Very Initial Coating Experiments and Results.

[Paul Verizzo]

First, I admit to being a hard core DIY'er, wanna do it myself, thank you very much.

With the continuing demise of swellable polymer papers, my primary goal is to minimize the rapid fading of dye inks on microporous papers, even Canon. As most of us here know, this is about shielding from gases, UV, temperature, and humidity. So, my thinking goes, make barrier shields, which might also include PVC/PET laminate. I have a fairly good background in coatings; I have painted cars, done the handyman gig, etc.

Some bottom line observations before I even get into the Florida sunshine tests, this is for microporous papers:

I have tried alcohol based coatings, methyl and ethyl with shellac. Deep blacks are rendered somewhat purple in moments. This is true for homebrew shellac or in the spray can.

Ditto water based acrylic.

Ditto true nitrocellulose type lacquer. Wow, it just peels the stuff off.

Only ordinary petroleum solvent products do not seem to effect the dyes. This includes cheap clear alkyd spray and expensive Krylon UV artist's varnish. However, all these clear/varnishes have issues with either clarity and/or UV resistance.

Ironically, the swellable polymer papers that inherently have a longer image life handle all of these coatings much better.

I'm thinking that dye on microporous might require PVC/PET lamination to provide perfect protection. I am researching this at many levels. I can tell you this, that so-called UV laminates mean that the laminate has some UV protection, it does not mean that the laminated piece is UV protected! With laminates, at least the result is uniform; liquid coatings have so many opportunities to get messed up.

Another consideration is humidity in the media. If humidity is a concern, why not minimize or eliminate it? No sense encapsulating water and dye. To that end, I've made a simple Big Ziplock/Silica Gel chamber to suck the humidity out.

Perhaps I've added life to swellable polymer papers, even if not my intention.

 

[stratman]

The most direct solution is museum quality glass. If you're looking for something to spray on and "fix the image, I read good things about Patricia Nimocks Acrylic Sealer products in the past.

 

[Paul Verizzo]

Glass is not a contender for my purposes. Museum glass is expensive, and is, of course, only a (partial) solution for hanging art. And UV protection is only one parameter of print degradation.

At a Google Glance, the sealer you mention is just a generic acrylic fixative/sealer. I can't speak to how it would impact a Canon dye print, but at this point I'm not real encouraged about water or alcohol based products. Which sort of makes sense as ink is made of water, alcohol, and glycols. I guess it's feasible to spray super light coats of shellac or acrylic that don't damage the ink, but it's probably a very fine line between that and too much.

 

[Paul Verizzo]

I forgot to mention my 'speriment with UV inhibitor only! Something to put ON/IN the print, not an exterior shield. BTW, my research on UV shielding shows it's a real zoo of standards and definitions and variables. Glass, acrylic, laminates, all differing abilities. So, thinks I, why not sunscreen for prints? Like, lots of inhibitor right in and on the print?

No reason why not! After a very failed human sunscreen attempt - turned the print very off color brown - I was led via the intertubes to fabric UV protectors. A local fabric store of the Joann's chain had one, $12 a quart spray bottle. I don't recall the brand and I'm too lazy to go downstairs. Good reviews on Amazon and elsewhere on fabrics. It's solvent based, but I gotta say, the odor is almost non-existent.

I took a test print on cheap, uncoated matte paper figuring that would suck up the most inhibitor and hence, show the most color change...................................none. OK, if you know where to look and really, really stare, a very, very slight change. Effectively, none.

All UV shielding products have to work one of two ways, AFAIK. First is physical filtering by wavelength. When I lived in Colorado I came to realize that my scenics on my digital camera was very blue. The solution was a $25 in 49mm filter, I don't recall the designation. The other method of UV protection is via conversion of UV to infrared. That's how sunscreen works. The UV becomes heat, basically.

There is also a clear film called Picture Shields. http://pictureshields.com/ I bought a large piece of this a year ago and will include some in my pending tests. At 3 cents a square inch, the cost is not unreasonable for a "keeper" print. I had some correspondence with the guy and he claims it's a custom order product from one of the big laminate houses, I can't recall which. Allegedly the same stuff protecting our nation's important documents. Very amateurish operation, bungled my order, very small presence. So, whether he'll be around in the future is hard to say.

But, again, as they say, UV is only one part of the fading problem. With microporous papers, sealing in some way is mandatory for a longer life.