Fuji Crystal Archive Paper Suitable for Gallery Sales?

I looked through the archives but couldn�t find a clear answer to

this...

 

I will be selling some of my prints for the first time in a gallery.

I know everything needs to be �archival� but I am not sure to what

extent. I had planned on just having prints of digital files made on

a Fuji Frontier printer on matte Fuji Crystal Archive paper.

 

A professional photographer friend has advised me that this would not

be acceptable because the paper does not have a long enough life. I

would need either Cibachrome prints or inkjet prints made with

pigment inks and archival paper. Anything less then those two would

be considered unprofessional.

 

I really don�t feel like going through that if its not really

needed. What are people's thoughts or experiences with selling

prints made on Fuji Crystal Archive paper? Thanks.

Hi James, According to <a href="http://www.drycreekphoto.com/PrintTest/PrintTest.htm">these guys</a> you should be fine. I do know that some people aren't happy with the </I>look</i> of Fuji's paper, but its archivability seems good. Best wishes . . .

On the top of my head, I remember Wilhelm having done some study, according to which crystal Archive lasts about 60 years at typical home display (ie. having your family portrait under glass and half the time in the sun.) This information can be checked, but the point was that Crystal Archive has far better keeping properties than other amateur RA-4 papers. I'd be sceptical about inkjets, since they're evolving rapidly and thus there's not likely to be any proof that the particular combination you use lasts (it might last, it might not but that's essentially the same as getting RA4 prints at a random minilab in the 80's: you won't know until it's too late.)

 

Ilforchrome (cibachrome) lasts when properly made, but there are quite many drawbacks to it. Most color work I see in galleries is printed on RA-4, so I doubt it would be somehow "unprofessional" (I've seen Crystal Archive prints sold, too, but I don't know how common it is.)

Not sure where your friend gets his info from - at the moment Fuji Crystal Archive

paper is probably the most common medium for photographic work shown in

galleries.

 

Cibachromes have become a rarity. Inkjets are new technology and hence untested.

Isn't Crystal Archive the paper most commonly used in Lightjets?

Crystal Archive matches or exceed Cibachrome in terms of daylight stability.

Your professional photographer friend is not helping you. Labs

like West Coast Imaging produce prints on Crystal Archive all the

time that are destined for galleries/exhibition. See

 

http://www.westcoastimaging.com/wci/page/info/articles/printerc

ompare.html

 

and there's also a link to the work of the Wilhelm Institute that

carries out authoritative work on archival capabilities.

 

Whilst I think that Frontiers are capable of producing material for

galleries, the results you get will vary with the original image,

how the file has been prepared, and how well the machine itself

is being operated. Bear in mind that you are also size limited

Thanks for all the advice! It looks like I�ll be using the Crystal Archive paper after all. I had felt like I might be short changing those buying my work, but it now seems any shortcomings are far outweighed by the benefits.

 

I have one more question. Is matte or glossy paper preferable for prints sold in a gallery or is it just personal preference? Thanks again.

Cibachromes are dead (although gorgious). The contrast is too high and you need to make an unsharp "film" mask (highlight mask) to get things in line, the 2 films must also be registered. Add the cost of a Condit film registration unit, the extra work...not worth it! Also few labs around to do it for you. That leave inkjets for scenics. However, most photographers doing high end portraits still prefer RA4 paper. It's proven, better tonal range, continuous tone, and Fuji Crystal is very archival (Kodak has always been the worse for longevity, until now with the Endura papers...100 yr life...big maybe. Their prints are known to yellow even in dark storage!).

 

As for what I prefer (scenics)....Inkjet (Giclee). Pigment is archival, but you sacrifice Dmax and chroma (brilliance). New dye inks (all Iris are dye inks) are changing the reputation they once had. They last anywhere from 26 yrs (epson) to 120 yrs...the right paper is the key for long life! Dye inks also last up to 2.5 yrs (compared to 6 mths), no bronzing, prints equally well on glossy or matte, no metamerism (ultrachrome still exhibits some). High end galleries I agree will want pigment prints, their mind is set. If however your selling prints in a mall frame shop, craft shows, etc.....I think impact obtained from more Dmax and brilliance will help sales more (quality must come first, archival second...recently photographers think the opposite after being sensitized to inkjet longevity issues). Think how many framed pictures people buy, and 99.9% never ask what paper it was printed on, how archival, most framed with acid matts, etc. The mall gallery owner wouldn't even be able to answer your questions. Also, all dye inks now exceed lithographic prints for life (and people didn't complain about lithos). I think too many people are hung up on pigment ink, and are sacrificing the enjoyment of seeing the added pop possible only from a dye print. Choose pigment or dye based on what the market really needs. Ultrachrome is hot, but only because dye had a bad rap, but both pigments and dyes have vastly improved and will keep getting better.

 

I recommend you read the March edition of Photo Techniques (March/April) .."Dye-Based or Pigment-Based? Debunking the Myths of Ditial inks" by Tony Martin (president of Lyson Inks USA). A few points from his article in case some people do not get a chance to get this issue:

 

***"There are two misconceptions about dye versus pigment. First, pigment inks are always more light stable than dye-based inks; and second, pigments now match dyes in terms of color quality. It's true that pigments generally are more fade-resistant, particularly for outdoor exposure where the intensity and type of light is very different than artificial illumination. However, for indoor display, THE GAP IS CLOSER THEN YOU MIGHT IMAGINE. Wilhelm Imaging Research shows published results that some dyes based products last as long as an estimated 120 years, while the leading pigment based ink set on certain media lasts only 34 years (he is referring to Epsons enhanced matt). It's worth noting tht many fine art reproduction houses use Iris Inkjet Printers to produce Giclee prints, which are renowned for their longevity. All Iris printers use dye-based ink!"

 

***"Beware the color gamut comparisons. A favourite trick of inkjet marketers is to show color gamut comparison diagrams in promotional literature. These 2-D charts only show the range of achievable colors that can be had from and ink set, and don't show the BRILLIANCE level of the colors, which can only be represented in 3-D. Before writing this article, I conducted a very simple test. I took the leading OEM pigment ink set and a LONG-LIFE dye based ink set, and made 2-D color comparison charts using top end color measurement equipment. The dye ink had slightly larger color space, but the color gamut of both inks was very similar. Then, I made prints on the same media using the same color print file. The results were vastly different. The dye-based print was more intense and BRILLIANT. The point is that 2-D gamut comparson charts do not tell the whole story. The best way to make a true comparison is with the actual printed images."

 

***There are severel DYE-BASED ink sets available that rival traditional products in longevity and color quality., but they are dismissed because they lack a 100+ year expected life. At one store, I bumped into the owner whose work was on display, I asked him why his prints were produced on long-life traditional papers, and weren't digital. he replied that he would love to use inkjet because of the extra creative flexibility and enlarged media choice, but was disappointed with the color qaulity of available arhcival pigment inks. His eyes lit up when I told him there were dye-based inks available that would give the color he wanted, along with the longevity he sought. I think that some mfrs have pushed the longevity envelope too far, too quickly. WHile they supply long-lasting ink products, the inks disappoint in terms of color rendition. Choose between pigments and dyes wisely. The choice is a compromise between color quality and longevity. For extreme long life requirements, pigments are the way to go, but they have reduced color qualit y when comnpared to dyes. FOR VERY GOOD LIFE AND GREAT COLOR, GO WITH THE DYES. "

 

Dye has it's disadvantages too...some drifting. Oh well, nothing is perfect. But no one ever complained about dye based Iris prints. Hmmmm. When are we going to give up this hang up about long life. No one complained when Kodak prints lasteed 12 yrs, Lithographs 29 yrs, Cibas 50+, Fuji Crystal 40+....all of a sudden we need 100 yrs or nothing. Yup, right, like were all Ansel Adams and our art will be in the national archives. Most of us either have a long way to go to get there, and the rest of us are more interested in selling at craft shows, etc., where the archival issue is not even discussed. They see , they buy! If the print has more pop, the better your sales. Ten to twenty years later the home owner redecorates his house, adds fresh new art, and your work goes to the front yard sale. Thats reality! I hate pigment for its short shelf life, I work in spurts. I can end up spending a $1000 Cdn, and end up not using all the pigment ink in 6 mths. However, with dye I have 2.5 yrs shelf life.

 

 

Matte or glossy is a personal preference.

<I>These 2-D charts only show the range of achievable colors that can be had from and ink set, and don't show the BRILLIANCE level of the colors, which can only be represented in 3-D.</i><P>Exellent point. I've had this debate many of times with opponents supporting graphs and charts, but *no* ink-set I've ever seen matches the pure intensity of the higher saturated Fuji color materials. The difference in the case of Fujiflex is quite extreme.