How archival is a straight print?

How archival is a straight print?

Well I'm not just being PC here but in my experience a straight print is just as archival as a gay print.

Granted the gay print may have a little more "joie de vivre" in some cases (but not all) and may even be a little more flamboyant, it's longevity is determined mostly by lifestyle. If it decides to stay in the closet, it could very well enjoy a long life, although probably not a very fulfilling one.

If it decides to announce itself to the world and say "hey look everybody here I am", then it may have a harder time of it, especially in different part of the country, (midwest, south).

As for the straight print, although usually outfitted in a more modest frame (see boring) but as long as it uses good materials and stays away from polyesters should do exceedingly well out in the world.

So overall, if treated properly, (and wears sunscreen) a straight and a gay print should share equally in a very long life.

Michael

Why would a straight print choose to hide in the closet? Perhaps this is locality specific. Around here straight prints are rarely kept in the closet.

Claire Senft said:

Why would a straight print choose to hide in the closet?...

Click to expand...

Denial

blansky said:

How archival is a straight print?

Well I'm not just being PC here but in my experience a straight print is just as archival as a gay print.

Granted the gay print may have a little more "joie de vivre" in some cases (but not all) and may even be a little more flamboyant, it's longevity is determined mostly by lifestyle. If it decides to stay in the closet, it could very well enjoy a long life, although probably not a very fulfilling one.

If it decides to announce itself to the world and say "hey look everybody here I am", then it may have a harder time of it, especially in different part of the country, (midwest, south).

As for the straight print, although usually outfitted in a more modest frame (see boring) but as long as it uses good materials and stays away from polyesters should do exceedingly well out in the world.

So overall, if treated properly, (and wears sunscreen) a straight and a gay print should share equally in a very long life.

Michael

Click to expand...

You must remember that the alternate alternative to straight is crooked. Now we have a different set of variables to consider. How crooked? Is it as simple as petty larceny, or might it be something as serious as grand larceny or even murder? These terms can range from very short to extremely long.
(Well, you asked for it.)

t_nunn said:

See, that's what confuses me. I hear this from
a lot of people, yet I also hear people say that if
the print is to be sold, it must be selenium
toned to archival standards. Is this mindset
from an earlier time when there were more
unknowns regarding paper and chemistry?

Click to expand...

The issue is somewhat complex. For one thing 25 or
30 years is no test of a prints archival quality. Likely
100 or more years is expected by those in the
business; museums, galleries, and collectors.

Selenium as we are familiar with it has not been on
the scene long enough for real world testing of it's archival
imbuing quality. Personally I consider selenium a " Trendy"
treatment. Perhaps it was the 50s when Kodak made a
safe selenium toner. The 60s and 70s saw HE, Hypo
Eliminator, as the way to long life.

The IPI, Image Permanence Institute, which concerns
itself primarily with microfilm has not considered selenium
an archival treatment for some years now. They have found
that sodium sulfide at a 1:9,999 dilution does impart a very
archival property to those film emulsions. Likely to some
degree that will also apply to B&W prints; Microfilm
and prints both having very fine grain.

The last word in archival treatment is Sulfur. Dan

I just scan and burn my most valuable images onto read/write CDs that I get for a Nickle apiece on the internet.
Then I can just destroy the negs because I know that my images will be safe forever.
:rolleyes:

Flotsam said:

I just scan and burn my most valuable images onto read/write CDs that I get for a Nickle apiece on the internet.
Then I can just destroy the negs because I know that my images will be safe forever.
:rolleyes:

Click to expand...

Finally someone who thinks outside the box.


See, with a little thought, anything can be accomplished.



Michael

dancqu said:

The issue is somewhat complex. For one thing 25 or
30 years is no test of a prints archival quality. Likely
100 or more years is expected by those in the
business; museums, galleries, and collectors.

Selenium as we are familiar with it has not been on
the scene long enough for real world testing of it's archival
imbuing quality. Personally I consider selenium a " Trendy"
treatment. Perhaps it was the 50s when Kodak made a
safe selenium toner. The 60s and 70s saw HE, Hypo
Eliminator, as the way to long life.

The IPI, Image Permanence Institute, which concerns
itself primarily with microfilm has not considered selenium
an archival treatment for some years now. They have found
that sodium sulfide at a 1:9,999 dilution does impart a very
archival property to those film emulsions. Likely to some
degree that will also apply to B&W prints; Microfilm
and prints both having very fine grain.

The last word in archival treatment is Sulfur. Dan

Click to expand...

Dan;

As I pointed out above, there is a degree of reciprocity in tests, a dependance on illuminant type, humidity and the proper mix of 'pollutant' gases such as sulfur dioxide, ozone and oxygen itself.

This makes the situation quite hazy when it comes to making a definitive statement on image stability either for B&W or color prints, whether they be analog or digital.

Just one example is illuminant intensiity. Most museums use about 100 - 150 fc while many offices use 500 fc, homes in summer have perhaps 120 fc. These are approximations, but the point is that they each give different answers for print fade (when normalizedd to FCH or some such) due to 'reciprocity' and ambient pollutant gases. Museums may use inert gas with low moisture content in their display cases or frames, whereas office sites may have more ozone and pollutants due to copy machines. The list goes on and on.

I am not disagreeing with anything you have said above, merely expanding on it and showing how hard it can be to make a valid prediction.

One thing that has become clear to me is that the peroxide or ferricyanide (or other oxidant) treatment for image stability is not well accepted now by most organizations doing these tests. Wilhelm Imaging Research and the Image Stability Labs at RIT have gone to far more sophisticated methods, as have both Fuji and Kodak.

And, little recent work has been published regarding the stability of B&W materials.

Since it takes thousands of hours to properly test an image for stability, and dozens of test types in addition to a lot of repeats (due to the large scatter inherent in this type of test), it would take an average individual several years before they could make a vaild claim regarding any given treatment.

PE

I am really suprised at the percentage of serious photographers here who don't tone their prints. It's extra work, yes. So is using fiber paper.

I selenium tone for the color shift away from green and for archival purposes.

I find it one of the most rewarding parts of the process.

T Nunn may be correct. From from me be it to criticize his typos or spelling. But I, for the life of you, can not understand why a straight print of an Alaskan National Park would not want to come out of the closet.

dancqu said:

They have found
that sodium sulfide at a 1:9,999 dilution does impart a very
archival property to those film emulsions. Likely to some
degree that will also apply to B&W prints; Microfilm
and prints both having very fine grain.

Click to expand...

It is a very different thing to test an effect of a certain solution in a laboratory and to recommend a certain processing sequence for practical purpose. A dilute solution of sodium sulfite solution is found effective in laboratory tests, but this does not immediately mean that it is a recommended practice.

In fact, a dilute solution of sodium sulfite has short shelf life and it is very problematic to apply in practice.

One of my two water wells and a lot of other wells here in this part of West Virginia smell like rotten eggs. I'm not talking about the ones whose effluent is flammable. I have some of those, too.

Ryuji, I'm sure dancqu was writing about the sulfide, not the sulfite. Is that what you meant to write as well?

I have a portrait taken of my father that is 80 years old made by a portrait studio. It is stongly sepia toned. It looks good enough to believe it was taken yesterday.