Fading away or is it..

[Smile]

The ultimate UV protection is from Car paint UV coat laquer, available in matt or gloss by many brands I read. I wonder if you tested this?

 

[The Hat]

When it comes down to it the Elephant in the room has all the answers, no not his big trunk, but switch to a pigment ink printer, problem solved..

 

[stratman]

When it comes down to it the Elephant in the room has all the answers, no not his big trunk, but switch to a pigment ink printer, problem solved..

Yes, but, are you looking for perfection or close enough?

 

[Paul Verizzo]

When it comes down to it the Elephant in the room has all the answers, no not his big trunk, but switch to a pigment ink printer, problem solved..

We all know the many reasons not to go pigment, Senor Sombrero.

One that I find interesting and never mentioned is that matte finish photo papers, I'm talking silver halide, never had much following. Primarily because of the low Dmax. Ditto for inkjet papers until pigment printers came along. Because they are the safe papers for pigment printing, of course. Suddenly the world is awash in matte papers because of pigment inks.

The bottom line is that except for the longer life span, there are only negatives with pigment printers. And I ain't speaking the ones that make positives.

 

[Paul Verizzo]

Thanks Paul, very useful and timely advice.

I have been producing a few gallery wraps over the last year of so, and have have been concerned about the lack of surface protection.

Investigating available coatings is a veritable minefield for the uninitiated. Also complicated by shipping restrictions in some cases.

Your summary is very informative and gives an excellent base for my renewed search.

RS

Happy to help (and/or learn from!) incorrigible investigators and experimenters like us.

I think the one easiest post-printing protection is to dehydrate the print with modest heat or a dessication chamber, first. This may not be of concern in some dry locations, but certainly should be done with fat paper, especially w/o polyethylene backing in humid climes. Then spray front, back and edges with inexpensive hardware store clear lacquer. Available in gloss, semi-gloss, and matte. You have at least stopped moisture and gas degradation pretty easily.

Some of my tests indicate that it is a combination of UV, moisture, and gas that kill the prints faster than any of them alone. Negative synergy. I can't state it as fact at this time, more time and tests will tell.

As a tease example of four that I could offer, I took a square of kitchen food wrap. Since 2004, these have been low density polyethylene, LDPE. (The original plastic used was a far better barrier for both air and water.) I took some Permatex All Purpose Spray adhesive, sprayer the print, rolled the film onto it. Don't even ask why I did this! Two weeks in the Florida sun and it remains subjectively perfect! No UV shielding at all. As good as the square with the physical UV blocking Print Shields taped to the paper. Meanwhile, the naked and the UV sprays deteriorate.

 

[Paul Verizzo]

The ultimate UV protection is from Car paint UV coat laquer, available in matt or gloss by many brands I read. I wonder if you tested this?

Not I, but no need to go there. First, I can't! I think a quart of single part car paints are hitting $50. Haven't bought any in about seven years, yes, I've done car painting. Not sure about the UV spec you mention, it could be marketing, it could be great - not sure what it's protecting - it could be ineffective like the alleged UV sprays I've tried. In fact, as I think about it and w/o researching, it probably means the clear coat itself is resistant to UV degradaion. That makes sense. A lot of cars, like my 1989 Jeep, from the early days of two coat paints suffered from what I called "Hood Mange." Flaking of the clear coat.

Clear coats do two things. They give a great gloss to the matte undercoat, and they protect that from oxidation.

 

[Smile]

Well from car paints I tried (the ones that are basic solvent based) need to be coated to not flake off the car from sun. So the clear coat need to protect the paint from flaking off and changing color (fading).

Where I live they can mix you as minimum as 100grams, 1liter cost is about 17Eur for paint, acrylic paints are about 12Eur a liter.
This clear coat is 7Eur 0.6liter 2component epoxy https://www.youtube.com/watch?x-yt-cl=84503534&v=wuklMOLBK5Q&x-yt-ts=1421914688

 

[Paul Verizzo]

@Smile: That's what I said.

And I sure as heck am not experimenting with two part epoxy paints on prints! If that paint has UV in it's description, it surely means it won't yellow with UV as I speculated. That's what happens with epoxy paints in the sun light.

 

[Smile]

Here is a scientific test idea for you, take a sheet glass of quartz that passes all UV rays. Then coat it with spray under test. Measure the UV rays (wit spectrophotometer or UV tester) from the sun or controlled UV source like high pressure sodium lamps with removed filter glass.

Draw conclusions if certain UV sprays work or not, how good or bad they block the UV.

 

[palombian]

We all know the many reasons not to go pigment, Senor Sombrero.

One that I find interesting and never mentioned is that matte finish photo papers, I'm talking silver halide, never had much following. Primarily because of the low Dmax. Ditto for inkjet papers until pigment printers came along. Because they are the safe papers for pigment printing, of course. Suddenly the world is awash in matte papers because of pigment inks.

The bottom line is that except for the longer life span, there are only negatives with pigment printers. And I ain't speaking the ones that make positives.

From my short (well, soon 1 year ) stay in the fabulous inkjet printer world, it seems to me that both pigment and dye technologies have improved a lot and that the historical advantages and disadvantages are ruminated endlessly.

But I take the risk to get the flak by recommending a recent - but still refillable - dye printer as a start for most photo amateurs.