Yellowing of RC prints in office environment

[ooze]

here's the real thing to keep in mind: whatever's doing that to those prints is also entering your lungs, and your bloodstream -- how ya feeling these days?

That's what I thought as well.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Simon has posted information here that applies to almost all B&W papers from reputable manufacturers. This includes Fuji, Kodak, Ilford and Agfa. Others may be in this group but I don't have good information to rank them with these tip tier companies.

Yes, sunlight hurts prints, but direct sunlight for one year should not cause this problem. It is therefore due to either a pollutant or bad processing.

Even at this late date, the prints can be tested for retained hypo and retained silver by using the standard tests. If the prints turn even darker brown, then it is the process that is at fault. If they do not, then it is likely a pollutant. If there is no change, the doubt remains if it is really a pollutant or if the prints had a bad process, but it was marginal in the sense that the prints have reached their limit of yellowing.

I guess I still don't know what kind of paper this is.

PE

 

[RalphLambrecht]

i go as far as claiming that an untoned print inot completely processed. i've dne quite a few tests on print stability,ang even lightly toned prints were always better than untoned prints. if the prints are not toned ,processing is not completed yet!

 

[RalphLambrecht]

insufficient fixing is the most common processing error, insufficient washing is not. this is particulary true for RC.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

trust the people who have done these tests. processing is not complete without toning.the difference is immense.

 

[ooze]

So, Ooze, what brand did you use?

There are three prints in question. All are Ilford RC glossy but different types: one Ilfospeed, one single weight Multigrade and one double weight Portfolio.

I should add that with Ilford materials I've never encountered a problem which would directly point the finger to Ilford. Their quality has been top notch and I'm grateful for that.

The only thing that comes to my mind is to make a couple of prints, identically processed, and hang one up at home and the other in the office and see what happens. Hopefully I can report back in a year or two...

Thanks all for taking the time and effort to respond.

Cheers.

 

[ooze]

Just a thought: did your colleagues "pin" the prints to some furniture? .

No. Two were placed on a large, unused monitor and the third was just kinda lying around loose on a desk.

 

[ooze]

trust the people who have done these tests. processing is not complete without toning.the difference is immense.

I'm left undecided on toning RC prints. As much as I respect your tests on this issue Ralph, I suspect Ilford would not make the opposite claim without having done their bit of research.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Toning is not essential. I have seen excellent photographs that are 100 years old and that were not toned! Toning was originally used for changing the "tone" or color of an image, and thus the name. The improved stability, at that time, was secondary.

PE

 

[Rich Ullsmith]

Wow. I am getting the impression that if I look cockeyed at my untoned rc prints, they might go poof. Yet this has not been my experience no matter the brand of paper.

My own darkroom is an affront to every OSHA and HAZMAT code ever written. It is as humid as a cave and I spill chemicals regularly. The sink perpetually drips. There is some mold on the drywall that I paint over from time to time. I can't see any office environment being this harsh on rc prints. I stick things on the darkroom walls with the confidence that they will be destroyed sooner or later, but there they are. Perhaps the brand of thumbtacks has something to do with it.

 

[Sal Santamaura]

...They should be selenium toned and hermetically sealed...

I'd ventilate, not seal, framed RC prints. See pages 158 through 168 here:

http://ctein.com/PostExposure2ndIllustrated.pdf​

 

[Sal Santamaura]

...I have seen excellent photographs that are 100 years old and that were not toned!...

I'll wager a copy of your book and DVD that none of those photographs were printed on RC paper.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Sal, of course not, but modern RC lasts just as Simon has said, and I agree with him.

Current RC, properly processed (wash and fix) with no toning, should last for over 100 years. With severe conditions, you may see bronzing of the image. Toning will eliminate the bronzing.

I have RC prints that are 50 years old and they loo;k just fine.

PE

 

[Sal Santamaura]

...I have RC prints that are 50 years old and they loo;k just fine...

Have any of them been displayed in light while inside sealed frames during a significant portion of that time? If so, I'd be very impressed that they still look good.

I have many RC prints that are 30 years old and still look fine, but they've been stored in darkness in albums and able to "breathe." RC has its place, but, in my opinion, hung on a wall sealed in a frame isn't that place.

 

[Photo Engineer]

As Ctein showed, prints can be underwashed and overwashed. They must be done just right. They do keep.

And mine were mainly in albums, but some were in glassed frames on full display.

PE

 

[SkipA]

if they had SILVERED OUT that would be even cooler !

I worked in an office for more than a decade that had a hallway filled with photos of employees. Some of the photos had come from a previous building and were quite old. There were new pictures being added periodically, generally at significant milestone anniversaries, like 10 years, 20 years, and so forth. All were matted and framed 5x7 photos behind glass. It was glossy paper, but I couldn't tell whether RC or fiber behind the glass. What was interesting was that all of the photos would start to show a yellowish shiny silver plating over time. It would generally develop on pictures that had been there for 7 or 8 years, and it was progressive. The older it was, the more "plated" it became. It really looked like slightly oxidized silver plating.

I never did figure out what caused it. I would hate for something like that to happen to my photos. It was weird looking, not attractive at all.

 

[removed account4]

i love silvered out images
they give a look that no other medium can offer.

 

[Leigh B]

Simon, please don't oversell your product.

Simon does not "sell" anything.

In fact he's quite conscientious in ensuring that his answers are factual and objective.

We're lucky to have his expertise (and PE's) so readily available to the community.

- Leigh

 

[removed account4]

Simon does not "sell" anything.

In fact he's quite conscientious in ensuring that his answers are factual and objective.

We're lucky to have his expertise (and PE's) so readily available to the community.

- Leigh

+1

THANKS SIMON !

 

[MattKing]

I think it is because they are around a bunch of IT people/engineers

 

[piu58]

I got images degradation in thew way Ctein describes it in his book: Changing the silver into brownish reaction products, mostly at black/white borders. This happened always with prints under glas glass which were exposed to the sun light. The degradation happened in some years, not some monthes.
I saw this at Kodak, Ilford and Foma RC papers. They were untoned und un-sistaned. It seems that the TiO2 problem is not fully solved yet.

I never saw any degradation in free presented prints (without glass), and of course nothing happened with my photos dark stored in boxes. I never saw a yellowing in the highlights, I alway got changes in the silver itself.

I am sure that the papers are sufficent fixed an washed. Incorrectly processed papers would degrade in boxes too, may in a slightly longer time. If your photos degrade only when presented then something chemical is different to baryta papers.

Therefore I make papers for long presentation on baryta. Such papers are much less sensitive to sun light.

 

[Vaughn]

Just for fun, here is my first image I ever printed (a self-portrait with the Rolleiflex) -- in the employee darkroom at the Grand Canyon in 1977. Chemicals were fresh, but no guarentee about the process! Some fading of the details in the highlights.

I gave this print to my dad the same year, and my mom framed it -- probably an Aaron Brothers mat and frame. It was displayed (no direct sunlight) for about 33 years, despite my offers to reprint it, LOL! I doubt that it was window-matted with acid-free material, some masking tape was on the back, and no toning. Another copy made at the same time and tossed into a folder looks like it did the day I made it.

Kodak RC glossy

 

[Poisson Du Jour]

We've got old family photos from 1946 that have absolutely no yellowing, degradation, breakdown or whatnot, in B&W and colour, some hand-coloured. Mind you, they are stored in many bog-standard albums that only come out when Uncle Frank and Twiggy stumble here and need their memories jogged of what they looked like "in them thar olden days". (Better than now... ) . I surmise the chemical makeup of papers way back in the mists of time were either more stable or the modern era industrial revolution has a bigger role to play in imparting and accelerating deterioration of un-tined RC or FB prints.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

please, be awre, sistan isNOTA TONER NOR DOES IT REPLACE TONING!.NOTHING BEATS TONING IN PROTECTING IMMAGE SILVER. DONT SKIP TONING1.

 

[jm94]

When I first started in the darkroom last year, I overused my fixer, majorly! A lot of my prints from that time had yellowed, or wit brown blotches all over the. the most crucial ones had used fresh chemicals and were fine. One of a swan has been framed and has been hung up on various places and it is still fine. Some very good negatives from that time were under fixed too, but luckily they had been stored in dark containers so I was able to refix most of them to stop further degradation. Some others that had not been stored well however were unrecoverable. The most crucial ones having used fresh chemicals, were fine. I always wash as follows: Luke warm water bath, then in running water for several minutes, each individual print held in the water stream, then hung to dry. I don't often tone, I do intend to try selenium I have many copper toned prints, but I'd have thought copper would degrade the image life? I use a fresh bath of fixer for each prints session, 1+9 Kodak or hypam, no more than 20 to 30 5x7 or about 10 8x10 or 5 12x16 depending on what I am doing, then I toss it. I will use one batch of fixer, 1+4, per roll of film using a 500ml or thereabouts tank. Fixing is a crucial step that isnt to be saved on. I just get bulk 5L bottles. All negatives are stored in a file in filing sheets.