fiber based printing paper "archival"?

[hans_berkhout]

This came to mind after reading the question about drymounting, leading to discussion about life expectancy of prints, standards set by musea etc.

 

<p>

 

What do we know about the "archival" quality of the fiber based papers we print on, what exactly is fiber based paper, do manufacturers have standards to follow and is a control system in place. Do different manufacturers follow different standards? Is paper from Hungary more or less "archival" than paper from France, the USA etc?

 

<p>

 

I suppose a similar question could be asked about the emulsion.

 

<p>

 

Discussions or articles about "archival processing" usually focus on the steps from developping to washing and then go on to the option of dry mounting or not, using "archival" board. We need to know if the paper we print on is "archival" in the first place.

 

<p>

 

Thanks to responders and best wishes for 2002.

[michael_alpert1]

Hans, The qualities of photographic paper (low tear and folding

strength, and the ability to resist dissolution when bathed for long

periods in chemicals and water) are unusual. These papers are obviously

made specifically for photographic purposes. I just looked at Agfa and

Ilford pdf files for their multi-contrast fiber-based papers. Neither

company supplies any information concerning the fiber used in their

paper. I assume it is alpha-cellulose or an equivalent natural fiber

with substantial longevity. I would also assume that the ph would need

to be neutral, or perhaps buffered, so the paper would not defeat

alkaline paper developers. Still, I have no solid manufacturer's

information to offer. I am sure that there are other readers of this

forum who know much more than I do about this issue, and I look forward

to reading their remarks.

[wilhelm]

Hans, our expectations for the service life of photographic papers

are based on the following: 1)Many photographs printed (on rag paper)

well over 100 years ago still appear in good condition, and 2) many

photographs printed on the earliest RC papers quickly crumbled into

shards. What happens to today's papers is a crap-shoot.

[conrad_hoffman]

I bet an email to either the George Eastman House (GEH) or to

Rochester Institute of Technology's Image Permanance department would

yield some answers. You'll have to do a search and maybe find a

contact through their web sites, but that would be a good first step

if you're really interested in tracking this down.

[dk_thompson]

I second the IPI....I attended aconference several years ago about

preservation and a few of their staffers were speakers...the amount of

infromation they had and the topics were fascinating. James Reilly in

particular....he's written a few books on albumen paper and early

photo processes as well....there's an albumen paper website linked to

this site: Conservation OnLine.

 

<p>

 

http://palimpsest.stanford.edu/

 

<p>

 

That site has a wealth of information abouth this type of

stuff....check out Abbey Publications for paper conservation topics,

and the IPI as well.

[michael_alpert1]

bmitch, the trouble with looking at the past is that you will never see

all those photographs that have long ago disappeared because they were

not made on long-lasting paper. So making inferences for the future

based on past results (using only surviving photographs) is somewhat

problematical. The late nineteenth century was the worst time in paper

making, with whole editions of books completely self-destroyed due to

poor materials. Hans' question concerning current manufacturers'

material standards is important. I hope someone can guide this forum to

these standards, or at least to some solid information about currently

used materials. I want something better than a "crap-shoot" when it

comes to the future. These days, with a wealth of good conservation

information available, no manufacturer can honestly plead ignorance in

these matters.

[gene_crumpler8]

I've been at this for a while, so I can tell you about my experiences.

 

<p>

 

1. Forget RC papers. I have many prints that have cracked, turned

brown or silvered out in the last 10 years.

 

<p>

 

2. Ansel Adams work printed on Iford and Kodak papers has been

estimated to have a life-time of 4000 years.

 

<p>

 

3. I have fiber base prints made in the middle 50's that are as good

as the day I printed then. All I did is give these prints a decent

wash out of the Hypo.

 

<p>

 

MTCW.

[dk_thompson]

Michael, you know that's so true about the assumption that the old

papers have "lasted"...out of all the millions upon millions of photos

taken over the past 150 yrs. or so, how many have actually "lasted"??

They say that nearly 75% or so of all albumen prints that have

survived have in fact deteriorated in some form or another....the same

is true if you look at old images like daguerrotypes, ambrotypes,

ferrotypes, pop papers etc....the truly magnificent ones that have

survived are the ones that people often think of it seems...not the

others that you'd find as more everyday sorts of images. When people

turn this sort of dialogue into an rc vs fiber thing, they talk of all

the bad experiences with rc papers....but I have probably a thousand

prints going back to the early 80's on RC paper, that were run through

Royalprint and dektomatic processors, or in good old trays, and the

worst that has happened to these has been with the dev. incorporated

papers of the mid 80's, with the dev. migrating to the top....the rest

have survived fine stored in the usual empty paper boxes....likewise,

at work, in the deep storage files, there's an odd mix of about 10,000

photos on a wide variety of papers from about the late 1880's and

running through now....to me, RC papers are like the canary in the

coalmine...if you can't make one that will last a few years (barring

the problems of framing one tight a la Ctein)...then maybe something's

wrong with either your process, your environment, poor paper quality

(generic manufacture), or a combination....the IPI guys say that one

speculation is that RC papers absorb atmospheric pollutants in their

polyethylene base, and this in turn attacks the emulsion from both

sides--whereas a fiber print will pass the pollutants through. I

believe this, because of my practical experiences with production RC

printing. But it doesn't neccesarily mean that you're safe forever

with fiber, or that one material is better than another...besides the

paper base quality, there's questions about brighteners in the

emulsion, and what their life expectancy is as well....I, personally,

don't believe that any material will last forever...this is the

mindset of an archive...but you need to protect what you have the best

you can, or assign a priority to various materials based on what your

uses are....the entire reason why they don't use the word "archival"

in the standards, is because there's nothing to match it up

against....it's a vague word....there seem to be two camps

here...those who just like fiber printing (nothing wrong with that)

but will deny all other forms of printing & reproduction...and yet the

"archivalness" of their mindset ends with the print....look at

drymounting, storing negs in unsafe plastics, uncontrolled

environments, handling prints & negs with bare hands, etc....and then

there's the actual institutional definition, which is sorta more

hardcore in storage, but a little more flexible in what you'll use to

actually access your collection of images....this is why you'll never

be able to have a decent conversation or point/counterpoint about

longevity....it gets turned into an all or nothing diatribe based on

one perspective.

 

<p>

 

As for fiber prints...yeah, they _do_ last longer if handled

right...but in the end they're on PAPER....which has it's own host of

problems no matter if you're talking books, letters, lithographs,

newspapers, or fiber based photos. I read a speculative article once,

about how if an RC b&w paper were manufactured on an opaque polyester

base (Melinex, like they use in cibas)...that this material would be a

very stable print medium...moreso than contemporary materials....but

that at this stage, it wasn't worth it to the manufacturers to develop

such a paper....

 

<p>

 

that's it for me, happy new year you all, as always my opinions only.

[dk_thompson]

So...gene, where do they get 4000 yrs LE for Ansel's prints? With the

ansi/iso std. for microfilm being at about 500 yrs....as the benchmark

for records storage, where does 4000 yrs. for paper print come in?

Surely that must be in some cold storage vault....in the design of

those vaults, they have extimations that exceed 10,000 yrs. for

materials often...but the materials stay there forever basically. In

absolute cold and perfectly tempered RH environments. This is not dry

mounted or hanging on a gallery wall, or being handled bu ungloved

hands, or with excessive light levels, or UV. I'll believe 100 yrs,

maybe 50 or so in an uncontrolled environment. In an archive, with a

cool room or cold vault, I'll believe those higher numbers...but based

on what I've seen from patrons, it _is_ a crapshoot out in the real

world. Again, my opinions only.

[dan_smith]

I have been told by more than one specialist in paper making that

there are three or four paper makers worldwide that provide almost

all the paper for the B&W photo manufacturors. Per these folks,

almost all photo prints made on fibre papers are with papers from

these few factories. Supposedly standards are high and go back a

number of years. Additives, such as brighteners and whatnot, are

added at the photo emulsion coating plants, they don't come already

in the papers. So, per those I have talked with, your purchase of

papers from Hungary, France, Great Britain and the USA as well as

elsewhere are from one of these few paper makers.

I have not gone further than this in finding out where the papers

come from & would welcome someone with first hand knowledge filling

in the very large gaps in our knowledge.

[dan_smith]

I forgot to add about the 4000 year life expectantcy of AA prints.

A study shows that 73% of all statistics are made up on the spot

while the other 50% are made up as needed.

[gene_crumpler8]

DK;

 

<p>

 

I've read so much photo liturature over the last 40 years, I don't

recall where the 4000 year estimate came from (although I think it

came from the National Archives or Smithsonian or some such second

rate source).

 

<p>

 

I'll ask John Sexton about it next month at his February Expressive

Print WorkShop and get back to you guys!

[michael_alpert1]

I just spoke with Andrew Robb, the Senior Photographic Conservator at

the Library of Congress. We discussed Hans Berkhout�s question

concerning the fiber content of photographic paper. Mr. Robb told me

that although fiber content (�paper furnish�) has changed over the

decades, in general fiber-based photographic papers are of high

quality, if only because they need to survive the demanding steps

involved in photographic processes. Poor quality paper will not produce

satisfactory photographic results in the first place. This factor

includes papers used in early and alternative processes. For this

reason, fiber based paper is not the first consideration in the mind of

someone involved in the conservation of photographs (the storage

environment is in many ways more to the point). In fact, with proper

archival processing and orderly handling and storage, black-and-white

fiber-based photographic prints have a reasonable chance of survival in

good condition. (Resin-coated paper is a different story. There are

second generation problems that have emerged that suggest that this

paper may not be as long lasting as previously thought.)

 

<p>

 

We also talked about other related concerns. Enclosures of some kind

are important for protection from physical and environmental damage; of

course, better enclosure materials (that pass PAT standards) lead to

better results. Mr. Robb stressed that an environment for storage that

is consistently cool (under 70 degrees F) and dry (under 70 percent

humidity) is extremely important. A hot high-humidity summer for three

months will more than undo cool dry conditions during the rest of the

year. Hot wet conditions will lead to a degradation of the gelatin

layer of the photograph as well as to other destructive changes.

 

<p>

 

These are the basic conclusions of the conversation (I have not

elucidated the exact chemistry involved in some of these points for

fear of distorting what Mr. Robb said). Frankly, I was reassured by

what I heard. Common sense is needed in both print processing and print

(and negative) storage. In places like the Southeastern U.S., some way

to maintain low humidity and cool temperature is also a very important

consideration.

[dk_thompson]

Thanks for that info Michael...you might be interested in the

Preservation Calculator software that the IPI offers free online, and

the pdf booklet for the "IPI Guide To Acetate Film Storage" as

well... You can use this to gauge the effects of temp & humidity on

the lifespan of a material...even though it's aimed at acetate based

negs and vinegar syndrome, you can extrapolate data from it to get a

rough idea of what sort of environment you need for your storage

areas. Cold storage is the way to go though.... We have dedicated

facilities for our collection (250K or so items), which

are mainly 3-d objects, furniture, textiles and paintings. These

objects all require different storage environments. Our photos are

documentation of the artifacts primarily, and some originals like

older

cased images and an odd assortment of prints....our state archives

though has

something like 1.5 million negs and a cool room/ cold

room for nitrate storage. We basically store our working files, some

60,000 or so negs & slides in a small room shut off, with a

hydrothermograph in it to monitor the temp & rh....it stays at 65-70

and around 20-30% rh. It's hard to isolate an area without a dedicated

vault though, and you can't really use traditional heating & cooling

systems for this on a large scale....you need to be cool/cold yet

really dry at the same time...and not cycling all over the place. Our

building has a different sort of HVAC system that sorta heats & cools

at the same time...it constantly regulates the temp & humidity and

this is what alot of museums use because for artifacts you need to

hold that at a certain level consistently.

 

Probably the absolute worst thing that could happen to your prints &

negs would be to have mold infect them ....When you talk with

conservators though, they have a different angle on it than maybe an

archivist, or a curator...they're all different professions in the

same sort of business. The conservator is going to come in after the

fact--the object is already in a collection, or has been brought to

them. In an institution, the three all work together though to manage

the collections....we have conservators for textiles & furniture

mainly here....I can tell you that the minute an item becomes part of

a collection it moves into another area of storage & display that is

far beyond what the average person would think. For an individual to

just assume that their fiber based print will last forever, is just a

fantasy really...for that print to last 4000 years (sorry, still

cracks me up) that would mean somebody, or someplace would have to

become the caretaker for it....somebody would have to _really_ want

it...out of all the quadzillions of images ever produced, I wonder

what the number will be to actually survive? Especially when some

places will spend up to a million or so on a vault, and then have to

prioritize what images deserve to be saved, because you can't save

everything.....if you really start adding up the costs for sheer

amounts of materials, and care like the services of a professional

conservator, it's mind boggling almost....and then multiply that times

the size of your photo collection....if you took all that money you

spent on "archival" materials, and built a vault or rented space

underground, you could in fact save your images for a long time even

if they were stored in not-so hot enclosures....but then who'd ever

see them?

 

<p>

 

 

as always MY opinions only here.

 

<p>

 

p.s....

 

<p>

 

You also might be interested in these week-long seminars that the

IPI

offers....I went to one 5 years or so ago for work up in DC at the

Smithsonian CAL lab. It was sponsored by them, but there were with

archivists & conservators with NARA, IPI etc. there.

It was about preservation issues in photo collections, They still give

these annually up in Rochester, but the CAL

gives other seminars as well. Some other institutions like NEDCC offer

courses in presevation management as well.