514

Whatever the limitations, I still think this is a nice initiative.

Agreed, though I can easily see this may prove to be a can of worms in the long run, we'll see, but I just want to be sure I understand what this is... it's a sticker that you are meant to place on the back of your finished prints? I've always been a little reluctant to put anything except my signature/title/date on the back written in pencil, and wonder if the sticker itself will prove to be damaging to the print's archival qualities?

I must say, I like the initiative, because I think there's a lot of confusion out there about papers.

 

[tkamiya]

I wonder if we are going to have counterfeit Ilford paper stickers showing up in the future... Can Ilford make the sticker in a way it'll fail to adhere when stuck on something other than genuine Ilford FB paper? Better yet, it'll self-destruct taking the paper with it?

 

[Bob Carnie]

I am having a hand punch made to emboss and sign in the emboss.
Probably- type of print,year printed, and my signature.

Agreed, though I can easily see this may prove to be a can of worms in the long run, we'll see, but I just want to be sure I understand what this is... it's a sticker that you are meant to place on the back of your finished prints? I've always been a little reluctant to put anything except my signature/title/date on the back written in pencil, and wonder if the sticker itself will prove to be damaging to the print's archival qualities?

I must say, I like the initiative, because I think there's a lot of confusion out there about papers.

 

[Shawn Dougherty]

Sticker Directly on Print

but I just want to be sure I understand what this is... it's a sticker that you are meant to place on the back of your finished prints? I've always been a little reluctant to put anything except my signature/title/date on the back written in pencil, and wonder if the sticker itself will prove to be damaging to the print's archival qualities

As someone who works in a frame shop (and a photographer who dry-mounts many of his own prints)...

I would NOT put that sticker on the back of the print itself. IN MY EXPERIENCE... most people who buy prints do so with the intent of having them framed and putting them on the wall. MANY want them dry-mounted so that they do not become wavy over time. Dry-mounting a print with a sticker on the back would be ugly.

We've had several customers come in with prints that had copyright stickers on the back and we couldn't mount them. In those cases the customer went back to the photographer and explained the situation, then got a new print... When the customers came back they said the photographers told them they had simply never thought of the issue and are now using stamps.

My suggestion would be to keep the sticker on the mat board, or better yet, on the crystal clear bag in which you're showing it.

 

[Oren Grad]

Even in FB, I don't know of a single 100 year old print that was made to Ilford's 'archival methods'.

Nor of any 100 year old prints made with the same paper stock and emulsions used to manufacture current Ilford FB papers.