Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,499   Posts: 1,543,214   Online: 1046
      
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 24
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Milwaukee, Wi
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    3,242
    I do not use RC paper myself. However, what I have heard as a means of preventing this problem is to leave a border for later trimming. It is my understanding that the extended wet times involves some penetration at the edges. Hope this is helpful to you.

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    6,242
    It is my understanding that RC paper is not capable of being archival. So why invest a lot of time toning something that isn't going to last anyway? It is for that reason that I don't use RC paper for anything and I haven't used RC for a great number of years. I am basing this statement on the experience of other photographers who have related that RC images do not maintain their integrity for anywhere near the time that would be considered archival.

  3. #13
    Bob F.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    London
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,984
    Images
    19
    If the prints are already processed and dry, you should only need a few minutes soak followed by the KRST (Tim Rudman agrees with your 1+9 dilution BTW - says a minimum of 3 minutes) followed by a wash. Wash-aid not recommended for RC; apparently, it does too good a job....

    By splitting the wet time like this, it should reduce absorbtion into the paper base.

    Can't help much re' real world, I have toned RC in sepia (days after being processed and dried) but not often enough to give any kind of definitive answer... hang on..... Just had a look at some and can only see the very faintest of damage to the very tip of some (1 in 4) corners (under 1mm) - can't tell if that is separation or just mechanical damage. That's about 2-4 minutes soak, 1-3 minutes in bleach, another minute or two in the toner and at least 5 minutes wash but I can't say exactly as I tend to dump it in the washer and leave it there until I need it for the next print... I use fibre for "final" prints and I'm a lot more careful of those!

    Archival is a relative term. A properly processed & stored RC print should last in excess of a hundred years, IIRC from the book I linked to above. A properly processed and stored fibre print could last in excess of 1000 years, certainly several hundred (same reference). Apparently, because of the plastic preventing contaminants in the emulsion from dissipating out the back of the print, archival toning in selenium etc is more important for RC than for fibre.

    Cheers, Bob.

  4. #14
    titrisol's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Rotterdam
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,671
    Images
    8
    Depending on what you call "destroying" the paper, try SISTAN.
    Othewise I'd just use some viradon for a few minutes or Selenium right after fixer
    That seems to be as archival as you can get.

    Also why rinse with photo-flo?

    If you tone right after your fix it'd be something like:
    - Develope 1.5
    - Stop 0.5
    - Fix 1.5
    - Rinse with carbonate 0.5 (to avoid carrying acidic fixer)
    - Selenium 1+9 2-4
    - Water 5
    Total 11-14 minutes
    Mama took my APX away.....

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Near Tavistock, Devon, on the edge of Dartmoor.
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,024
    Quote Originally Posted by Alessandro Serrao
    What are your real-life experiences?
    Alessandro,
    I have to agree with Konical. I frequently have Ilford RC prints that go through the usual processes, sit in a holding bath for an hour, get washed (sometimes for rather longer than intended when I forget them!) and then dried, so could easily be wet for a couple of hours and I've never had any problems. As with many photographic issues, I think the problems are more theoretical than practical.
    As for the archival qualities of RC (or any) paper, I often see the term "archival" used in a context where I would choose "display". I have untoned prints ( mainly FB but some RC) going back thirty years that have been stored in the dark and are the same as the day I printed them - that to me is archival usage - kept in the dark and hauled out occasionally to be looked at. I've no doubt that had the same prints been displayed behind glass in strong light they would probably not be worth having by now but would have benefitted from toning.
    Best wishes with whatever course of action you take!
    Steve

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Rome, Italy
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    884
    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Roberts
    Alessandro,
    I have to agree with Konical. I frequently have Ilford RC prints that go through the usual processes, sit in a holding bath for an hour, get washed (sometimes for rather longer than intended when I forget them!) and then dried, so could easily be wet for a couple of hours and I've never had any problems. As with many photographic issues, I think the problems are more theoretical than practical.
    As for the archival qualities of RC (or any) paper, I often see the term "archival" used in a context where I would choose "display". I have untoned prints ( mainly FB but some RC) going back thirty years that have been stored in the dark and are the same as the day I printed them - that to me is archival usage - kept in the dark and hauled out occasionally to be looked at. I've no doubt that had the same prints been displayed behind glass in strong light they would probably not be worth having by now but would have benefitted from toning.
    Best wishes with whatever course of action you take!
    Steve
    Thanks all folks who replied.
    Again this forum is a wonderful place to share impressions and comments.

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    1,649
    Images
    5
    Good Afternoon, Alessandro,

    My apologies for the delayed response. I am having major computer problems and have been unable to access the Internet until a few minutes ago.

    I suspect that some of the RC prints I've accidentally washed too long may have had soft edges, but, if so, I have never noticed. I would stress that I don't routinely subject RC paper to extended wet times, but I do think that the manufacturers' recommendations are probably conservative.

    Konical

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Ayrshire Scotland
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    386
    Images
    4
    If I remember correctly Ilford recommend selenium toning RC prints for display (sorry if this has been mentioned already).

    One thing I have heard about RC is that it contains brighteners. Apparently if you leave the print wet for too long the brighteners can be leached out. Can't say I've noticed myself though.

    I use both Ilford RC and fibre papers.
    All my finnished prints are at least selenium toned.
    One method I have found pleasing with MGIV RC is......
    Dunk it in warm KRS selenium (22 degrees C or more) at 1/4 dillution for maybe 3 or 4 minutes. This should remove the papers horrible green tinge and impart a more pleasing very suttle blue hue.

    That's what I often do with MGIV RC anyway.

    Archival? I'd say so. A well processed and toned RC print should last longer than any of us. Also RC is much more tollerant of bad processing than fibre, so don't be surprised if many modern RC prints last longer tham many fibre prints being produced to day!

  9. #19
    chuck94022's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    602
    Blog Entries
    1
    Images
    10
    I don't have an axe to grind here, I'm interested in opinions on this topic though. I found this link interesting and relevant to the issue of the archival nature of RC prints:

    http://www.geocities.com/thombell/rcvsfiber.html

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,042
    If I remember correctly the last time this was discussed it was pointed out that the manufactor of both RC and FB have changed over recent years.

    As a result there is no proof that FB has remained archival and prints will last like the old stuff.

    RC has improved leaps and bounds and I've not had prints fade that have been printed in the last couple of years. It would appear that the achivity of RC has been addressed by the manufactorers.

    All we can really hope for is that FB is still archival and RC is now archival.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin