Re: Interview with Henry Wilhelm on print permanence

In article <z4adnWjjnaYnJKHbnZ2dnUVZ_s6onZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, Pat O'Connell 
<gypkap@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> writes
>
>Background: among other things I'm a chemist and have also had an 
>education in parts reliability. Failure rates of parts can be 
>accelerated by testing at temperatures higher than the design 
>temperature range, then corrected for normal use using Arrhenius' Law. 
>The same testing acceleration could be done for temperature 
>interactions with photo prints, then corrected back to "normal"
conditions.
>
>The average digital photo guy prints his photo on good, not archival 
>paper (is there such a thing as archival paper for inkjets?).

Indeed there is.  Epson had their own version called Epson Archival 
Matte Paper, however they claimed even better results for Epson Premium 
Glossy Paper

>The things that fade prints include light, chemical interactions with 
>the paper, and possible chemical interactions with mounting materials 
>or fingerprints.
>
And chemical interactions with the ink itself - in the Epson case this 
was the cyan ink, with the light cyan being more susceptible than the 
dark cyan.

>This stuff can all be tested in the short term by increasing 
>temperature or (in the case of light) by using higher intensity light.
>
As a chemist, you will know that the results obtained by intensification 
of one parameter bear no relevance to those obtained by accelerated 
testing of other activating mechanisms.  That is precisely the mistake 
Wilhelm made - he ignored everything but light - because light was the 
big issue with his Kodak war.
-- 
Kennedy
Yes, Socrates himself is particularly missed;
A lovely little thinker, but a bugger when he's pissed.
Python Philosophers         (replace 'nospam' with 'kennedym' when
replying)