Quote Originally Posted by Joe VanCleave View Post
Not to be argumentative (although I suppose posting a reply is intrinsically just that), but which current manufacturer of RC paper are you referring to? Is this reflective of your experience solely at EK, or does this statement universally apply, industry-wide across the board, to any RC paper I may choose to purchase in December of 2006?

Since you stated that it depends, in part, on the manufacturer, can you be more specific, so as to help us laymen in making better decisions on purchasing RC paper? What about the easten European brands of B/W RC paper; do you hold the same degree of confidence as you do with the products no longer manufactured by EK?

I suppose you can sense the frustration of, after eagerly lending an ear to the wisdom and sage advice of experts, to find their statements mostly opinion, with little of substance.

How is this thread supposed to bolster our decision-making regarding the longevity of RC vs fiber paper? Granted, the context of this thread is about which papers to use for hand-coating, which is not in my foreseeable future, but the discussion seems to be relevant to commercially manufactured papers as well.

Where do us laymen (and potential customers, the only ones who will keep this technology alive in the marketplace) find authoritative information on the keeping properties of such materials? Most manufacturers' websites give information, if at all, that reads more like a legal disclaimer than a statement of expected product performance.

I may also state here that, as a qualified neophyte, the academic and arcane arguments between you and Ryuji seem to me to be nothing more than a battle of two egos. While it provides for some degree of entertainment in my otherwise miserable life, I am beginning to question the advocacy of relying solely on self-proclaimed 'experts'.

I appreciate the candid and otherwise priceless wisdom that is (occasionally) dispensed here. And the historical lessons on the engineering developments of modern photographic materials are of academic interest to some. All the rest is chaff.

There's nothing that beats experience; especially one's own!

I don't take it as argumentative.

My statement about the life of a color photographic material is based on several things. First, there is a statement on Kodak's web site regarding the longevity of Kodak Endura paper. Second, Fuji has made a similar statement to the photo industry. Third, Henry Wilhelm discussed this with me personally and his institute has published data on longevity. Fourth, the Image Stability lab at RIT is in general agreement with this data. Fifth, I took the ICIS course on image stability in May. And, last but not least is my more than 30 years experience as an engineer at Kodak, with about 1/2 of that time being involved in some way with image stability.

Now, the disagreement in value centers around the testing method. You get different results with each paper depending on how you test it. And, the ANSI committee on image permanence has yet to make a definitive statement on this subject with definitive standards, so each lab makes its own standard.

Nowhere in this thread was handcoating discussed that I know of. This was solely a discussion about manufacturing color products. They cannot be easily hand coated, although I have done it. It is truly a pain, and very expensive due to the chemistry and equipment needed.

I do not wish to have an argument with Ryuji. I merely state facts from my actual hands-on experience along side his observations from the literature. Sometimes they agree and sometimes they don't agree. This is often the nature of printed material vs hands-on in engineering and should not reflect badly in any way on either of us.