Is fiber paper worth the additional cost for selling prints compared to rc paper?

[Certain Exposures]

I have a question for you if you sell your prints or purchase prints that artists have up for sale.

Do you feel like the visual difference between fiber paper and resin-coated paper is enough to justify the additional cost of fiber paper? Fiber paper costs more, and you have to invest more time to ensure you develop and wash it properly.

I have two prints of the same scene sitting in front of me. I made one on Ilford fiber glossy paper and the other on Ilford MG glossy RC paper. I am thinking long and hard. I can't tell if I'm imagining any differences I see between the RC paper and the fiber paper. I like the fiber a little more.

RC paper's wash process makes my printing routine in this cramped space less of a chore. It's also cheaper, and I don't need a press machine to flatten it. I like the feel of the fiber paper in my hand a lot more, but I plan to frame my prints.

What do you all think?

[John Kasaian]

If I hang up a picture, it's because I can connect with what the picture is of. All the rest is just details.
I print on fiber paper because I enjoy printing on fiber paper. If I wanted to save time, I'd print digitally.
My 2-cents anyway (how come 'puters don't have the cent sign?)

[nolindan]

I used to sell prints via galleries and hangings. It was all fiber. Yes, it is a bit of a pain but I figure if someone is shelling out good money for the product the product should be as high quality as I can make it, without going overboard.

The issue is defining 'overboard.'

In my book if an RC print sells for little money as a result of no frame, regular ole' mat board & spray adhesive mounting then it isn't overboard or underboard - it's made to a price.

I think the answer hinges on whether the premium price for fiber is something a customer will pay for.

I have some 30 YO framed RC prints hanging on my walls and all of them have bronzed to various extents. I live in the 'burbs and air quality is good - much better than when Cleveland still had steel mills. I don't know if current Ilford RC papers have the same problem. Loose RC prints from the same time that are stored in flat files look fine.

This is an issue that has been well debated, with no definitive outcome to the debate. I guess the answer is 'it is up to you.'

[Tin Can]

I like both as I practice with RC

Every print is NOT Fine ART

[Bernice Loui]

Over the decades of making B&W prints have developed an absolute dis-like for RC paper. They look like artificial RC plastic pix.

Fiber base B&W paper usually comes in gloss or matt, of these two the gloss is preferred and has been that way to this day.


Bernice

[Tin Can]

24 years ago my instructor insisted on hot mount Fiber Prints, I made a lot

They do look like new

but I never sell any ART

RC is very fast to check many other variables

[xkaes]

If you are making prints NOT for sale -- yourself, gifts, etc. -- do what you like.

I prefer the whites in RC.

If you are worried about the silver stability of RC ("bronzing") -- which is not only an RC issue -- make sure you fix the print well, and consider a post-wash, silver-stabilization step, such as selenium toning, Sistan, etc.

If you are making prints FOR sale, fiber is the way to go because there are SOME photo snobs out there that want "the best" for their money -- not that they have a clue about photography, or could tell the difference in a comparison test.

If you are paying for a Rolex, you want a real Rolex -- even though it's no better at telling time than a Timex.

[Bernice Loui]

RC quick print yes, dry down is easier to deal with for RC paper. RC paper is often lower cost than high quality fiber base paper.

Dry down (fiber paper prints gain density as they dry) must be accounted for in the print making process when making prints on fiber base paper. If toning is done post-print process, more print tweaking might be needed to account for what toning does to the print.


Bernice

[Drew Wiley]

I think RC in black and white applications will always be perceived as the unwanted step-child. I only used RC for quickie commercial applications headed to the printing press. You can't decently drymount them, or present them well except in small sizes. But for casual sales like sidewalk fairs etc, it's your own rules : whatever works, works. In any kind of formal gallery, expect noses to still be turned up.

[Paul Ron]

printing on fiber paper, and your archival matts n efforts and a frame, are all selling points that justify your price.

i dont particularly like rc papers. they just dont feel right to me....


thats my two cents and im stickng to my story.

[John Layton]

You need to establish what you like best in terms of results, knowing that from then on it would be unlikely for you to put your best efforts forward were you to then use the "lesser" of these choices. Just sayin'!

Aside from the above, if you want to sell prints...you will need to embrace archival methods for whatever material you use. As far as I know, the state of the art regarding keeping qualities would favor Fiber over RC papers...but only if you are very thorough in your methodology. In other words, an RC print is easier to "clean" to its own maximum keeping standard, while to properly/thoroughly wash a fiber print is more difficult and time consuming - but the fiber print will last longer, all else being equal.

From a sales standpoint...depending on your choice of venue(s), you may very well find yourself being quite thoroughly grilled by a knowledgeable prospective buyer about the archival properties of your prints - and if you cannot give assurances here (with the proviso that the buyer also has responsibilities going forward, environment-wise) then you may lose that sale. Kind of a PITA...but there it is.

[Oren Grad]

I'm fine with RC paper - for my printing I use almost entirely RC at this point. But there's no way for me to know what your buyers will want.

But you should know that untreated RC prints are highly vulnerable to deterioration when they're framed and on display. Read chapter 12 of Ctein's Post Exposure book:

https://ctein.com/booksmpl.htm

So if you are going to sell RC prints, I strongly recommend using a protective post-treatment. I selenium tone all of my RC "keepers". Because RC washes so easily, it's not a huge workflow burden - much less of a hassle than it is with FB papers. Been there, done that.

[xkaes]

I only used RC for quickie commercial applications headed to the printing press. You can't decently drymount them, or present them well except in small sizes.

For what it's worth, I haven't had problems dry mounting 48" (short side) RC prints in my Seal 500T with Seal Colormount. The color photo murals are all RC, but I've dry mounted large paper maps, etc., as well. And with B&W photo murals, the RC paper is more rigid and easier to handle. The largest fiber-based paper I've used is 20x24, and RC wins hands-down for me in large sizes.

Some people don't like the feel of RC paper. When the print is behind glass, you can't feel it. The question is can you tell a difference?

[bmikiten]

I've been collecting prints for 30+ years from well known and lesser known artists. I would not consider a print not printed on anything but fiber except when I'm supporting a very small startup artist. There are certain costs that don't make sense to cut and fiber versus RC is one of them on final high-quality prints. Just my thoughts...

Brian

[Drew Wiley]

Yeah it can be done, but RC paper, either color or b&w, exhibits miserable "orangepeel" when drymounted, and often unevenness of sheen afterwards due to the heat, even if you use the recommended silicone release boards. It really needs to be pressure sensitive mounted, which is a dicey thing to do in large sizes without special roller equipment (which I do have). At least really big fiber-based prints can be wet-mounted with care, analogously to wallpaper hanging using simple glues like Seal Vacu-Mount or Daige's equivalent.

Otherwise, can I tell the difference behind glass? Yep, in a heartbeat. But people are always free to follow their own preferences.

[Michael Graves]

(how come 'puters don't have the cent sign?)

Hold down the Alt key and type 0162.¢

[xkaes]

-- AFTER you first press the NUM LOCK key.

[xkaes]

"orangepeel"? I've never had that problem or any other -- even with dry mounted prints decades old. Guess I'm just lucky.

[Tin Can]

How many prints make money?

Almost all humans want it on a screen

Sure some very wealthy will pay...or not

We need a survey!

I am not that guy

I only give Art away

Seldom

[Pieter]

RC is a non-starter for selling prints. Buyers expect the longevity of an archivally-fixed and washed fiber print. Also, I don't think you can properly spot (as in touch-up) an RC print.

[Drew Wiley]

RC prints spot just as easily using the ordinary Spot Tone or Marshall's dyes. No big deal there.

[Alan9940]

I don't sell my prints, but I much prefer the aesthetic look of air-dried glossy fiber paper over any RC surface.

[Drew Wiley]

xkaes - you've had orangepeel, probably routinely. Just put an angular light to it. I only need to ask one question to prove it - what's the specific substrate are you drymounting it on?

[xkaes]

I've never sold a fiber-based print, but then I've never tried to sell a fiber-based print. I've had much better luck selling color prints -- which were all resin coated -- over B&W. I've never had anyone ask me if my prints were fiber-based. And I've never had any complaints.

[uphereinmytree]

I see it as silver coated in plastic vs. silver layered on clay and cotton.

[Drew Wiley]

OK. That's starting to make sense. The general thread was about b&w RC. There are now no routine fiber-based color print options, though a limited amount of dye transfer printing is still going on, as well as hand-coated color prints on paper like carbon transfer. It has nothing to do with "complaints" you might get; that's all relative to the specific clientele. Mine would scream. Matte or satin RC color prints are going to betray orangepeel considerably less than glossy RC, even though it's there in those cases too. It just doesn't show much. Once you go true gloss, like with Fujiflex or former Cibachrome, any variation from total flatness is highly evident. With nearly truly flat substrates like Dibond or Ultraboard, or Gatorplast, heat mounting is not realistic at all. Everything other kind of mounting board has an irregular surface; and the heat of drymounting conforms RC papers to the uneven surface. That's been known in the picture framing trade for decades; and Seal made a point of warning about it themselves. But I'm glad it's working out for you. Always nice if you can use equipment already on hand. I can't imagine life without my big 500 Seal press, though I never use it for color prints.

[Pieter]

In the end, the difference in the cost of the paper should have little impact on a sale, unless you are selling a lot of really large prints dirt cheap. So go for the extra bucks and work and use fiber.

[xkaes]

Not that I'm looking to buy any, but does anyone sell fiber-based mural paper (40-54" wide) nowadays?

I'm not looking for any because a while back, a camera shop in another State was closing, and I was able to buy all their rolls of B&W and Color (mostly Color) mural paper for the cost of shipping. They are all thick glossy RC paper, and I could not pass it up -- even if they do "orangepeel".

[interneg]

does anyone sell fiber-based mural paper (40-54" wide)

Yes - Foma, Ilford, Adox (did, probably will once they get their wide coater running). Mainly 42" rolls, though some 20" & 56" are offered. 30" (annoyingly) is only available on the panchromatic Harman digital papers, unless you want to custom order for a 4-figure sum.

[Drew Wiley]

It's the big color paper rolls hard to get now. That issue is specifically addressed under RA4 darkroom threads. Kodak suspended making it, planning to restart with a Chinese subcontractor, at what turned out to be the worse possible time with the pandemic and now a war affecting energy and petrochemical prices. That created panic buying of Fuji papers. Can't get even Fuji Super C rolls at the moment. Have had a big Fujiflex roll on backorder for six months now. Whenever ....

[LabRat]

There are pros & cons to both, but a primary concern is production facilities, time, and space for the resale prints...

Fiber will have a richer, longer scale, but more expensive and many little steps to follow to get a flat mountable print for sales... But worth the effort for high-end work...

RC is much more poo-pooed, but can produce nice results fairly quickly in limited space if careful and last a reasonably long time... The glossy surface is the clearest surface today without effort, and final prints will be reasonably flat that dry quickly... The MG grades are versatile, and wet times are short... The clarity of glossy surface is easily scannable so it is also used for prints to be used in publishing (even fine foto books)...

One tip is RC is the wet time should be short as possible, meaning in development time should be slightly shorter than full time or print can look harsher, a fresh rapid fixer at film strength for a shorter time than fiber, then straight to a single print wash for manufacturers recommended minimum time, as excessive wash time leads to water piping into print edges that can cause uneven flatness and can cause future surface peeling when exposed to regular bright lights later... Prints can be dipped it very dilute photo-flo + distilled water bath before wiping with a slightly damp photo sponge after draining excess water, and dried hung or face up on blotters (should be totally dry in less than half-hour... Prints can be flat enough to be archival taped along top on backing board, then over matted and be pretty flat if careful...

For production work, can be nice enough, but gotta keep the wet time low, and best to finish one print at a time during shorter process...

Steve K

[jnantz]

Behind glass RC prints look as beautiful as FB prints, the problem ( as Photo Engineer over on Photrio would talk about ) is "outgassing" of the substrate. This doesn't happen all the time just under certain conditions and it always seems to happen when the print is in a frame. The result of the outgassing is something called "silvering out" so some of the silver on the print turns to something like metallic silver, shiny like an aged and oxidized old black and white #55 polaroid. Maybe something like AG STAB, or selenium toning the prints, something that converts the silver into something else will rectify this silvering out issue, I have no clue. Unfortunately it's more chemicals to use, and deal with their hazards and disposal issues.

===
sorry Oren I repeated what you said, didn't see it.
It's pages 155-16x in Ctien's book, free download off the link Oren posted!

[neil poulsen]

I tried some RC paper when I was in my 20's. Instinctively, I wanted nothing more to do with that "paper". Since then, RC "paper" has never again made its way into my darkroom.


. . . I have some 30 YO framed RC prints hanging on my walls and all of them have bronzed to various extents. I live in the 'burbs and air quality is good - much better than when Cleveland still had steel mills. I don't know if current Ilford RC papers have the same problem. Loose RC prints from the same time that are stored in flat files look fine.

I have framed, dry-mounted, fiber-based photographs that were printed decades ago, and they all look like they did (to my eye) the day they were mounted. None of them have shown any deterioration.

The above says it all for me. It appears that my instincts were right on target.

[Tin Can]

Recently I bought four 30 sheet Promo boxes of Ilford 8X10, B&H

3 Pearl
1 Glossy

I wonder which I prefer

I believe Ilford has vastly improved RC in the last 25 years

[Jim Noel]

Over the decades of making B&W prints have developed an absolute dis-like for RC paper. They look like artificial RC plastic pix.

Fiber base B&W paper usually comes in gloss or matt, of these two the gloss is preferred and has been that way to this day.


Bernice

I totally agree with you. I see no value in the use of RC regardless of price. Some say they use it to see if an image is worth printing on fiber paper, toning, etc.
The 2 prints will be too different to help with this decision.

[sperdynamite]

I've been recently having a 'how I learned to stop worrying and love RC' moment personally. Mostly due to time constraints and frustration with print flattening. Seal presses are super hard to find and always a bit more than I think they 'aught' to cost. I have been using merely as a flattener, the Arkay print dryer I have but it sometimes leaves the edges curly.

Personally with the newest MG paper from Ilford I think it's a bit foolish to proof and contact on fiber. You can do 90% of your work on RC and then when it's time for that show or gift or sale, you do a run on fiber. The previous generation of RC papers looked noticeably worse than FB stocks, but this new one is really nice.

[Bernice Loui]

Part of the print making process often involved finishing the print in some way. Historically for silver gelatin prints it was dry mounting on high quality acid free mat board. This was part of the print making process from loading film to making the print to finishing the print as the goal's end result.

At some point, the cost of Foto materials should far exceed the cost of gear as the rational for gear should be driven by print making. This means the "gear" needed to mount and finish the print, regardless of RC or fiber based print papers.

IMO, some folks complain about the cost of a good mounting press, paper cutter and all related but not even a flinch dropping $$$$ on a "new fangled camera or lens or ..." then ignore the needs of the print making process.



Bernice

[xkaes]

IMO, some folks complain about the cost of a good mounting press, paper cutter and all related but not even a flinch dropping $$$$ on a "new fangled camera or lens or ..." then ignore the needs of the print making process.

Bernice

That same line of thinking is probably at work when people buy incredibly expensive digital cameras, justifying it with "I'll never have to pay for film and processing again".

But you are correct. Paying for post-processing material -- mounting boards, mats, cutters, frames, glass, press, etc. -- really adds up, even if you buy in bulk -- and it takes a lot of time. Which reminds me -- I've got to get back into the habit of looking frames at my local GOODWILL store.

[Tin Can]

I have all those tools and learned to use them 23 years ago

I have fancy boxes filled with interleaved Hot mount on 23 year old Light Impressions matt board

and plenty of that good old LI matt board still sealed

I for one am tired of 'experts' banging their drums

A few years ago every expert had classes that few could afford as the travel, time, gear and 'expert' guy add up

Nobody does Print exchanged any more, my 2 were mounted FB. Duh!

and I doubt we survive to 2023

I feel no shame in doing what I want, when I want and how I want

I also suspect many of the loudest Experts are good friends with the suppliers and get deals

Salesmen and their lackeys do lie

[John Olsen]

I've been using the same Ilford papers as the OP in FB and RC. Over 30 years both have improved greatly. I trust the RC to give a good test print, but it's the FB versions that have the full depth. As Drew says, if the buyer doesn't care, RC is fine. But if you've got an image that you care about, only the FB is right. The added time? If you're doing film, you've already committed to a time-consuming method. Having done so, go all the way!

[Kiwi7475]

I've been recently having a 'how I learned to stop worrying and love RC' moment personally. Mostly due to time constraints and frustration with print flattening. Seal presses are super hard to find and always a bit more than I think they 'aught' to cost. I have been using merely as a flattener, the Arkay print dryer I have but it sometimes leaves the edges curly.

Personally with the newest MG paper from Ilford I think it's a bit foolish to proof and contact on fiber. You can do 90% of your work on RC and then when it's time for that show or gift or sale, you do a run on fiber. The previous generation of RC papers looked noticeably worse than FB stocks, but this new one is really nice.

May I recommend this. It just works. Just a bit over $100 on eBay, they come in different sizes.

https://youtu.be/MWQNk9b-99U

[Pieter]

I have all those tools and learned to use them 23 years ago

I have fancy boxes filled with interleaved Hot mount on 23 year old Light Impressions matt board

and plenty of that good old LI matt board still sealed

I for one am tired of 'experts' banging their drums

A few years ago every expert had classes that few could afford as the travel, time, gear and 'expert' guy add up

Nobody does Print exchanged any more, my 2 were mounted FB. Duh!

and I doubt we survive to 2023

I feel no shame in doing what I want, when I want and how I want

I also suspect many of the loudest Experts are good friends with the suppliers and get deals

Salesmen and their lackeys do lie

Photography is not an inexpensive undertaking. Film, chemicals (or processing), paper (including what goes in the trash for tests, etc), and mounting, matting and framing if you choose--all are not cheap. To complain about the added cost of fiber paper and the extra time and care it might take is pretty ridiculous. Especially if you take the time and care to make a good print--doesn't it deserve the best you can afford? And I very much doubt anyone is in the pocket of suppliers. There just isn't that much competition or interest to justify that kind of marketing outlay. Deals might be made for large quantities because some do consume a lot, but they are probably available to anyone buying like that. So stop whining.

As far as workshops go, they're a way of making a living. Do you deny pay for teachers? No one is forcing anyone to take the workshops, if you do some research you will usually find some feedback about how well they are taught and if the skills promised are really demonstrated and learned by the participants. And depending on where you are located, there may be a less expensive option--a local photo group, community college or even an individual willing to share.

[Drew Wiley]

There's no reason for any modern RC print to "outgas". The very thin semi-permeable plastic sandwich material is PET, not vinyl. No plasticizers like with vinyl. But at one time there was an alleged oxidation reaction to the optical brighteners or something else in the paper coating. That issue was apparently solved. I doubt that Sistan or any other treatment made a significant difference in print longevity; that particular study is now quite old and possibly obsolete. The long term integrity of the paper support itself is always open to question; but that's the hidden bear lurking in the woods with inkjet substates too. An involved topic with a lot of lingering questions.

RC does have an advantage in water-restricted areas, since they wash out way faster. Nice for teaching darkroom beginners too. But I'll personally never buy RC again; that just wouldn't fit in with my larger body of black and white work.

[jnantz]

There's no reason for any modern RC print to "outgas".

There may not be any reason for it, but it does (according to people who worked at kodak). From what I remember him telling me in the chatroom
if you frame it, don't put glazing in the frame . (paraphrase)

[Drew Wiley]

That's all old talk, John, and I know at least one person behind it. If it's important to someone, they should try to find newer research. Many of us are aware of performance issues in older RC products. But so were the manufacturers, and a lot of water has gone under the bridge since, R&D-wise. But I admittedly haven't paid much attention to it since I print exclusively on FB. Regardless, because RC got that reputation and it stuck, its gonna get a bum rap whether it remains true today or not. I can't imagine framing without glazing for anything allegedly serious; but not everyone demands "serious".

[jnantz]

That's all old talk, John, and I know at least one person behind it. If it's important to someone, they should try to find newer research. Many of us are aware of performance issues in older RC products. But so were the manufacturers, and a lot of water has gone under the bridge since, R&D-wise. But I admittedly haven't paid much attention to it since I print exclusively on FB. Regardless, because RC got that reputation and it stuck, its gonna get a bum rap whether it remains true today or not. I can't imagine framing without glazing for anything allegedly serious; but not everyone demands "serious".

Not sure what to say Drew
Ron Mowrey was a respected and renown scientist, a guy who had patents for one of the Kodachromes, BLIX, developers, He was steeped in science and experience and until the end he was connected to that whole word, he was a known quantity and had credentials. Sorry to sound like a jerk, but you are some argumentative guy on the internet and your only credentials are the things that you post. Personally I'd take Ron Mowrey's observations, insights and suggestions, sorry.

[Willie]

How many "fine" printers sell RC prints?

Have been told that some well known photographers used RC and ended up having to replace a lot of prints sold - that did not last. Also - the labs printing some of these for them did not stand behind the printing and closed as a result. I emphasize "have been told" - so if someone knows what reality is, please let us know so I'm not repeating old husbands tales.

[esearing]

Like most things in life the luxury elevates the experience. Like some expensive luxury cars make you enjoy driving more vs getting from point a to point b, or writing with a fine pen, or drinking fine wine. Fiber gives a feeling of luxury paper compared to RC (even though the new Ilford Portfolio RC is fantastic tonally).

[Tin Can]

LOL

I will try it!


Like most things in life the luxury elevates the experience. Like some expensive luxury cars make you enjoy driving more vs getting from point a to point b, or writing with a fine pen, or drinking fine wine. Fiber gives a feeling of luxury paper compared to RC (even though the new Ilford Portfolio RC is fantastic tonally).

https://www.ilfordphoto.com/new-product-announcement-multigrade-rc-portfolio/

Don't forget I drove $100 cars for a decade, no insurance required by the State

I almost never crash and always drive the speed limit

I no longer drive for the safety of others

[Tin Can]

I do have it, that's what I bought last month!

SAVE WATER

BTW I remember

If it's yellow it's mellow

If it's brown flush it down

[bob carnie]

I have been printing silver for clients for a long time , most of our work gets framed immediately . In the early 90's I had a business partner who decided to make rc prints for clients, it only took a couple of years for some of these prints to come back to us after they had de silvered in frames (see ctein article)
from that moment on I banned all rc prints except for contact sheets and publicity photos ( theater proofs) which we were doing a lot of in that timeline.

Today I will still use rc for contact sheets , but for all our work for gallery shows and private collections it would be FB Paper.

[Sal Santamaura]

...see ctein article...And then follow up many years later:


https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?125178-RC-print-permanence-update

Then, check Aardenburg to see how silver halide prints, fiber base or RC, actually degrade on display:


https://www.aardenburg-imaging.com/light-fade-test-results/

It pays to revisit research. :)

[xkaes]

..please let us know so I'm not repeating old husbands tales.

Sorry, the horse is out of the barn.

[Oren Grad]

Sal, thanks for the reminder of the update and the Aardenburg results. Some may not appreciate that making sense of the latter requires a close read of the full reports, not just the summary "conservation display rating" number. As MHMG explains, the "fading" that he observes is a consequence of OBA decay, not deterioration of the silver image proper. If one's artistic or documentary objectives depend on the print looking exactly as it did the moment it emerged from the darkroom, then the materials must be considered unstable on extended display. OTOH, if what one needs is simply physical longevity of a pleasing / informative monochrome image, one will draw different conclusions.

FWIW, I don't lose much sleep over the fact that we're stuck with OBAs in our silver gelatin papers. The only prints of mine that anybody is even conceivably going to care about over the very long run are pictures of family and friends, the places we've lived and the things we've done. Most of those will be in dark storage most of the time, but even if they do get displayed and the OBAs decay, nobody is going to care - they will still effectively serve their purpose.

[xkaes]

I do have it, that's what I bought last month!

SAVE WATER

BTW I remember

If it's yellow it's mellow

If it's brown flush it down


Yet another city, today -- Aurora, Colorado with a half a million people -- will start discussion regarding banning any new grass in the City. The Mayor -- a conservative Republican -- is bringing up the issue to the City Council. No lawns on new homes, no new golf courses, Astro-turf on new sports fields, etc. They are running out of water like most of the West. Maybe I'll show up and suggest a ban on the sale of fiber-based photo paper -- since there is an alternative. Washing prints for an hour???

[xkaes]

I have been printing silver for clients for a long time , most of our work gets framed immediately . In the early 90's I had a business partner who decided to make rc prints for clients, it only took a couple of years for some of these prints to come back to us after they had de silvered in frames (see ctein article)

Were the RC prints treated as Ctein and others suggested?

[Drew Wiley]

xkaes - like I already stated, that kind of information is very old, and was questionable from day one anyway. Ctein rarely even printed black and white; but I'm not going to get into an extended argument over a very minor hypothetical point. I've visited him more than once, and have an idea of his actual capabilities.

As per Aardenburg's methodology - big improvement over Wilhelm, but still reliant on accelerated aging tests which often DO NOT always correctly predict long-term results under ordinary conditions. There is simply no substitute for hindsight; but we do have to start somewhere, so torture tests do have their place. But let me give one of my own examples of such a distinction. The premier non-rag "archival" PAT matboard brand has a proprietary core technology allegedly trapping the buffering agent in its own kind of special ply sandwich, preserving the outer colored layers, as well as the whiteness of the bevel cut, and of course, for sake of preserving paper artwork behind. If they accelerated aging tested that for humidity resistance, all of it would just promptly fall apart, and you wouldn't learn anything except not to throw matboard into an alligator swamp. But what I observed after a long period of time under actual display conditions with relatively modest cyclic temp and humidity changes was that a bit of CaCO3 was actually gradually migrating out of the core layer and redepositing where it wasn't wanted. That was never anticipated. More tests to follow. But by comparison, Rising Museum board is made using natural slightly alkaline water from limestone wells, rather than added alkalinity basically after the fact. Of course, they don't do colors other than a few shades of off-white, and also offer non-buffered board too.

I can think of quite a few things I learned the hard way which went counter to even traditional conservator hunches. I tend to test everything. But of course, the latest products will outlive me, so it's hard to say. And with all that talk about inkjet, for example, being more permanent than certain other color photographic media, again, you're only as good as your weakest link; and just how much do we REALLY know about the bonding integrity to the paper itself, or rather, all kinds of different papers rushed to market, when there's simply no substantial track record yet. So for some things, accelerated aging tests just don't give the answers.

Torturing a baryta base and its brighteners under intense UV doesn't necessarily forecast what will happen long-term under little or modest UV. It might tell you that displaying work under UV-intense hot projector lamps or typical low-voltage track lighting, also UV and heat-intense, isn't a good idea. But common sense should tell you that too.

[Michael R]

It's a minor point but FB can be washed much faster than an hour, and archival washing requires surprisingly little water if one is willing to add a little labour to the washing process.



Yet another city, today -- Aurora, Colorado with a half a million people -- will start discussion regarding banning any new grass in the City. The Mayor -- a conservative Republican -- is bringing up the issue to the City Council. No lawns on new homes, no new golf courses, Astro-turf on new sports fields, etc. They are running out of water like most of the West. Maybe I'll show up and suggest a ban on the sale of fiber-based photo paper -- since there is an alternative. Washing prints for an hour???

[Oren Grad]

It's a minor point but FB can be washed much faster than an hour, and archival washing requires surprisingly little water if one is willing to add a little labour to the washing process.

These articles are a useful resource for understanding the tradeoffs involved in choice of FB washing method:

http://www.film-and-darkroom-user.org.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=296

http://www.film-and-darkroom-user.org.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=344

[Drew Wiley]

Michael. Some of us want more than the minimum wash. It's a margin of safety. And I do have especially efficient slot washers of my own design. And Ilford's well-known tests in that respect applied mainly to Galerie graded FB, which was somewhat different than their other papers. When it comes to color RC, automated roller-transport processors basically run these rapidly through a stabilized wash, whereas I typically wash them with multiple changes of water for about six times more time, cumulatively.

Astroturf? Too late. Plastic gophers are already evolving. ... Yeah, just making that stuff ain't all that "green".

[interneg]

Drew, Ilford know their stuff - Ilford's emulsions have evolved very considerably since MK1 Galerie - and are clearly designed from the ground up for compliance with Ilford's fix/ wash system. It's a question of a relatively small number of total water changes, some agitation and diffusion time - aided by wash-aid. The 5 mins wash/ 10 mins wash-aid, 5 mins wash works - and all the slot-washer does (and Ilford did some work on the rheology of these - seemingly finding that acrylic prismatic diffusion material made the best compartment separators) is take up less space than a couple of trays and use less water than a tray syphon.

[xkaes]

Astroturf? Too late. Plastic gophers are already evolving. ... Yeah, just making that stuff ain't all that "green".

Aurora has an overabundance of real gophers, but a shortage of water with a multitude of people who want to move there. They gas the gophers, build the houses, and use oil to make the lawns. That's what you do when you have no H2O.

[Tin Can]

Where I live we have too much water generally

In between the Ohio and Mississippi rivers with The Big Muddy closer

My water bill is reverse graduated, the more I use, the cheaper

My water main pipe after meter failed and leaked like a river, fixing that was not cost effective. I upgraded to 1" PEX which may last 100 years

[Drew Wiley]

xkaes - continuing this line of cynicism, they need all that water to pump into fracking wells to force the oil out. Otherwise, there's going to be an astroturf shortage! Why not plant drought-resistant plants instead? Too many golf courses already. But I do indeed know what it takes to live in drought conditions. You might ask Tom Selleck about that ... just steal someone else's water. But I have bit of geology-hydrology background, so ended up with two superb wells with sufficient output to share water with others, plus keep everything green. Otherwise, people in the hills were often spending more for a well than the cost of house and property itself, and also often coming up empty handed.
I eventually sold that property; too much work. Here on the coast we get good water piped in from Sierra snowmelt, but those cities which don't are going to have another real tough year. Even the plastic gophers, moles, and grasshoppers are going hungry.

[Bernice Loui]

Water used to wash FB papers can be reduced by using a wash aid like Heico Perma wash.
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?Ntt=Heico%20Perma%20Wash&N=0&InitialSearch=yes&ap=Y&gclid=CjwKCAjwrfCRBhAXEiwAnkmKmUhtaqFWbHF1n1g0HzGXIlvU4qaYYsV6fNoUEtQSiKGxlzQOYAcpjhoCmiEQAvD_BwE

If the print is toned, more water and washing will be involved. Using a wash aid helps to reduce water needed for processing.
Used Perma wash decades ago, those prints treated with Perma was have held up good.

Print size is another water usage factor, larger the print or greater the print volume water usage goes up.

IMO, cost of print making materials is zilch compared to the human resources required to make prints as the most valuable resource any individual has and can offer is their time.. which is limited and not replaceable.


Bernice

[Michael R]

Drew, nobody said anything about a "minimum wash", whatever that means. I'm talking about archival processing and washing.



Michael. Some of us want more than the minimum wash. It's a margin of safety. And I do have especially efficient slot washers of my own design. And Ilford's well-known tests in that respect applied mainly to Galerie graded FB, which was somewhat different than their other papers. When it comes to color RC, automated roller-transport processors basically run these rapidly through a stabilized wash, whereas I typically wash them with multiple changes of water for about six times more time, cumulatively.

Astroturf? Too late. Plastic gophers are already evolving. ... Yeah, just making that stuff ain't all that "green".

[Drew Wiley]

Interneg, I'm well aware of Ilford's method. I just prefer my own. Water quality as well as quantity can differ considerably place to place. I have no doubt my own washers are quite efficient with respect to both washing out the paper thoroughly and conserving water. But I prefer a longer cycle as a margin of safety. The septums in my own slot washers are more effective at getting water constantly both in front of the prints and behind them than those in commercially made units. Prismatic potentially risks emulsion scratches unless specially modified. Won't go into detail here about my own materials. But I'm well equipped for my own acrylic fabrication.

[xkaes]

xkaes - continuing this line of cynicism,

Cynicism? Not me. Reality. I have RC paper in my darkroom, drip irrigation in my garden, and 55-gallon drums on my down-spouts.

[xkaes]

probably all you fine printers are using:
Residual Silver Test Solution ST-1
&
Kodak HT-2 residual hypo test

Those are great for removal of all the residual silver -- and fixer -- that should be removed, but developed silver is not supposed to be removed. It needs to be stabilized in place and protected from the elements.

[Bernice Loui]

Print edges are more prone to holding on to residual processing chemicals. Trimming off the print edges as part of the print mounting process reduces this risk.

Bernice



probably all you fine printers are using:
Residual Silver Test Solution ST-1
&
Kodak HT-2 residual hypo test

[Sal Santamaura]

...As MHMG explains, the "fading" that he observes is a consequence of OBA decay, not deterioration of the silver image proper...I'm not sure institutions or collectors who purchase and display photographic prints care what the mechanism of deterioration is. They'd more likely be concerned that there's deterioration, period. This thread is about selling prints, after all.


...If one's artistic or documentary objectives depend on the print looking exactly as it did the moment it emerged from the darkroom, then the materials must be considered unstable on extended display. OTOH, if what one needs is simply physical longevity of a pleasing / informative monochrome image, one will draw different conclusions...Staying with the thread topic, wouldn't the objectives of buyers be determinative, rather than those of the photographer?


...I don't lose much sleep over the fact that we're stuck with OBAs in our silver gelatin papers...If the ivory tint and warm image tone suit a photographer's taste, and if that photographer does lose sleep over the deterioration of OBAs over time, this paper (custom coated by HARMAN) might be of interest:


https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/232203-REG/Bergger_VCCBS810_25_VC_CB_Warm_Tone_Black.html

After checking it with UV light, I've concluded that it contains a far lower level of OBA than most other current silver halide papers. I suspect the only OBA is in the base (allegedly current Ilford and ADOX papers all use the same base), since it fluoresces much less than those others, which likely add OBAs to their emulsions. An added bonus is that, unlike other current Ilford and ADOX fiber base papers, its top coat surface presents a "golidlocks" level of reflectance. Shiny enough to support blacks, but not so shiny that viewing the image is difficult in all but the most controlled lighting conditions.

[Oren Grad]

Staying with the thread topic, wouldn't the objectives of buyers be determinative, rather than those of the photographer?

Yes indeed, if the primary goal is to sell. But that general principle doesn't by itself determine the best strategy for a given seller. Some complications:

MHMG's findings re OBAs remind us that buyer preferences may be driven by erroneous beliefs. How many buyers who insist on FB prints on grounds of stability are aware that deterioration of OBAs in displayed prints is an issue, and that today there are very few choices of silver gelatin paper that are not potentially vulnerable to that failure mode?

On the other hand, not every buyer is looking for an heirloom. Offensive as it may be for some who imagine themselves producing Profound Works of Art, some buy for decor purposes, and many such buyers are comfortable with a relatively short display lifetime.

And yet on the other hand, some buyers who are looking for Profound Works of Art nevertheless understand the reality and are willing to accept something less than maximum possible stability if that's what it takes to acquire an item that appeals to their taste and/or meets their collecting goals. Don't forget that collectors began buying color prints on chromogenic papers years before relatively stable pigment-inkjet prints became available. Many, especially early on, were no doubt deluded about the keeping properties of the work. But others knew what they were doing, accepted the risk and were/are conservative in how they display their collections.

There's no one right way for a photographer to print work for sale. But one can always adhere to the ethical practice of being candid with buyers about the properties of the materials one uses, including limits to our knowledge about stability and corresponding uncertainties about keeping, so that buyers can make an informed choice. And in particular, that means thinking long and hard before trumpeting one's work as "archival".

[jnantz]

Yes indeed, if the primary goal is to sell. But that general principle doesn't by itself determine the best strategy for a given seller. Some complications:

MHMG's findings re OBAs remind us that buyer preferences may be driven by erroneous beliefs. How many buyers who insist on FB prints on grounds of stability are aware that deterioration of OBAs in displayed prints is an issue, and that today there are very few choices of silver gelatin paper that are not potentially vulnerable to that failure mode?

On the other hand, not every buyer is looking for an heirloom. Offensive as it may be for those who imagine themselves producing Profound Works of Art, some buy for decor purposes, and many such buyers are comfortable with a relatively short display lifetime.

And yet on the other hand, some buyers who are looking for Profound Works of Art nevertheless understand the reality and are willing to accept something less than perfect stability if that's what it takes to acquire an item that appeals to their taste and/or meets their collecting goals. Don't forget that collectors began buying color prints on chromogenic papers years before relatively stable pigment-inkjet prints became available. Many, especially early on, were no doubt deluded about the keeping properties of the work. But others knew what they were doing, accepted the risk and were/are conservative in how they display their collections.

one of the greatest photographs ever made is in a darkened room in Texas ( le gras by Nicéphore Niépce ). I have a few grey sheets of paper I am planning on selling soon for big bucks!

[Tin Can]

Museums never display continuously, at least ARTIC (https://www.artic.edu/collection) does not

I went there daily for years

They put it out for a controlled time and return to cool storage in darkness

I never saw a print by a member here

They try to not use curtains, but will with very rare prints

One walks up, opens the little curtain, and closes it

[Michael R]

Yes that series remains a good reference. Thanks for posting those links.



These articles are a useful resource for understanding the tradeoffs involved in choice of FB washing method:

http://www.film-and-darkroom-user.org.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=296

http://www.film-and-darkroom-user.org.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=344

[Drew Wiley]

Some of the priciest commercial galleries used such brutal UV lighting, to make those optical brighteners glow like Caspar the Ghost, that I can well understand the possibility of premature exhaustion of the baryta base layer. Lighting was so intense, in fact, that adjacent acrylic paintings were literally starting to melt! The best of color prints will fade within six months if left displayed under those conditions. Color prints displayed just the typical show length of a single month were half-faded by the end of that month. I'm talking about real cases. I have no idea how RC black and white work would have been affected; I've never even encountered an example of b&W RC in such places. So it all depends. Blanket generic claims can't be trusted. Abuse exists just as informed thoughtfulness does.

The best I can do is inform my potential clients how to properly display or store prints for sake of reasonable longevity. Once they're purchased, all that is out of my hands; too late. But with many commercial galleries, it's just the opposite; they make misleading claims.

[Drew Wiley]

Oren & Michael - I forgot about that old magazine. Knew the Editor, and he asked me to do some articles for them; but they didn't pay anywhere near as much as the Architectural glossies, so I never took him up. But at this point in history, one would really need to add to the mix the wholly alternate fast "archival fixer" option. I personally use TF4 for everything. No double-bath, no HCA clearing agent, no long sessions. More expensive per quantity of solution; but what is one's time worth?

[Michael R]

It was a good magazine. It’s unfortunate not much of the content has been preserved. Some of the best stuff were the articles by Silvia Zawadzki and Dick Dickerson.


Oren & Michael - I forgot about that old magazine. Knew the Editor, and he asked me to do some articles for them; but they didn't pay anywhere near as much as the Architectural glossies, so I never took him up. But at this point in history, one would really need to add to the mix the wholly alternate fast "archival fixer" option. I personally use TF4 for everything. No double-bath, no HCA clearing agent, no long sessions. More expensive per quantity of solution; but what is one's time worth?

[Drew Wiley]

Well, my wife wanted the photo magazine pile cleaned up, so I kept only a handful of issues. Can't complain. I took an entire pickup load of her old textbooks etc, and donated them to the med school library. But we've both still got huge mounds of books in almost every room, plus many bookshelves. That characteristic runs in my family; all readers, or else writers too.

[Michael R]

I threw away all of my magazines a few years ago. Probably should have kept a few but it’s too much clutter.


Well, my wife wanted the photo magazine pile cleaned up, so I kept only a handful of issues. Can't complain. I took an entire pickup load of her old textbooks etc, and donated them to the med school library. But we've both still got huge mounds of books in almost every room, plus many bookshelves. That characteristic runs in my family; all readers, or else writers too.

[nolindan]

Staying with the thread topic, wouldn't the objectives of buyers be determinative, rather than those of the photographer?

I guess that is another definition of art. The artist is permitted, if not positively encouraged, in telling the customer to stick it. If there is quality in the materials and workmanship it is there for the glorification of the artist and his work rather than the satisfaction of the customer.

There aren't many industries where customer satisfaction comes last. Hence all the starving artists?

Not to say that an artist can not take joy from the appreciation of his work.

[Drew Wiley]

Not everyone wants to be just another vending machine dispensing a popular commodity, or just another comfortably familiar franchise with a big golden arch-shaped M outside of it. I wouldn't call that self-glorification at all, just freedom to do what we want apart from commercialistic compromises. If somebody likes my work, they're welcome to buy it; if not, I'm not going to alter my dedication just for sake of a little extra income. No reason to starve - lots of those types are pandering to mere artsy career stereotypes and preconceptions anyway. Not all, by any means. But there are plenty of ways to make a living without compromising your so-called art goals. (I don't even like the term art itself; something that can mean everything doesn't really mean anything; but all of you know what I actually mean if you've been on the road yourself for awhile).

I aim for top quality : is that versus "customer satisfaction"? Guess it all depends on the taste of the customer. Some think a black velvet Elvis rug thumbtacked to the wall constitutes fine art. There's no crime to that; I just don't happen to make Elvis rugs.

[Willie]

I see it as silver coated in plastic vs. silver layered on clay and cotton.

The silver is not coated "in" plastic. If it were you could not develop it.

All the efforts at making long lasting prints can be defeated with cheap framing and materials. Conservation Framing is the preferred method if you hope to help the artwork last.

[otto.f]

Absolutely worth the extra cost. The quality of the paper, the thickness, the perfect balance between glossy and matte, the impression of depth in the picture. The thickness of the paper makes all kinds of presentation possible, for instance mounting without glass.

[John Layton]

Also something which was inspired by Paul Strand - but which I've done only rarely and not for years - to mount/frame without glass in combo with gently waxing the print. If done with some patience and care can really add a bit of extra "richness" to a print, and with the appropriate wax the prints archival properties are maintained.

As I remember, a cotton ball works best for the application...but one needs to take care not to leave little bits of it embedded in the wax!

Hmmm...where did I put that tub of Renaissance Wax - would like to try this again I think!

[Tin Can]

Good tip John, I have that wax and I really dislike any glazing of glass, plastic, no matter the grade

Wax on today!



Absolutely worth the extra cost. The quality of the paper, the thickness, the perfect balance between glossy and matte, the impression of depth in the picture. The thickness of the paper makes all kinds of presentation possible, for instance mounting without glass.

[Willie]

While we are at it - does anyone know of a "fine printer" who uses RC paper for their images? The prints they sell/exhibit?
Sexton, McSavaney, Ross, Butcher - anyone who does fine work, sells prints - any of them using RC for the images?

[xkaes]

I just don't happen to make Elvis rugs.

That's OK with me, but if you find one, please send it my way. I can get a lot for it on EBAY.

[jnantz]

Doesn't DUGAL in NYC still print photographic images on shagg rugs if you want it ? Textile is great stuff, my grandparents had a rug in their home that was hand made with over 1,000,000 knots

[Tin Can]

I took a 'Textile or Fiber' class at SAIC as I wanted to learn new things

I dyed fiber cloth rags poking out of DIGI printed matt board

I photographed the fibers with a Toy DIGI Microscope 2001

I also made rubber stamps on the bottom of my shoes and stepped in a large ink pad to walk on big roll of white paper

One shoe printed 'STEP' the other 'HERE'

I was about to move that concept to car tires, with a tire spray gun to make road graffiti on the go

Then 911




Doesn't DUGAL in NYC still print photographic images on shagg rugs if you want it ? Textile is great stuff, my grandparents had a rug in their home that was hand made with over 1,000,000 knots

[Sal Santamaura]

...another definition of art..."Art" is whatever anyone decides it is. One need only observe things those who create them allege to be "art" to conclude that it covers such a wide range of disparate "stuff" there really is no viable definition. When a word means whatever one wants it to mean, it has no meaning at all.

Photographs are made by photographers. Whether screen images, inkjet prints, chromogenic color prints or black and white silver halide prints on RC or fiber base paper. Art, schmart. :)

[Tin Can]

I just REN waxed 2 11X14 prints

One Ilford FB Glossy and an Ilford Pearl RC both 20 years in same drawer

Both a bit dirty, did not even wipe the slight dust off

WOW!

The wax stinks...

REN wax did the obvious, shined them both up, I used medical grade cotton ball

I really like how it improved the RC Pearl

I will be waxing my prints going forward


Also something which was inspired by Paul Strand - but which I've done only rarely and not for years - to mount/frame without glass in combo with gently waxing the print. If done with some patience and care can really add a bit of extra "richness" to a print, and with the appropriate wax the prints archival properties are maintained.

As I remember, a cotton ball works best for the application...but one needs to take care not to leave little bits of it embedded in the wax!

Hmmm...where did I put that tub of Renaissance Wax - would like to try this again I think!

[bmikiten]

I used to teach photography (mostly advanced and large format) and the fellow heading the program was an MFA and also a member of the "art is art if you say it is" school. We had wonderful conversations on the subject mostly centered around the concept of intentionality during the creative process. The divergence always occurred when we discussed the idea of art for statements versus art for investment. I would still stand by my 30 year belief that art (Art) as an investment has very specific accepted norms including archival processing and permanence. On the other hand, supporting a street artist in Italy working with chalk prior to a rainstorm is still important but less tangible and more a general support of the person and industry. When inkjet prints passed the Whilhelm tests for 200-300 years the complaint about permanence went away. Now you have to discuss what hand-crafted or hand-made means. I have several Ansel Adams prints and can hold up any of his books next to them and from about 10 feet away (11x14 and 16x20 prints in this case) and it would be difficult to tell the difference between either behind glass. Does that mean that they both have the same value? Did I waste that money or was I supporting the artist and making an investment? Do they both accomplish the same end goal? It is the Bain of the collector to answer that question.

[xkaes]

I used to teach photography (mostly advanced and large format) and the fellow heading the program was an MFA and also a member of the "art is art if you say it is" school. We had wonderful conversations on the subject mostly centered around the concept of intentionality during the creative process. The divergence always occurred when we discussed the idea of art for statements versus art for investment. I would still stand by my 30 year belief that art (Art) as an investment has very specific accepted norms including archival processing and permanence. On the other hand, supporting a street artist in Italy working with chalk prior to a rainstorm is still important but less tangible and more a general support of the person and industry. When inkjet prints passed the Whilhelm tests for 200-300 years the complaint about permanence went away. Now you have to discuss what hand-crafted or hand-made means. I have several Ansel Adams prints and can hold up any of his books next to them and from about 10 feet away (11x14 and 16x20 prints in this case) and it would be difficult to tell the difference between either behind glass. Does that mean that they both have the same value? Did I waste that money or was I supporting the artist and making an investment? Do they both accomplish the same end goal? It is the Bain of the collector to answer that question.

How about the "collector/investor" who bought the artwork at auction, and when the gavel went down, the artwork went through the built-in shredder? I hope the buyer checked beforehand about archival material.

[Tin Can]

That added huge value to that work

Check the auctions


How about the "collector/investor" who bought the artwork at auction, and when the gavel went down, the artwork went through the built-in shredder? I hope the buyer checked beforehand about archival material.

[xkaes]

A new opportunity for RC paper users like me!

[Drew Wiley]

Waxing - you gotta be kidding. Even Renaissance Wax eventually traps little bits of lint etc; and waxing does nothing to prevent physical damage of the surface. Worst of all, what if you need to get that wax off? Maybe a conservator is willing to go through hell to get beeswax off some famous Strand print, but their services don't come cheap. Nowadays prints displayed without plastic or glass glazing are simply over-laminated with transparent washable adhesive film
using a high-pressure roller machine. No, nobody is going to treat a "fine print"; but neither is someone likely to leave a real collectible unframed or without glazing, unless for just a brief public exhibition.

Black velvet Elvis rugs are bad enough; don't care for shagg. But if you really want to see remarkable textile presentations, those are not printed on fabric, but actually woven using many slightly different gray scale shades of dyed silk.
Magnolia Editions here locally did that done for Chuck Close, scanning the original 8X10 negative and then doing to weave programming. The actual weaving machine is in Belgium. A huge tapestry, very expensive to make. Probably over a million dollars at sale to some museum. But carpets can be fascinating in their own right. When my uncle was chief US engineer in Iran under the father of the Shah, he was paid in carpets. I recall those eight deep in their rooms back here in the US. Each one of them had taken over twenty years to hand-weave by many women; the real deal. I barely have the patience to sew back on a button.

[Tin Can]

Moot point my dear


Waxing - you gotta be kidding. Even Renaissance Wax eventually traps little bits of lint etc; and waxing does nothing to prevent physical damage of the surface. Worst of all, what if you need to get that wax off? Maybe a conservator is willing to go through hell to get beeswax off some famous Strand print, but their services don't come cheap. Nowadays prints displayed without plastic or glass glazing are simply over-laminated with transparent washable adhesive film
using a high-pressure roller machine. No, nobody is going to treat a "fine print"; but neither is someone likely to leave a real collectible unframed or without glazing, unless for just a brief public exhibition.

Black velvet Elvis rugs are bad enough; don't care for shagg. But if you really want to see remarkable textile presentations, those are not printed on fabric, but actually woven using many slightly different gray scale shades of dyed silk.
Magnolia Editions here locally did that done for Chuck Close, scanning the original 8X10 negative and then doing to weave programming. The actual weaving machine is in Belgium. A huge tapestry, very expensive to make. Probably over a million dollars at sale to some museum. But carpets can be fascinating in their own right. When my uncle was chief US engineer in Iran under the father of the Shah, he was paid in carpets. I recall those eight deep in their rooms back here in the US. Each one of them had taken over twenty years to hand-weave by many women; the real deal. I barely have the patience to sew back on a button.

[jnantz]

How about the "collector/investor" who bought the artwork at auction, and when the gavel went down, the artwork went through the built-in shredder? I hope the buyer checked beforehand about archival material.

From what I understand ... The person who created the work was adamant about not selling s/he said if it is sold, s/he would know it, and s/he wouldn't be happy. It might have been a social experiment to see if the owner would keep their word and not sell it. I have several photographs of their street art I took when visiting Norway it was nice to see it in the wild. I wandered around and it was right in front of me ...

[jnantz]

But carpets can be fascinating in their own right. When my uncle was chief US engineer in Iran under the father of the Shah, he was paid in carpets. I recall those eight deep in their rooms back here in the US. Each one of them had taken over twenty years to hand-weave by many women; the real deal. I barely have the patience to sew back on a button.

yea, they are something else. FWIR the EL's are all ended up in Paris. When not in Persia, Paris is kind of nice .. and you can get moosir which is a real treat!

[Drew Wiley]

Oh, I have heard some horror stories about photo auctions. Rare irreplaceable prints of famous events being returned wrinkled, items lost. Once saw the lifetime work of a rather famous vintage photographer laying around a gallery backroom floor unprotected, below a leaky roof. Most got ruined. After that, the first thing I'd ask of any gallery potentially representing me was to see their back room. I obviously scratched that particular one off my list.

Mr. Can - what is "moot" about understanding the "cons" of wax, and not just the alleged benefit of it? Yeah, I've got a can of Renaissance Wax in the shop just like everyone else. But it's kinda the "nuclear option" in a irreversible sense. Sometimes use it on frames themselves.

[Michael R]

At one time I had a theory Drew is banksy.


From what I understand ... The person who created the work was adamant about not selling s/he said if it is sold, s/he would know it, and s/he wouldn't be happy. It might have been a social experiment to see if the owner would keep their word and not sell it. I have several photographs of their street art I took when visiting Norway it was nice to see it in the wild. I wandered around and it was right in front of me ...

[Tin Can]

I consider Banksy (https://www.wgbh.org/news/local-news/2022/03/25/from-banksy-to-boston-how-art-activism-is-transforming-city-walls-and-public-spaces) one or our most important artists

His work is always complex, more so than many believe

and printed pictures will be lost sooner than later

already considered ecologically incorrect

our days and work are numbered

[Sal Santamaura]

...our days and work are numberedThat's always been the case. Some are interested in what those numbers might be. Others aren't. :)