Archival Epson Papers?

[stevegiovinco]

Hi,

I'm looking to use archival semi matte or lustre paper for fine art exhibition. 

I see from the Wilhelm Research site that Epson premium luster photo paper
Epson premium semi-gloass photo paper are rated to last 100+ years (assuming archival inks, UV coated frame, no direct sunlight, etc.).

However I've heard that since they do not include any cotton or fiber in their base that they are NOT archival.

Does anyone have information about this?

If they are not archival, do you have other recommendations for semi matte or lustre papers?  The Moab Satine seems to have a poor and inconsistent coating.

Thanks in advance!  Steve

[Ernst Dinkla]

Archival is a somewhat confusing term. Usually it is limited to documents and book pages and their lifetime. There are other criteria for exhibtion prints.

Check which papers tested best at www.Aardenburg-Imaging.com including the paper white color shift in time which is not tested by Wilhelm Research. Rag, cotton, alpha-cellulose and RC base can all be considered if the fade resistance is good. Mechanical properties of inkjet coatings or RC barriers etc have not been tested anywhere recently so are uncertain in time. That includes cracking of the coating, bond to paper base, disintegration, etc. Certain varnishes can improve fade resistance (see A-I tests) but their influence on mechanical stability in time is unknown too.

Epson has a list of Signature Worthy papers but at least the EEF did not show its signature worthy character in Aardenburg testing.


--
Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst

340+ paper white spectral plots:
http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
update april 2012: Harman by Hahnemühle, Innova IFA45 and more

[Paul Roark]

I agree with Ernst. 

I wanted to reiterate the problem that we have no apparently reliable information on the mechanical or physical longevity of the inkjet papers we usually rely on.  I looked into the issue some time ago and found that accelerated aging is way less reliable than accelerated fade testing.  One major issue is that the accelerated age testing generally used holds the humidity and temperatures constant.  As such, fluctuations in humidity and temperature that cause laminated and coated materials to expand and contract at different rates is not included in the testing.  Some conservators believe that all of the coated or laminated substrates will crack and/or separate, due in no small part to the differential expansion and contraction of the layers.  In the digital restoration of old photos for a local museum, I found what I call micro-cracking of the surfaces of many if not most of the nearly 100 year old print surfaces.

It may be that history is our best guide, but inkjet papers don't have much of a history.  What we do seem to know is that acid free, buffered cotton has an excellent reputation for longevity.

I, personally, have come to appreciate and prefer Arches un-coated watercolor paper (Hot Press 140 lb./300 gsm) for my display size B&W prints.  The dmax (gamut for color) and smoothness is not as good as the best inkjet papers, but they are not bad either if the right inks and workflow are used.  On the wall and under glass the prints look excellent.  I use MIS Associates carbon pigments and QuadToneRip to print on Arches, and even with these, not all printers are able to get an acceptable dmax.  I'd guess no OEM driver can.  So, it's definitely not for most people, but just a potential solution for some to a problem of unknown magnitude.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

[Wayne Fox]

“Archival- a term often used to imply that a material will be stable over time. The term has neither a recognized standard definition nor a quantifiable method for verification.” The Image Permanence Institute, a department of RIT’s College of Imaging Arts & Sciences, (http://www.archivaladvisor.org/shtml/glossary.shtml)

The American National Standards Institute (ANSI) agrees:

“(Archival media is) material that can be expected to retain information forever, so that such information can be retrieved without significant loss when properly stored. However, there is no such material and it is not a term to be used in American National Standard material or system specifications.” The American National Standards Institute (ANSI/AIIM TR21998, “Glossary of Document Technologies,” Association for Information and Image Management International, Silver Spring, MD.)

As mentioned the term archival gets thrown around a lot but doesn't have a standard meaning.

To your original question regarding RC paper, I'm not sure about whether cotton or other fiber is  used, although some report the paper base itself is a cotton fiber base.  I personally believe this is irrelevant, since RC paper is made by coating both sides with a polyethylene  coating.  The origination of the paper was wet photo processing and was a significant step in the evolution of photograph as it made it much easer and faster to process photo papers without the paper absorbing any chemicals, meaning must less washing and much faster drying. Inkjet RC papers use basically the same RC coated paper then apply an inkjet receptor coats instead of photo sensitive emulsions. The goal early on to gain acceptance in the photo side of things for inkjet companies was to duplicate the look and feel of traditional photographic papers.

So RC paper really isn't new, it's been around for 60 or 70 years (I can't find when it was first introduced).  Inkjet  RC papers should perform the same as chemically based photo papers, and perhaps better since there is no penetration of any chemicals into the edge of the paper.

The issue with these papers isn't with the paper content, because the polyethylene  coatings will break down before the paper, and that's the surface the ink is on.  I do not believe these papers will last as long, although certainly 100 years is believable.  We have photographs on RC paper that have been around many decades, and the colors may not be great the paper has held up pretty good.  But I don't think there is anyway RC papers will last as long as well made non-RC papers.

[Ernst Dinkla]

The issue with these papers isn't with the paper content, because the polyethylene  coatings will break down before the paper, and that's the surface the ink is on.  I do not believe these papers will last as long, although certainly 100 years is believable.  We have photographs on RC paper that have been around many decades, and the colors may not be great the paper has held up pretty good.  But I don't think there is anyway RC papers will last as long as well made non-RC papers.

Wayne,

My gut feeling is that the PE sandwich with paper inside will last longer than any paper based substrates if there is no UV light exposure to deteriorate the PE. The other gut feeling is that where both PE paper and rag paper survive, the image faded or the paper white shifted color or inkjet coating + image has cracked or dissolved off the base. It is the bond of the inkjet coating to the base and the inflexibility of the inkjet (ceramic powder etc) coating on the more flexible, higher tensile strength, fiber-film base that tells me something goes wrong with that bond. For the RC paper bases it is the PE surface that needs treatment (Corona etc) to create a better bond to the inkjet coating (and may fail in time), for rag paper it is the change in paper base humidity that could destroy that bond. The binder of the inkjet coating may not withstand time either.

--
Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst

340+ paper white spectral plots:
http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
update april 2012: Harman by Hahnemühle, Innova IFA45 and more

[Alan Goldhammer]

From a chemical point of view, I agree with Ernst.  Polyethylene RC papers should be more stable in the long run because the polymer is more resistant to degradation than pure cellulose derived papers.  With cellulose (regardless of whether it is cotton rag or alpha derived from wood pulp) the manufacturing process to get rid of lignin is critical.  In addition, the application of the ink receiving coating is extremely important and light fast testing really is not a predictor of long term stability of the coating.  It may turn out that matte finish papers are more stable in the long run because of the coating is directly in contact with the paper base as opposed to a polymer surface which is smooth requiring some type of adhesive interaction.

[Wayne Fox]

I've heard there are issues with the polyethylene coating, but I defer to your experience.  Some has been written about it being problematic, but then again this was based on chemical RC papers, not inkjet RC papers.  Inkjet certainly is a different beast, and I agree the issue will probably be more about the inkjet receptor coat and it's bond to the various surfaces.  

Bottom line they are all probably "archival" enough, because the number one issue in print longevity has nothing to do any of this, but lack of importance/value of the print itself.  Second issue is care of the physical print itself which is related ... unless it is extremely important and some type of value is placed on the print,  the less likely anyone will try to preserve it.  But that value has to translate to future generations which very few images/prints gain enough prominence.  Even then,  the chances of survival are lessened by natural events.

A hundred years is pretty good ... I often wonder if any of my prints  will have enough value to be around 100 years from now if they could survive that long.  Maybe a few from my previous career as a portrait photographer ...

[Alan Goldhammer]

I've heard there are issues with the polyethylene coating, but I defer to your experience.  Some has been written about it being problematic, but then again this as based on chemical RC papers, not inkjet RC papers.  Inkjet certainly is a different beast, and I agree the issue will probably be more about the inkjet receptor coat and it's bond to the various surfaces.  

The first RC papers were truly a disaster.  I remember when they came out and the big promoted advantage was the ease in fixing and clearing of residual fixer in terms of washing.  I printed up a bunch of very nice images that my parents hung in their house.  When I returned for a visit two years later I was appalled at all the small black spots in each of the prints.  I reprinted some of them on regular fiber paper but it was a significant expense for my parents to get them reframed.

[Damir]

Wayne,

My gut feeling is that the PE sandwich with paper inside will last longer than any paper based substrates if there is no UV light exposure to deteriorate the PE. The other gut feeling is that where both PE paper and rag paper survive, the image faded or the paper white shifted color or inkjet coating + image has cracked or dissolved off the base. It is the bond of the inkjet coating to the base and the inflexibility of the inkjet (ceramic powder etc) coating on the more flexible, higher tensile strength, fiber-film base that tells me something goes wrong with that bond. For the RC paper bases it is the PE surface that needs treatment (Corona etc) to create a better bond to the inkjet coating (and may fail in time), for rag paper it is the change in paper base humidity that could destroy that bond. The binder of the inkjet coating may not withstand time either.

--
Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst

340+ paper white spectral plots:
http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
update april 2012: Harman by Hahnemühle, Innova IFA45 and more

As always you hit the point. Two months ago I put on my window several pieces of RC or PE papers, I just use double side sticky tape. It was not intended to be scientifical experiment, I just decide to see what will happened with different papers and coatings. I sprayed papers with regular hair spray, HM protective spray, and several other sprays that was sold for painters as protect and fixative spray for cryons. Paper was from Mitsubishy and Canon. I put it on outer side of window, so they are exposed to the all elements: rain, sun, humidity, change of temperature and so on. Window is facing to the south, so it was a lot of sun on the prints. It was standard patches from HP Z printer for paper calibration that left after calibration.

Today I decided to take that test patches to examine them. To my surprice I found that inkjet coating left on my fingers in form of white dust or coloured dust from the part of paper where the patches are. Pigments looks well, although I can not meausre it now beacuse lightes touch or manipulation is causing inkjet coat crumbling all over. Paper without any protection fall apart all together, even paper base become brittle causing paper to tear apart while I was removing it from windows. Papers that was sprayed with protection sprays that was intended to be used by painters behaves the same way. Papers sprayed with cheap odourless hairspray and HM protective spray was a bit better, some pigment and inkjet coating left on paper and paper base was not brittle, but never the less it is useless for any king of measurement.

I concluded that it is not pigment from ink that is critical for stability of picture but bond between paper base and inkjet coating, at least with RC or PE papers. Of course that was realy tough environment for testing, Sun is shining really strong, temperatures goes as high as 50 Celsius, maybe more on direct sunlight, we also had storms and showers. Protection had some influence but not as much as I expected. All together I am totally dissaponted, I expect that at least some protected paper will survive in way that it can be compared to test patches I keep as a reference. Normaly any printed picture will not be exposed to such environment, I was just curious for example how long I can use RC printed paper outside as a poster or for some promotions on open. Interesting fact is that ink on all paper stayed on same place where printer put it, there was no migration due to humidity and rain. Border of patches was sharp and clean until the coating started to crumble.