Permanence of Silver Prints Revisited in 2020

[analog65]

Hi, I have been making some prints with the new Ilford 5th generation Multigrade RC Deluxe papers and I actually like the tonal values and aesthetics of these prints over the ones printed on their Classic FB papers.

With the negative history (true or untrue) around the lack of permanence of RC papers, I was wondering if there is any new information on permanence with this new generation 5 emulsion from Ilford?

I am hopeful they took into account the issues that have been identified in the past and addressed them, but I am not sure that is the case and I don't want to assume anything.

While I am taking the obvious precautionary steps such as processing the prints according to Ilfords guidelines and selenium toning for a slight increase in DMAX and overall contrast in addition to the improvement in permanence, I have also been using Sistan as the final step in my workflow to help with the permanence issues as well. But all of this is based on my understanding and certainly not scientific in any way.

I am starting to sell more of my silver gelatin prints and I would like to be able to provide some clear and unbiased information to my buyers about permanence and I would like to be able to print on this new RC paper with confidence and not worry about prints being returned for replacement in a few years.

I have emailed Ilford directly and asked these questions, but no response as of yet and I am not holding my breath that I will get a response.

Any information or referrals to credible information is much appreciated.

 

[CMoore]

I am just a beginner, but i cannot imagine Any paper having the problems you suggest.
Kodak, Ilford, Agfa, Oriental, etc etc......did any of those papers, made during the last 50 years, give reason to....... "worry about prints being returned for replacement in a few years."
Is it just because Ilford-5 is new..... is that why you have doubts.?

 

[analog65]

The issues with RC paper permanence are well documented, some credible, some probably rubbish, but it is too complex of a matter to discuss in a single reply and I don't want to derail this thread. I am hoping to get some quality replies on this long-standing issue in the context of the new Ilford emulsion.

If you want to get educated on this matter, read chapter 12 in Post Exposure, Advanced Techniques For the Photographic Printer by Ctein. You can download a free PDF from his website at http://ctein.com/booksmpl.htm

I am just a beginner, but i cannot imagine Any paper having the problems you suggest.
Kodak, Ilford, Agfa, Oriental, etc etc......did any of those papers, made during the last 50 years, give reason to....... "worry about prints being returned for replacement in a few years."
Is it just because Ilford-5 is new..... is that why you have doubts.?

 

[Kino]

The IPI might be a good place to start with your inquiry...
https://www.imagepermanenceinstitute.org/research/photographic.html

and for color (I know you didn't ask for this) as well as some information on B&W:
http://wilhelm-research.com/book_toc.html

 

[AgX]

The issues with RC paper permanence are well documented, some credible, some probably rubbish, but it is too complex of a matter to discuss in a single reply and I don't want to derail this thread.

One issue was related to the pigmented PE-layer that substitutes the Baryta-layer. I regard these issues as long solved. Well, as far as one can predict future...
Another issue was related to the missing "sink" formed by the Baryta-layer. This can be conquered by postprocessing treatment of the emulsion.

 

[reddesert]

I have prints I made on Ilford Multigrade IV RC paper, Kodak RC, and Arista VC RC paper about 20-25 years ago, stored under mixed conditions (low humidity mostly, but mostly just in a box, folder, or on the wall - that is, I didn't go crazy with buying museum level acid free boxes). These prints have held up well. I didn't do anything extreme in the processing - rapid fix, Perma wash, and a typical running water wash, no selenium toning.

Obviously I can't guarantee performance or tell how Multigrade V RC will look 20 years out, but it's my impression that issues with RC paper had to with paper generations before those available in the late 80s/90s.

 

[Andrew Kleinfeld]

I made fiber-based prints (then the only kind) as early as 1957 and 1958, using the sloppy technique you might expect of a 12 or 13 year old boy (wash water too cold, fixer maybe a little stale, too long in the fixer), and they are all still fine -- from the 50's, 60's, 70's, and since. My only prints that deteriorated are a few selenium toned prints from the 80's with inadequate fixation and splotchy staining. My RC prints from the 70's and 80's are fine too. All badly stored -- cardboard boxes, not acid-free. Albumen prints from the 1870's hanging on my wall (north facing, no sun hits them) are also fine. I look for deterioration, because I've certainly seen prints with deterioration, and I don't know why my prints don't show any. Maybe these preservation concerns are overblown.

 

[Andrew Kleinfeld]

I suppose I should add that all my color prints, both made in my darkroom and commercially printed, from the 70's, 80's, and 90's, have deteriorated a great deal, as have old color negatives, even when stored properly. The only way to make them tolerable is to digitize them and repair the scans. So maybe color deteriorates, black and white just doesn't in most cases.

 

[Kino]

Seems that color is fugitive; maybe good for your lifetime if you are lucky.

Do color separations if the image means a lot to you.

 

[summicron1]

Properly processed for archival quality, your prints should last a lifetime and then some.

I mean, several folks here have given examples of even badly-made b/w prints stored poorly and still holding up.

I suspect the real acid (sorry) test is the drug store prints everyone mom/grandma/whatever got in the 30s and 40s and stuck into those amazingly acid black paper albums with photo corners.

I dunno about yours, but mine are still like new. We're talking drug store b/w prints on fiber paper from 1945.

 

[analog65]

Hi and thanks for all the comments and replies.

In my original post, I shared that I was looking for some credible information that I could share with customers/collectors about the permanence of the new Ilford 5th generation RC Multigrade Deluxe prints. It would be a best-case scenario to get that information from Ilford, but I doubt that will happen. I have several messages into them with no replies so far.

150 years of history tells us that fiber prints when processed properly and toned will hold up for this period of time at least and since RC paper has only been around since the 1970s, that history just isn't there and not to mention the difficult start that RC paper had in the beginning.

It basically seems impossible to get the information from that I am seeking from the manufacturer, so I have a hard decision to make most likely. I can either continue with the time-proven fiber papers that aren't as desirable to me from an aesthetic perspective or risk going with RC paper based on very little information and none from the manufacturer.

I look forward to any additional thoughts on this.

 

[NedL]

Not trying to be negative, but if you're using sitstan this is a thread worth reading.
My understanding is that the well-known problems with RC from the 70s and 80s have been pretty much solved, but I don't know where to point you for references.

 

[MattKing]

RC also has real advantages when it comes to longevity.
Prints can suffer from two main types of damage over time: chemical and environmental deterioration, as well as physical damage - tearing, abrading, creasing and wrinkling - due to exterior forces.
The RC substrate is inherently quite strong - in many cases stronger than FB papers - when it comes to resisting physical damage from exterior forces.
Some of my nearly 50 year old RC prints show some signs of deterioration, but so have some of my fibre prints from back then.
As I am also that much older, I make no representations about whether I personally have deteriorated since that time - I'm still a young teenager at heart, after all .

 

[AgX]

It would be a best-case scenario to get that information from Ilford, but I doubt that will happen.

Well, there has been a lot of research done and published, by a manufacturer and independent researchers. And the PE-issue is not even discussed anymore.

 

[analog65]

Hi, I guess that was my point in my message. Where is that research? I've looked and can't come up with anything from Ilford and the only independent research I was able to find was by Ctein, which I provided a link to.

Thanks

Well, there has been a lot of research done and published, by a manufacturer and independent researchers. And the PE-issue is not even discussed anymore.

 

[analog65]

Hi, thanks for the link to that thread. I read the first few pages and I am guessing the OP probably did not follow the proper workflow as he eventually admitted. While very unfortunate for him, I don't think it was an issue with Sistan. However, it underscores the importance of following the directions closely and I will most certainly make sure I do that. Thanks for sharing that, very helpful.

Not trying to be negative, but if you're using sitstan this is a thread worth reading.
My understanding is that the well-known problems with RC from the 70s and 80s have been pretty much solved, but I don't know where to point you for references.

 

[AgX]

Ilford Imaging was very active on this and published through their head of research. I myself discussed the matter of PE-layer permance with her about 12 years ago. Already then she called that a solved-issue since years.

I myself think there are better approaches possible and discussed this with a manufacturer. But we have to use what is offered.

 

[jeffreyg]

I use fiber base paper and have not seen deterioration in prints made almost 50 years ago. I also use 100% cotton paper for digital prints with Epson UltraChrome inks. When I exhibit and sell prints I label as to the material. One thing that has not been mentioned is how the prints are mounted. I live in a humid area and have noticed on some dry mounted prints on cotton board that climate
"stains" have occurred on the board but the prints are fine. I only use acid-free materials. Once I realized that could occur I stopped dry mounting and use archival corners unless dry mounting is specifically requested. Also remember that once the print leaves your possession you don't know how it will be handled. Over 50 years ago I had two Ansel Adams prints matted and framed by a framing establishment and to my dismay they were not properly done and although the prints are fine the mats which they glued together are not. For framing I only use a frame shop that knows how to handle photographs or I do it myself.

http://www.jeffreyglasser.com/

http://www.sculptureandphotography.com/

 

[Mr Bill]

I am just a beginner, but i cannot imagine Any paper having the problems you suggest.
Kodak, Ilford, Agfa, Oriental, etc etc......did any of those papers, made during the last 50 years, give reason to....... "worry about prints being returned for replacement in a few years."
Is it just because Ilford-5 is new..... is that why you have doubts.?

Ohhh yeahhhh. For an eye opener download (free) Henry Wilhelm's book from his website. Check chapter 17 regarding the earlier b&w RC papers. Then if you're interested in the problems of earlier color papers, review chapters 1 and 3. (Note that Wilhelm's book was published about 25 years ago, so the "earlier" papers I refer to are beyond that.)

The main issues with earlier b&w RC prints seem to have been a result of being exposed to sunlight plus being kept in a sealed frame. I'm not gonna try to describe the mechanisms without rereading some literature, but it seems generally accepted that the cause of the problem has been addressed. I don't have any first-hand knowledge of that, though.

I have emailed Ilford directly and asked these questions, but no response as of yet and I am not holding my breath that I will get a response.

I think that this is a smart thing for you to do, but I think it would be smart of Ilford to stick only with information that is made public on their website. So I wouldn't hold out much hope about getting inside information, at least in writing.

I honestly don't know what I'd do in your situation. If you do relatively low volume but fairly high-priced work you might consider making a backup copy of each print, then keep it in storage. Or perhaps begin a couple years of "testing," where you might perhaps have a number of prints displayed in places such as restaurants or beauty salons where a variety of air contaminants/oxidizing gases, etc., might be present (the frame cannot be sealed if testing the effect of the gases). As well as the classic test - daily exposure to direct sunlight while in a sealed frame. And of course you need to periodically monitor the samples vs a reference.

 

[Mr Bill]

Well, there has been a lot of research done and published, by a manufacturer and independent researchers. And the PE-issue is not even discussed anymore.

Ilford Imaging was very active on this and published through their head of research. I myself discussed the matter of PE-layer permance with her about 12 years ago. Already then she called that a solved-issue since years.

Hi, I would imagine that the problem has long been solved, but don't recall seeing any concrete information. Are there any specific links or references that you can share?

 

[AgX]

No. That is why I discussed the matter back then. It had been handled within the industry.

You may read-up what Wilhelm and Ctein wrote about it. And come to your own conclusion. As said, I would take a different approach than the industry did then.
But the whole issue seems a non-topic anymore in permanence research.

 

[pentaxuser]

Frankly as MG V is brand new then no-one can give examples of its longevity. All we can say( give assurances in other words) is that we see no reason why MG V's longevity should be any worse than MG IV unless Ilford had failed to introduce whatever it was about MG IV that secured its longevity and either is unaware of something missing or has chosen to not reveal it. Neither of these options is in theory impossible so you need to decide what on the weight of evidence that Photrio can provide or evidence that other sources provide that pertain to MG IV whether either of my two above scenarios are likely.

When selling prints, how long a life is acceptable to you? With the usual caveats on display conditions then if we know what is acceptable to you then maybe there are enough members who can produce prints from MG IV that meet your longevity criterion to either give you the assurance you need or not as the case may be.

It may even be that MG IV has not been around long enough either to meet your longevity requirements which would point to the only safe avenue being the use of FB or even FB toned in sepia.

pentaxuser

 

[DREW WILEY]

A number of sheer incidental shoot -from-the-hip comments so far which have little in common with the vast amount of objective study given by conservators to the subject. If you really care, do some serious homework.

 

[Bob Carnie]

I have only done fibre base prints for customers, RC for contact sheets only... i have been doing this since 1991 , I would never consider an RC print for exhibition but that is just my 2cents on the matter.

 

[DREW WILEY]

I had a music teacher still giving me bad squint-eyed looks up till the year he died of old age due to some bad notes I played when I was 7 years old. They never forget. RC papers had some interaction between display UV and the base that gave them a bad reputation which has never been forgiven either, whether the problem still exists now or not. I drymount black and white prints, so RC is off my list of options anyway. I have used RC for temporary use, namely images intended for commercial offset printing.