Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Down

Author Topic: IGFS  (Read 19298 times)

Mark D Segal

  • Contributor
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12512
    • http://www.markdsegal.com
Re: IGFS
« Reply #20 on: July 06, 2015, 08:39:03 am »


..............

Use OBA free non RC papers like Hahenmuhle PHoto Rag Pearl, Canson Platine, etc. The RC media can build particularly high levels of stain (b* values of 15 to 25... that's yellow!). I suspect OBAs embedded in Ti02-PE layers is aggravating the OBA degradation and discoloration rate in the RC papers, but more study needed.

.............

later,
Mark
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com


Mark, Forgot to mention that while this advice may solve one problem, it could invite another: printer clogs. For example, my 4900 absolutely dislikes Canson Platine. The amount of cleaning I needed to do after running just a few 13*19 sheets of that stuff through the printer was extra-ordinary and intolerable on a regular basis. I think the "rag" aspect, whatever it's made of, sheds particulates that clog this printer badly. Now it could be fine with less temperamental printers in this respect, but just a word of caution. It would be good, for example, to see what experience users of the new P800 will have with these papers, and it shouldn't take too long to learn how those combinations work. 
Logged
Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....."

Ernst Dinkla

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4019
Re: IGFS
« Reply #21 on: July 06, 2015, 09:51:21 am »

Mark, Forgot to mention that while this advice may solve one problem, it could invite another: printer clogs. For example, my 4900 absolutely dislikes Canson Platine. The amount of cleaning I needed to do after running just a few 13*19 sheets of that stuff through the printer was extra-ordinary and intolerable on a regular basis. I think the "rag" aspect, whatever it's made of, sheds particulates that clog this printer badly. Now it could be fine with less temperamental printers in this respect, but just a word of caution. It would be good, for example, to see what experience users of the new P800 will have with these papers, and it shouldn't take too long to learn how those combinations work. 

There is the Epson Proofing White Semi-Matte, OBA content negligible but an RC paper. Wide gamuts possible on that paper and no coating particles or paper fibers floating in the air from that paper. Aardenburg-Imaging has a test still running for EPWSM with promising results so far. How well PE barriers and their bond to the paper base and inkjet coating stand time is another question. Mechanical aspects of inkjet coatings have not been tested (or the test results were never published) for any inkjet paper we discuss in this forum.

Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst

http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
December 2014 update, 700+ inkjet media white spectral plots
Logged

Mark D Segal

  • Contributor
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12512
    • http://www.markdsegal.com
Re: IGFS
« Reply #22 on: July 06, 2015, 10:27:18 am »

It's not bad - gamut volume is 832.6k versus 977k for IGFS. Minimum L* = 6, whereas for IGFS about 4~4.5, all for an Epson 4900.
Logged
Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....."

Ernst Dinkla

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4019
Re: IGFS
« Reply #23 on: July 06, 2015, 10:47:00 am »

With an Alpha Cellulose base like IGFS but without OBA or very low OBA: the recently introduced HM FineArt Baryta Satin 300, coating similar to PhotoRag Baryta. Calumet Brilliant Museum Silver Gloss Natural 300, Inkpress Baryta 307. Innova IFA19 Fibaprint Warmtone Gloss 300, Sihl 4848 MClass Satin Baryta 290, Tecco Baryt Ivory BTI 290. More gloss with a Harman and a Bergger version.

Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst

http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
December 2014 update, 700+ inkjet media white spectral plots
Logged

Mark D Segal

  • Contributor
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12512
    • http://www.markdsegal.com
Re: IGFS
« Reply #24 on: July 06, 2015, 11:47:28 am »

Thanks Ernst - that's enough to pick from - some may not be available in Canada, but others would be.
Logged
Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....."

MHMG

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1290
Re: IGFS
« Reply #25 on: July 07, 2015, 07:56:39 am »

With an Alpha Cellulose base like IGFS but without OBA or very low OBA: the recently introduced HM FineArt Baryta Satin 300, coating similar to PhotoRag Baryta...

Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst

http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
December 2014 update, 700+ inkjet media white spectral plots

HM FineArt Baryta Satin still doesn't seem to be available in the U.S, at least not at any of my usual dealers. Does anyone know where to obtain some in the U.S.?

thanks,
Mark
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com
Logged

MHMG

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1290
Re: IGFS
« Reply #26 on: July 07, 2015, 08:20:47 am »

There is the Epson Proofing White Semi-Matte, OBA content negligible but an RC paper. Wide gamuts possible on that paper and no coating particles or paper fibers floating in the air from that paper. Aardenburg-Imaging has a test still running for EPWSM with promising results so far. How well PE barriers and their bond to the paper base and inkjet coating stand time is another question. Mechanical aspects of inkjet coatings have not been tested (or the test results were never published) for any inkjet paper we discuss in this forum.

Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst

http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
December 2014 update, 700+ inkjet media white spectral plots


Yes, Epson Proofing White Semi-Matte is one I'm watching very closely in my tests. Cross-sectional analysis shows that unlike nearly all RC photo papers on the market today, EpPPWSM only has OBAs in the paper core but non in the critical image-side TiO2-PE layer. It's still early on in test, but I can already detect the LILIS effect in the other RC photo papers in this batch of samples (Batch M1 in the AaI&A database). I have not been able to detect it so far in the EpPPWSM, so this paper is the one to watch because it potentially points the way to much better RC Photo papers in the near future if the manufacturers begin to pay attention to the LILIS issue. 

I am now working on an improved light fade testing procedure(i.e., a test with combined light and dark storage cycles) designed to more carefully track and report the LILIIS phenomenon for any media where it exists. EpPPWSM will be one of the first samples to go into that new testing sequence as will EPPL and IGFS. :)

cheers,
Mark
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com
 
Logged

Ernst Dinkla

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4019
Re: IGFS
« Reply #27 on: July 08, 2015, 04:11:09 am »

HM FineArt Baryta Satin still doesn't seem to be available in the U.S, at least not at any of my usual dealers. Does anyone know where to obtain some in the U.S.?

thanks,
Mark
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com

Mark,

I think Jim hints here that he has it available and at a 10% discount;
http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=101878.0

Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst

http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
December 2014 update, 700+ inkjet media white spectral plots

Logged

MHMG

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1290
Re: IGFS
« Reply #28 on: July 08, 2015, 07:57:03 pm »

Mark,

I think Jim hints here that he has it available and at a 10% discount;
http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=101878.0

Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst

http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
December 2014 update, 700+ inkjet media white spectral plots


Ernst, thank you. I bought a pack of 25 sheets, letter-size paper. It should arrive in a day or two. I'm excited to compare to my favorite "traditional fiber" paper, HN Photo Rag Pearl,... and no matter what I think of it for my personal use, some of the sheets will wind up in light fastness studies no doubt :)

kind regards,
Mark

« Last Edit: July 08, 2015, 08:01:09 pm by MHMG »
Logged

MHMG

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1290
Re: IGFS
« Reply #29 on: July 16, 2015, 09:28:55 am »

Following up on measurements of old and new IGFS.  I received samples from Mark Segal, one marked "old", one marked "new". I also went into the Aardenburg Archives and pulled a "very old" sample of IGFS. I still have a small box of some IGFS purchased in 2008 when IGFS was very new to the market. Measuring M0, M1, and M2 conditions on a new i1Pro2 spectrophotometer the sheets read as follows

IGFS very old:   M0   L= 98.5, a= 0.4, b= 0.7       M1    L= 98.6, a= 0.5, b= 0.0     M2   L= 98.5, a= -0.1, b= 2.2
 
IGFS old:          M0   L= 98.2, a= 0.5, b= 0.1       M1    L= 98.2, a= 0.7, b= -0.5    M2   L= 98.1, a=  0.0, b= 1.9

IGFS new:         M0   L= 97.9, a = 0.5, b= 0.1       M1    L= 98.0, a= 0.7, b= -0.7    M2   L= 97.9, a=  0.0, b= 2.0

Mark Segal's old versus new samples appear to be within a normal batch to batch tolerance, suggesting that production of IGFS under new managment is essentially the same as recent production before the bankruptcy.  The very old sample I have from 2008 does suggest that OBA content was a little lower when IGFS first went into production. Although OBAs can lose flourescence by ozone, the sample I have was in a PP bag inside the box, so I'm inclined to believe that sometime during production under original management IGFS OBA content did get tweaked a small amount. The M1 readings are up in blueness by approximately -0.5 units is not easily nor repeatibly noticed by even the most discerning viewers. I cut a sample of the very old stock to same dimensions as Mark supplied to me, shuffled them, and tried to reliably pick out each one. I did this little experiment several times, and succeeded in three-out-of-three correct sample ID less than half the time.

I have also attached a UV blacklight photo with five samples in view from left to right:  Epson EEF paper, IGFS very old, IGFS old, IGFS new, and lastly Canson Platine.  EEF on the left has very high OBA content, Platine has zero (it's a bit brighter than the dark table surface only because I added a little visible fill light, about 4x under exposure, along with the blacklight to be able to separate the Platine paper surface from the dark background. As can be seen in the photo, EEF glows brightly :), the very old IGFS slightly less than the newer IGFS samples, and Platine is clearly staking the No OBA ground, while Mark's old versus new samples do show ever so slight difference in fluorescence (older slightly less glow than newer) but again, I would conclude that to be typical manufacturing variances.

Lastly, note that the UV excluded M2 measurements for b* versus the UV included M0 legacy and M1 measurements clearly detect the presence of OBAs in IGFS. No matter what the marketing guys have said in the past or nowadays, IGFS has and always did have some OBA content.  Its presence is also easily confirmed in the blacklight photo.

best,
Mark
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com

« Last Edit: July 16, 2015, 12:43:14 pm by MHMG »
Logged

Mark D Segal

  • Contributor
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12512
    • http://www.markdsegal.com
Re: IGFS
« Reply #30 on: July 16, 2015, 09:33:32 am »

Thanks Mark - I think you've nailed it.
Logged
Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....."

Ernst Dinkla

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4019
Re: IGFS
« Reply #31 on: July 19, 2015, 07:58:45 am »


Mark Segal's old versus new samples appear to be within a normal batch to batch tolerance, suggesting that production of IGFS under new managment is essentially the same as recent production before the bankruptcy.  The very old sample I have from 2008 does suggest that OBA content was a little lower when IGFS first went into production. Although OBAs can lose flourescence by ozone, the sample I have was in a PP bag inside the box, so I'm inclined to believe that sometime during production under original management IGFS OBA content did get tweaked a small amount. The M1 readings are up in blueness by approximately -0.5 units is not easily nor repeatibly noticed by even the most discerning viewers. I cut a sample of the very old stock to same dimensions as Mark supplied to me, shuffled them, and tried to reliably pick out each one. I did this little experiment several times, and succeeded in three-out-of-three correct sample ID less than half the time.

I have also attached a UV blacklight photo with five samples in view from left to right:  Epson EEF paper, IGFS very old, IGFS old, IGFS new, and lastly Canson Platine.  EEF on the left has very high OBA content, Platine has zero (it's a bit brighter than the dark table surface only because I added a little visible fill light, about 4x under exposure, along with the blacklight to be able to separate the Platine paper surface from the dark background. As can be seen in the photo, EEF glows brightly :), the very old IGFS slightly less than the newer IGFS samples, and Platine is clearly staking the No OBA ground, while Mark's old versus new samples do show ever so slight difference in fluorescence (older slightly less glow than newer) but again, I would conclude that to be typical manufacturing variances.


best,
Mark
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com



Mark,

I agree that the differences are subtle between the oldest, older and new IGFS, even close enough to stay compatible with the ICC profiles, as I have written before. I do not think the differences are batch variations, it looks like the batch variations within its generations are smaller. I find more confirmation in the fact that the three clones of the new generation have identical spectral plots and see the same in clones of older generations, they fit either the oldest or the older spectral plot of IGFS.
That could mean there have been three batches produced since 2008 and equally split to different brands or the differences in the batches have been that minute it is not visible in the spectral plots and we see three generations of IGFS here. I exclude the possibility that clones could be made in different facilities and become that identical. My vote goes to three generations of IGFS + rebrands. Subtle differences that could be batch differences but are more likely generation differences. Whether the generations are created in/on different facilities/equipment or have changed components is harder to tell. All IMHO.

Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst

http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
December 2014 update, 700+ inkjet media white spectral plots

Logged

Mark D Segal

  • Contributor
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12512
    • http://www.markdsegal.com
Re: IGFS
« Reply #32 on: July 19, 2015, 09:20:32 am »

OK, so what's the bottom line? For practical purposes whether one uses left over stock of old paper or the new paper it's essentially the same product and can be expected to have about the same longevity profile? And likewise for rebranded clones of the same basic paper? Am I missing anything important?
Logged
Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....."

Ernst Dinkla

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4019
Re: IGFS
« Reply #33 on: July 19, 2015, 10:19:44 am »

OK, so what's the bottom line? For practical purposes whether one uses left over stock of old paper or the new paper it's essentially the same product and can be expected to have about the same longevity profile? And likewise for rebranded clones of the same basic paper? Am I missing anything important?


Not missing much I think. For color management there will not be much difference if the coatings also act the same with the inks and practice says they do. Ilford ICC profiles are not renewed? On longevity with A-M IGFS etc tests; the paper white shift starts earlier than ink patches failure with HP Vivera pigment inks but Epson (pre P800) yellow ink patches change faster than the paper white shift. It is an OBA content paper. No tests for the latest generation IGFS etc and there might be no reason for extra tests if Mark sees no differences in the paper's components.

Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst

http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
December 2014 update, 700+ inkjet media white spectral plots





Logged

Mark D Segal

  • Contributor
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12512
    • http://www.markdsegal.com
Re: IGFS
« Reply #34 on: July 19, 2015, 10:33:38 am »

Thanks Ernst - useful insights. On the profiles question, Ilford - under the new regime, did publish a new set of profiles - or at least it appears so, as they are renamed. They're very good, but I get yet more accurate results with my custom profile of course. On the testing, again under the new regime and for the first time, instead of general statements from Ilford about "long-lasting: etc., the box now says "WIR Certified" - for whatever that is worth. Nonetheless, I still think it would be useful for Mark M-G to go ahead and test for what WIR doesn't, if he can do so. Can you or Mark tell from what we now know whether the OBA content is high or low, whether it is in the base or the surface, and therefore whether it portends obvious fading and as of what timing?
Logged
Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....."

MHMG

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1290
Re: IGFS
« Reply #35 on: July 21, 2015, 08:26:41 pm »

...Can you or Mark tell from what we now know whether the OBA content is high or low, whether it is in the base or the surface, and therefore whether it portends obvious fading and as of what timing?

Well, the fluorescence in IGFS is low, but that doesn't really tell us everything we would want to know about the location and concentration of the OBAs, nor of the OBA resistance to fade and discoloration over time. All samples I've tested of IGFS do exhibit the low-intensity light-induced staining (LILIS) effect. In fact, ironically, IGFS was  the first paper in which I detected the problem without fully understanding what was causing the variations I was seeing in my sample measurements, but that said, it's no where near as bad as many RC papers like Epson Premium Photo Luster. So, at this point in time, it's hard for me to put all of the LILIS issue into perspective and to respectfully quantify how much media discoloration is too much from a fine art print perspective. EPPL is definitely too much, as are essentially all other OBA containing RC photo papers on the market today because the OBAs are embedded in the TiO2-PE layers which is unquestionably a bad match of ingredients. I can no longer recommend any RC photo papers at this time for fine art applications, and I say this knowing full well that EPPL is a very popular paper as are many other RC photo papers on the market today. There is one RC "proofing" paper with no OBAS in the PE layers that is promising, Epson Proofing Paper White SemiMatte, which I'm currently testing and which so far is not exhibiting the LILIS effect.  All that said, IGFS is not an RC paper yet it does have plenty of TiO2 (which may be a key to aggravating the LILIS effect) along with a lesser amount of BaSO4 (determined from some recent XRF studies I did), but more research is needed. The light-induced yellowing I detect with IGFS is not nearly as pronounced at the yellowing I'm measuring in nearly all RC type media, but it's there nonetheless, and thus there are other "traditional fiber base" media which do not show the yellowing issues and thus would be a safer choice at this time for printmakers trying to achieve long lasting prints.

Understanding the  light induced discoloration problem in modern media is a work in progress. I'm doing what I can on a shoestring budget to figure it out. The industry and other testing labs have been AWOL on this issue. Even when very robust pigmented ink sets are used to create the image, any claims of 100+ year longevity on RC photo papers need to be taken in the context of under reported media yellowing problems.

best,
Mark
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com
« Last Edit: July 21, 2015, 09:23:03 pm by MHMG »
Logged

Mark D Segal

  • Contributor
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12512
    • http://www.markdsegal.com
Re: IGFS
« Reply #36 on: July 21, 2015, 10:32:12 pm »

Thanks Mark - we owe you one for hitting on this issue and taking it as far as you have been able to till now - I think it needs to be researched to the core and some way needs to be found for funding this work - maybe a Kickstarter campaign?  Ilford has led us to believe for the longest time that IGFS is of archival quality and many have been using it extensively for years. I wonder whether Canson Baryta Photographique would be similar in this regard.
Logged
Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....."

MHMG

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1290
Re: IGFS
« Reply #37 on: July 22, 2015, 10:47:12 am »

... I wonder whether Canson Baryta Photographique would be similar in this regard.

Yes, I have confirmed that CIBP shares the exact same LILIS behavior as IGFS. A couple of weeks ago, I got access to some portable XRF (x-ray flourescence) equipment at the nearby Williamstown Art Conservation Center, and I examined several papers for inorganic material composition.  Among various papers I tested CIPB and IGFS, and their XRF "signatures" were also identical. Both papers use TiO2 as a major whitening agent, some BaSO4 as well. While the BaSO4 signal did qualify them as Baryta papers, it should be understood they aren't anywhere near a traditional full Baryta photo paper, IMHO, but they do look good initially, so I can appreciate their popularity.  Because neither paper is an RC photo paper, it's the presence of the TiO2 which is an intriguing aspect of these products.

We've discussed CIPB and IGFS similarities several times before in this forum. My best guess is that the image receptor coatings including all subbing layers and layers on the verso are the same chemistry being coated in the same coating plant.  The base sheet, however, may come from different sources, i.e., CIBP paper base being supplied by Canson, IGFS using a paper supplied from a different mill. The base sheet differences would add very minor differences to the two products because most of the visual appearance and printing properties will be determined by the coatings.

I've been giving a lot of thought, actually rethinking the whole "color of white" idea for modern media, and also the notion that an OBA containing paper merely returns to its "natural" color when the fluorescence quits. First, the enduser doesn't know what that underlying color actually is without actually placing the paper under full UV block illumination to shut down the OBA fluorescence, but it is likely to land in a "still looks nominally white" media color range. Second, the LILIS effect and other yellowing/discoloration reactions can take the paper to even higher yellowed states over time which is definitely not the original "natural" underlying state. Whether the viewer can detect a problem in a "single stimulus" viewing environment (i.e., there is no unchanged reference print to compare to) appears to lie in the viewer's knowledge and sophistication, but in my research I"m beginning to focus on this perceived "color of white".  For nominally "white" appearing papers, modern media seem to go from a b* value of -10 (yup, that's blue) to a very warm white state with b* = +4 or 5 (think Hahnemuhle Bamboo). Any b* values higher than approximately +5 then begin to bring us to creamy or tan colored papers that most people would not judge as white. Likewise, the vast majority of cool white papers that serious printmakers typically prefer will further be constrained on the cool white end of the scale to about -5. So, the b* scale for "white" papers appears to be about -5 to +5.  Now here's where accurate versus plausible color gets interesting. if a paper with initial b* at -5 lost fluorescence and perhaps further discolored over time bringing its final b* state to +5, the I* metric would dutifully report that the media white color accuracy had reached zero, but the unsuspecting viewer might still accept the paper as a satisfactorily "white" paper based on the fact that it would still classify as a "plausible" warm white paper just within the -5 to +5 b* range. The printmaker's very carefull initial highlight color image edits would also be shifted by the change in paper color, but that's another story and also one dependent on viewer sophistication as well.
  
The LIILS effect for the IGFS is not as severe as what I'm seeing in many RC photo type papers, so it looks like the IGFS may end up in the +5 to +7 b* zone,, i.e., significantly changed but still a plausible white color. That said, I need to do more research on the reaction rates. The LIIS effect in IGFS and CIPB can be detected in very short dark storage time intervals (just a few weeks), but I don't know how far it has gone towards completion.  My discontinued samples are only a few years old now and have been kept at ordinary room temperature, so where they are now in color isn't necessarily where they are going to remain as more dark storage time accumulates. Some more yellowing may still take place over more time. That's where more study is needed, but one thing is certain, some papers have already shown discoloration in my tests to +10, +15, even up to +25 b* values. Some of these discontinued test samples now look like the color of a creamy manilla folder. >:( It's hard for me to accept the notion that such poor white point stability constitutes an "archival" paper, yet some of these bad apples are very popular papers today and enjoying those "archival" claims. IMHO, these poorly performing papers really need to be flagged and perhaps even taken off the market or reformulated, so that printmakers who care about print longevity can more easily avoid them.

I think IGFS is sitting right on the debatable threshold of acceptability.  I personally don't use it because there are better papers with similar initial whitepoint color that is retained much better over time. Canson Platine and HN PHoto Rag Pearl (my personal favorite in the glossy/luster FA category) come to mind, and there are other FA papers as well not exhibiting any serious yellowing problems in my tests.


best,
Mark
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com
« Last Edit: July 22, 2015, 11:27:40 am by MHMG »
Logged

Mark D Segal

  • Contributor
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12512
    • http://www.markdsegal.com
Re: IGFS
« Reply #38 on: July 22, 2015, 11:34:14 am »

Hi Mark,

This gets more interesting as it goes along. Quick reaction: Firstly, I reconfirm I think this is most valuable work that needs to be brought to its full extent. Secondly, I question whether you are being a tad generous to the issue in allowing for as much as +/- 5 on the b*axis as the benchmark range of acceptability for archival purposes. I'm pretty sure I can see differences within a smaller range. But this also depends on how you look at the print - i.e. in isolation or in comparison. IGFS became available in 2008 and that's when I started printing with it. I just opened a book of those prints and looked through. All seemed fine. No evidence of uneven yellowing, in fact no yellowing I could discern in isolation (let us recall how our visual perception is adaptable). So thinking this may not be the whole story, I placed beside it a fresh sheet unprinted sheet of IGFS from the "Swiss" stock, bought about somewhat over a year ago on the verge of the Ilford-Marly bankruptcy. Looked at side by side, I could perceive a slight difference in the tone of the white margin between 2008 and this "fresh" unprinted sheet. Later on I shall haul out my spectro and fire up the other computer to measure the two samples and I'll report back here whether the measurements bear out my observation.

As for using Canson Platine - not ever again in my 4900. After running several sheets of that stuff it took about 45 minutes of steady work getting the nozzle check pattern back to normal. It sheds particulates. Others have reported the same issue. For that reason I shall not risk running rag papers through this printer. Perhaps one needs a less sensitive printer to use that or possibly other of these papers conveniently. I also put profile gamut high on my order of priorities. In this respect the HFA_Epson4900_PK_FABaryta (Hahn Fine Art Baryta) looks like a good choice at 976,713 in ColorThink Pro. It's white point is however a bit bluish at b*-4. It's black point of L* = 6 is a bit higher than I've seen for this class of paper in the 4900, but not by much. It would be interesting to test this paper in a P800, which does better than the 4900 on black point. Does its b* value indicate OBA and possible LILIS?
Logged
Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....."

MHMG

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1290
Re: IGFS
« Reply #39 on: July 22, 2015, 01:34:24 pm »

Hi Mark S.,

Keep in mind that the yellowing caused by the LILIS effect requires a light exposure component. Your samples stored in a book are actually "dark storage control" prints. In the paper I'm working on about light induced discoloration, I am now in the process of going back through all of the old sample collection and remeasuring the media whitepoints on my dark stored control samples as well as all the light exposed samples, so that any changes documented for the dark stored only-no light exposure samples serve as a benchmark for thermally induced (i.e. heat and humidity) discoloration. Any additional yellowing discoloration beyond that can then be concluded to have been caused by light exposure. Gas induced discoloration (e.g. loss of OBA fluorescence due to ozone attack) would be spread rather uniformly in my collection accross all the samples. However, neither my light exposed samples nor my dark stored samples are likely to have much air pollution damage since they have not been subjected to unframed or uncovered storage and/or display conditions.

An IGFS print will require 10Mlux hours light exposure or more to induce any LILIS effect upon further storage in the dark or at low intensity light levels where the staining growth proceeds faster than the light bleaching reduction in yellowing.  Under typical home display conditions, it means we shouldn't expect to see any additional light induced discoloration for a decade or more. We simply aren't there yet in terms of real world statistics.  Thus, many inkjet media in the market today aren't old enough yet to have reached any kind of deployment in the real world where we will begin to see the toll of light fading, light induced yellowing, or other effects that will eventually show up in older samples. It's why accelerated testing is necessary, and why studying older samples in storage and display is a long term project.

As for Platine, ah yes, I recall you had problems with it on your 4900, and I don't use much of it personally, either. I prefer the HN Photo Rag Pearl, but I have run a roll or two of Platine on my iPF8330 with no issues, and a box of cut sheet through my Epson 3880 without incident. I would thus expect that many other printmakers don't have the problems with it that you experienced. Not to beat a dead horse, but the Epson X900 series printers do seem to be particularly sensitive to clogging, and perhaps that does limit media selection to some extent as well, but not being able to use any cotton fiber base papers? Ouch, if that is truly the case, I'd be looking for another printer ;)

HN Fine Art Baryta does have serious OBA burnout issues regardless of whether there is additional LILIS. I'm not finished with all of my LILIS evaluations yet, but HnFAB doesn't exhibit the LILIS effect to the extent that IGFS and CIBP do, yet its OBA loss of fluorescence alone is on the b* order of shift that you consider unacceptable.  I also took a sample of the HnFAB along for XRF analysis. Interestingly enough, HnFAB does not incorporate TiO2 whiteners like CIPB and IGFS which may be a clue to the LILIS effect, but again, more research needed.

You may want to have a look at the new Hn Fine Art Baryta Satin. It has no OBAs and yet it is alpha cellulose base, so a welcome addition to the Hahnemuhle glossy FA line of papers.  It's very close, IMHO, in overall image appearance properties to Hn Photo Rag Pearl, but the sheet is a little stiffer, the texture and sheen a little less as fitting its satin rather than "pearl" or "luster" description, but still delivering outstanding blacks. It is also about 30% less expensive than HnPhRagPearl. My only slight disappointment with the new HN FineArt Satin is that it's about 1 point warmer in b* value (2.4 versus 1.6) yet it's L value is also a little higher, so which one is "whiter" depends on your personal taste. You just need to look at a sample to see if it suits your needs.

best,
Mark
« Last Edit: July 22, 2015, 05:59:04 pm by MHMG »
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Up