How long a print will last is a subject of great confusion and controversy on the internet – you may have seen arguments about this topic in printmaking forums.
The truth is, there’s a ton of misinformation, false assumptions, and plain old lies floating around out there about what makes a print last 100 years.
Renée Besta joins the AskBC podcast this week to set the record straight. She’ll cover 3 of the most prevalent false claims about print permanence, separating fact from fiction and sharing truths she’s learned from deep research and extensive printing experience.
For the first assumption… Did you know longevity is not purely dependent upon the printer, ink, and paper used?
Listen in to learn about the 3 print permanence false claims and the truth about longevity
Note: These timecodes show how much time in the episode is left, which is how our audio player (above) displays time.
–29:56: A brief overview of what print permanence actually means
–27:33: Why print permanence is important and should be considered
–23:45: Where to get the right information on print permanence
–18:15: False assumption #1: Believing that the longevity of photographs is purely dependent upon the printer, ink, and paper used
–16:27: The lack of print education and fake “experts”
–13:02: False assumption #2: Believing that all printers and papers are more or less equal
–08:30: The impact of OBAs on print longevity
–06:32: False assumption #3: Believing that the quoted Wilhelm Imaging Research “years on display” are absolute numbers
–03:36: A quick summary on how to achieve a 100-year print
- Print permanence studies mentioned in this episode were carried out by Wilhelm Imaging Research, Aardenburg Imaging & Archives, and Image Permanence Institute.
- The Ultimate Guide to Digital Printing: Part One and Part Two.
- Check out Renée’s website at RenMarPhoto.com.
- Love the show? Have some feedback for us? Leave us a review on iTunes.
- For Renée’s full show notes for this episode, including the transcription, click here to download.
Prefer to read over listen? Want to save this conversation for reference later? We transcribe all of our shows for these reasons! Download this episode’s transcription below:
Or, to view a web version of the transcript:
Announcer 1: You are listening to the AskBC podcast – your printmaking questions, answered by the experts!
Justin: In this episode, Renée Besta joins me to talk about three of the most popular misconceptions about print longevity.
Justin: Hey, guys. Welcome to AskBC. My name is Justin, and calling into the show today will be Renée Besta, a printmaker, photographer and frequent guest to the show as well as on the Breathing Color Blog. We’ll be talking to her in just a few minutes about print longevity.
This, of course, is a very important topic to us here at Breathing Color, and we go through a lot of trouble to ensure that our media is stuff that you’ll want to print on if your work is to last a long time. Achieving that kind of quality means doing a lot of research into the science of print permanence. We do independent as well as third-party testing and have some bold steps such as removing OBAs – those are optical brighteners – from most of our paper so that we can feel confident in giving you guys materials that will really last.
Obviously, having very long-lasting prints is something that’s important to most artists, but technology changes, new information is discovered and science evolves; and all this creates various pieces of misinformation that can definitely be confusing to sort through, especially for somebody new to printmaking or even somebody that’s pretty experienced.
We invited Renée on the show today to clear up three common misconceptions, three big ones, and we’ll walk through them one by one. Renée will help separate some false assumptions from truths that she’s learned from experience, research and speaking with other industry professionals. Pretty excited to hear what she has to say, so let’s jump right into the interview.
Hey, Renée. Thanks so much for joining the show today to discuss this print permanence issue. I think we’ll start off with just kind of a brief overview of what print permanence actually means. What are your thoughts on that? If somebody were to come up and ask you, somebody new to printing, I guess, “What is print permanence?”
Renée: First of all, thanks for having me back, Justin. Appreciate it. Basically, in the simplest form, print permanence, we would generally just say, how long is the print going to last before the fading? You could look at light fading. It becomes objectionable to you under given display conditions. Of course, that’s based on different testing methods, but it also has to do with the quality of your printer, ink and papers.
How long is it going to last before either the paper itself, which isn’t going to really happen these days, completely gets destroyed and crumbles like old papyrus, or will it be destroyed because of atmospheric pollutants, temperature, humidity or, more likely than not now would be light fastness or the light fading. When does that become objectionable? It’s dependent on the person.
Justin: What is usually the first thing to change? The media? The ink?
Renée: Right. It depends on if you’re talking about chromogenic prints or inkjet pigment prints. For chromogenic, that’s a whole different ball of wax, and I’ve been discussing that in my article with more to come, but with inkjet prints, it’s going to be, you’re going to see fading. Of course, this all depends on what colors are in your image and how they are distributed within that image.
Traditionally, with inkjet pigment prints, it’s the yellow ink that’s always been the fugitive ink or the culprit that causes the issues, and it’s really important for skin tones and portraiture which, of course, constitutes a lot of the consumer market and wedding and portrait market. It’s just going to depend on which type that you’re doing.
Justin: A lot of different variables.
Renée: There’s a ton of different variables. So again, if that’s most of the composition of the photograph, you have a problem with the yellow ink and you’re doing a portrait, you’re going to see big changes as it fades much faster than you would just a landscape that doesn’t have much yellow in it, if that makes sense. It’s more blues and greens or what not. That’ll all change, but it’s a basic, generic term: How long is my print going to last? The question should be: How well is it going to last?
Justin: Right. Why is that important for somebody that’s trying to decide what type of paper or what type of printer, what type of ink, all these different variables? Why should that be important to somebody that’s trying to make these buying decisions, like an artist or photographer? Why should they consider print permanence?
Renée: They ought to consider it simply because, as you know, there’s a lot of misinformation on the market and a lot of print studios, labs and OEMs claim, “Our materials or our systems are archival.” Well, what does that mean? That’s a loosey-goosey term.
If someone is putting out their hard-earned money to buy a print, they should be concerned with how long it’s going to last. Of course, it has a lot to do with not only the printer, the ink and the paper and how it’s coded, but also the display conditions, which we’ll get into. I think I had mentioned in my article in the Digital Printing Guide, there’s a lot of photographers still these days, very famous, like Peter Lik, instead of making the choice of an inkjet pigment print, they’re still selling the digital C-prints or chromogenic prints.
As I mentioned, people keep bantering around this term, it’s going to last a hundred years, and I can get into the history of that in my article. It’s absolutely not true. It’s less than 30 at this point, and I would want to know if I’m spending over $100,000 or a million dollars – they’re in the millions of dollars now. Cindy Sherman’s prints. She didn’t think about longevity. That’s what was available at the time when they were printed, say in the 1980s. They’re all faded, and people were like, the more it fades, the more value it seems to have.
Even if you’re just, this is what bothers me about the print on demand services and the confusion photographers have. We’ve talked about this in prior podcasts where someone will call in and say, “How come Photoshelter or SmugMug or Fine Art America only takes jpegs and SRGB?” As I mentioned before, it’s because they assume most of the people that purchase will order the less expensive digital C-prints or chromogenic dye prints, and they certainly won’t last as long as an inkjet pigment print. So it just basically depends on, what are you claiming to the customer?
Depending on the price point you’re selling at, maybe if you’re selling something for five bucks, it’s not going to matter as much. I see the prices are wild and all over the place. It’s one of the hardest things to do is determine pricing, but I think it should last, based on inkjet pigment prints today should at least expect under average display conditions a life of 100 years for something that’s framed behind conservation glass.
That shouldn’t matter. It matters from an emotional value and a historic value. The older I get, the more photographs become important to me. My entire immediate family is deceased. My brother died young. I have a lot of friends that have passed away. I don’t want to date myself, but in a lot of cases, all I have left are photographs, and I don’t have the negatives because somebody gave me a print in the ’70s or ’80s. Those are starting to fade. You try to put them in an album, but that’s important. That’s your memories.
What happens? I was involved, I used to live in Laguna Beach, California. There was a huge fire back in the early ’90s. The first thing people do when there’s a fire – the whole town, we lost 500 homes – you grab your pets, you grab your photographs. You don’t care about your furniture or your things. So there’s a deep emotional importance to that as well.
Justin: Definitely. Sounds like there’s a couple different perspectives. Depending on who you are as a listener, I guess you could be considering, who should you outsource to and how do you know what their print permanence ratings are? If you’re actually doing the printing, then it’s kind of about being able to truthfully and ethically market these products that you’re using – the papers and the inks and stuff like that – and properly estimating how long these things might last, like communicating to your customers truthfully.
You mentioned there’s a lot of information out there on the market. How do you get the right information? Where do you even look for that? Where do you start? What keywords do you look for? What ratings do you look for?
Renée: First of all, anything that’s basically on the website of any print lab or studio’s most likely going to be, as you just said, a lot of marketing hype. This is why I’m writing a whole portion of this Digital Printing Guide article on print permanence. If you ask anybody, “Where do you get this information from?” If anybody knows anything, they’re going to quote Henry Wilhelm at Wilhelm Imaging Research. He is a pioneer in this type of testing, has been doing it for many decades.
However, you have to understand, and I will get into this in the article in detail, but just to summarize, this was started many decades ago when the only technology available were, for color prints, they were wet processed using chemistry and free dyes – cyan, magenta and yellow. That’s it. So for chromogenic dye printing, that’s how his testing began, and people used densitometers in those days to measure a small handful of color patches. They only measure reflected light. They don’t measure color. In other words, you could have a cyan, magenta and yellow patch with the exact same density value, and they’re different colors completely.
As inkjet printers evolved, early on they just had four inks – the cyan, magenta, yellow and black. Then you could extrapolate that information. However, now that we have light cyans and magentas, we have multiple blacks, we have extra colors like greens and oranges, it just doesn’t work. It’s an antiquated method.
Because there is no ISO standard, the manufacturer’s kind of not got behind it, now scientists, the research scientist that worked with him for quite a few years named Mark McCormick-Goodhart, who is now the director and founder of Aardenburg Imaging and Archives, he invented and then developed in conjunction with Mr. Wilhelm, a newer, much more appropriate testing system called the I* metric, which I will detail in my article. A little too much to get into in the podcast, but you have to understand.
If you look at a Wilhelm report, which is what some labs will claim, you’ll see all these footnotes and asterisks. You go like, “How is this determined? Where is the data?” It will say, years on display, and it will tell you a plain print, something under glass, something under UV glass, yada yada. You’re like, “Oh, but where’s the data? How is it done?” It’s basically what people don’t understand is that it’s based on what’s called easily noticeable fading that was determined by a very small focus group of people with untrained eyes looking at photographs in various stages of deterioration.
They determined what is objectionable to them. Give them a bunch of photographs in these stages, and basically it was determined that up to 35% of color could be lost before it might be considered “objectionable.” Now, to you and I, we could see a 5% difference perhaps, but this is, like I talked about in a podcast last year, it’s actually quite surprising. That is what the criteria is for failure. Well, depends on, again, the colors and the image, but I think we would object for fine art that that is way too subjective, and we want more tight tolerances, as they say.
Justin: Yeah. Data driven. You see like a year estimate from Henry Wilhelm, and you just kind of take that at face value.
Renée: Yes, you do. You could say 50 years, 80 years, and people think, we’ll get into this later about the top three false assumptions, but you have to understand that’s accelerated testing, but then it’s extrapolated. It’s based on a single display condition or a single lighting condition of 450 lux. A lux is a measurement of how much light is falling on an object. I would recommend people buy one. They’re inexpensive, so you can kind of determine where in your house might be best to display artwork given the fact that they’re all still done [inaudible 12:16] densitometer and that’s just not appropriate. You need a spectrophotometer.
So Mark developed the I* metric system, which measures both colors and tone, because things can get flat as things fade. Again, it depends how the colors are distributed, and I’ll get into that later in the article. [inaudible 12:36] 30 patches whereas Wilhelm is still only using nine, because he can’t measure the rest.
You can decide for yourself looking at those reports, visually assess the patches before and after a certain amount of exposure, but he reports in megalux values. You can look up on a table, depending on your display conditions, and figure out the years on display. It’s much more versatile with tighter tolerances. You can look at it numerically. It’s up to you. So there’s a number of ways to interpret it. A little too much for the podcast, but I’ll get into it in the article.
Justin: All right. To jump into the false assumptions that we were talking about. The first one, I think, is believing that the longevity of photographs is purely dependent upon the printer and the paper used or the printing technology selected, where environment also plays a huge role and people have control over this. We’ve kind of talked about this already, but display conditions are hugely important, and it’s not solely the printer and the paper used. Right?
Renée: Right. The course of materials play a very large part, but people have to take responsibility and realize it’s partly their job to make their images last by understanding preservation science and how the environment impacts longevity. You, as an artist, selling your work have a huge role to play by educating yourself and your customers on the longevity factors. I do that all the time on a [inaudible 14:01] in terms of safe display conditions.
The role in the environment can’t be overly stressed, and know that there is no average lighting in a home. The difference can range from a low of 10 lux, which is very low in a dark storage area, to maybe 10,000 in areas near a window getting direct sunlight or under a skylight. That’s something to keep in mind. Everything should be kept around 70 degrees Fahrenheit or so, not over that, and between the average, what’s recommended is 30 to 50% relative humidity year round. That makes a huge difference. You do have control over that. Again, it’s the total accumulated light exposure over time is what really matters.
As photographers, we’re all familiar with the classic reciprocity law, where you’re looking at F-stops and shutter speeds, and you have a doubling. You make the aperture smaller, you have to expose for longer. That law applies to light intensity and time on display. They’re directly proportional to the total exposure. There’s a lot that you can do and the customers should be educated, but people forget about the underlying light level assumptions buried in the fine print of some of the Wilhelm reports, as I was saying.
Justin: From a business owner standpoint, do you think that education piece is lacking? I feel like it’s lacking pretty severely.
Renée: It’s very lacking. As I said early on, one of the reasons this is so difficult to figure it out is that not only on printing forms is there a ton of misinformation and people pretending that they’re experts when they’re not, somebody says something, it goes around and around and around. When I was a kid, there was a little game people played where one person whispered into someone’s ear a couple sentences, and by the time you got to the tenth person, it was totally distorted.
One of the biggest claims that’s still out there, which shocks me, with chromogenic prints, I still see people listing in print studios that they will last 100 years with Fuji Crystal Archive Paper, and it’s absolutely not true. Not even Fuji really claimed it. It’s a long story I’ll get to in my article. It came from Konica for dark storage. There was an issue with paper staining or yellowing due to dye couplers, but it’s just not true. It’s on there, and I saw it even recently.
I work on a private printing forum for an eCommerce site, and I did a poll recently asking the artists, “Is this of concern to you? Do you question the print studio about this? What materials do they use?” “Oh, yeah.” So many people said, “I do this,” and then I check out their website; they were making chromogenic prints and, furthermore, a couple people claimed they last 100 years. It was pretty shocking.
Renée: Then, when you bring this up, people get very angry. I’ve talked about that before in podcasts. You can’t have a hesitation. Just because a studio says, they all say, “We have the most archival prints because we use an inkjet pigment printer. They’re on the highest quality papers.” Yada yada. They’re short on specifics. Mostly because they don’t take the time or understand anything about print permanence testing and how it’s done, or they quickly browse, like I said, some Wilhelm reports for a couple papers, cherry pick years based on maybe darker display or cold storage, not realizing how the tests are even done.
Can’t be shy. I would phone a studio and ask specifically what printers and ink sets are they using and which papers. Some of them, they kind of rebrand them and use their own names. I’ve seen this. Like, they’ll call an Epson paper something that sounds real sophisticated and won’t even say it’s Epson or Canon or Hahnemuhle. They’ll just make up a name. You don’t even know what it is. Some big commercial labs can use two, three or more large format printers. They can vary from, I’ve seen some still using old 9800s. That’s a huge difference from what we have today and the newest sheer colors that Epson just released.
So you don’t really know what you’re going to get. Which printer is your print going to be output on? I know it sounds like really gnarly, but I really hate it when that happens, and sometimes they stick to the older ones because they’ve invested, as you know, on costly Riffs.
Justin: Yeah. Printers are expensive. I mean, without question. That kind of ties into the next assumption that I wanted to talk about – believing that all printers and papers are more or less equal. Even if a customer were to know that they could potentially get printed on multiple different printers, they may not know that that’s a big deal. When we talk about pigment ink, aqueous pigment ink versus solvent ink. Even that can have drastic effects on print permanence, so you’ve got to be super conscious about what lab is using what printer, what ink, what paper. All that stuff’s got to be considered.
Renée: Right. Definitely. I want to link in the show notes to a report that’s available on Canson’s site where their papers were tested by Wilhelm. What you’re going to see, the reason I’m pointing to it, they take three different pigment printers – a Canon, an Epson and an HP – you wouldn’t believe the difference in the longevity ratings. The differences are large.
I have to say I give a big shout out to Mark McCormick-Goodhart and I thank him very much for answering my questions and speaking to me, because he gave me a lot of information I didn’t know. I was really surprised to find out HP still fares the best out of all the pigment printers. Unfortunately, they’re pretty much out of the fine art market, and that’s held up. If you go onto Wilhelm’s site and look at it, even the tests Mark’s done at Aardenburg, they fare the best. The next is Canon. Shocking. Followed by Epson at the rear.
Now, the caveat is that Canon and Epson, as you know, both have new ink sets on the market that are currently undergoing testing by Wilhelm. Now, Epson claims, based on preliminary data, their new HDX and HD inks now are like 200 years or more based on that preliminary testing. We’ll have to look at it, but they really should be run, as I said, at Aardenburg because you can’t test the colors. You can’t test greens or oranges. I don’t want to get into that. I’ll get into that in the article, but it does make a difference.
So Epson, I think, have done a great job in improving the weakness in the yellow ink that’s been the culprit for a long time, but the other thing is surprising, which you might not know. I’ll talk about it in the article. The printer driver you use matters. There was an article published on Luminous Landscape called The Weakest Link by the president of ColorBurst. I guess that’s where the image print driver gives much better results because it doesn’t rely as much on the yellow to produce the skin tones and other things. So there’s greater longevity.
The ICC profile matters. These things you can discern using the I* metric system versus Wilhelm’s because the inks are laid down in different combinations. The inkjet coatings vary widely, as you know. You guys do your coatings and that has an impact on longevity. They’re not all the same, just because you think, “Okay, I’ll have this lab make my prints,” or a print studio and they’re using a pigment printer, like I said, it could be old. The newer, the better, because not only do you generally get greater color gamut, you’re getting better longevity.
You know how the term archival is bantered about and it’s used very loosely, has no real meaning. I’ve seen on websites that these labs or print studios will say, “Our prints are archival because,” and this is a quote, “our papers are acid free.” I mean, this is the type of thing you see, and I think that’s why people just get turned off to this stuff. There’s just so much stuff out there that doesn’t make sense. You can’t filter it. It’s not even appropriate. Just because a paper is acid free doesn’t mean it’s going to work well with different inks from different printers. I mean, it’s just like, that has nothing to do with fade resistance. Therefore, it doesn’t mean it’s archival. I mean, it better be archival. If it’s fade resistant, it’s going to hold up, it damn well better be archival and not fall apart in your hands. It just, like I said, it doesn’t make sense how the terminology is used with archival. Archival means nothing.
I mean, it does and for library standards and documents, but people use that all the time and they just, I think everybody’s just in a hurry. Do business, make sales, make prints, and they don’t want to be bothered with it. Good enough to them is good enough. They don’t understand the nuances of how the testing is done and the criteria.
This is what we’ve come to, and pretty much got pretty good pigment ink sets these days. The battle has really moved to media and inkjet coating. So we’ll see, and the only way you’re going to be able to do that is to pull up different reports if you’re so inclined. I am, because I’m a nerd with this stuff. Compare the same paper using different pigment printers and see if there’s huge differences.
Depends on if that’s done. Aardenburg relies on donations. He’s not industry sponsored. Wilhelm is highly industry sponsored. Depends on what you’ll find.
Justin: Yeah. OBAs play a pretty important role.
Renée: A huge role. Absolutely.
Justin: Yeah. We haven’t really talked about that. That’s kind of interesting.
Renée: Yeah. That’s another, like I said, I could have come up with about a dozen false assumptions. OBAs, absolutely. That’s been controversial for years.
I remember quite a while back, there was a statement released by Hahnemuhle saying, “It’s okay as long as you realize eventually the paper’s not going to crumble, it’ll just kind of revert to its normal, more worn or yellowish type of state.” There’s a lot more that goes into that. Obviously, it affects the colors to start with. Just basically, they’re going to look different on a brighter background and then as those fluorescent compounds or dyes actually, the optical brighteners, disappear from exposure to ultraviolet light and it returns to that, it’s really going to effect the colors, especially in the highlights where more of that paper color shows through. So you can have an imbalance.
Justin: Definitely. It doesn’t make much sense just to say that the paper’s going to slightly change back to the way it looked before.
Renée: That’s what was said. I mean, you go back and forth. Photographers are just really hooked on the bright white papers and the only advice you can say, “Try to wean yourself away from them. Use a baryta.” Be aware that almost all RC papers have OBAs. People, when they think in terms of OBAs, they’re thinking of cotton or canvas papers. Do they add them to brighten up that? They’re not really aware how much are in the photo papers to take the photo black ink. I don’t really like resin-coated papers anyway. They’re kind of thin and cheesy feeling, but that’s really important.
Justin: Yeah. I had the third kind of false assumption we were going to talk about. We’ve kind of already hit it for the most part in believing that the quoted Wilhelm standard years on display is an absolute number in terms of how long the print will last. Obviously, we’ve talked about the conclusion that that’s clearly not the case, it’s kind of based on where it’s going to be displayed, and Wilhelm only tests the one display condition. I’m not sure there’s a lot more to talk about on that. I don’t know if you have anything else to add to that assumption or not.
Renée: No. Not really. Because it depends on the light conditions and the display conditions and the environment, but people do, it’s important to know, as I said, they’re going to pick that number and say that’s what’s going to last. Beware not putting that out to the customers.
I mean, we had a lawsuit back in the 1980s from a woman in Wisconsin, I believe it was, that sued a local portrait photographer because Kodak used to claim, “memories that last a lifetime”, all that marketing hype. Sued him because her cherished family photos, not only did they fade and turn lighter, but they underwent drastic color shifts. They were turning blue and all these horrible colors that kids look like aliens and saying, “Why is my son looking like an alien?” So she couldn’t pass those portraits on to the next generation. People were taught, consumers, because of this marketing hype, they’re going to last forever. Well, they don’t last forever.
Eventually, that photographer sued Kodak for making these claims that they should not. I mean, he lost his house from what I understand. I guess it got settled out of court, but they had good gun lawyers and outnumbered him.
There have been other issues with, what are you going to do if you don’t inform the customer, they’re displaying it under the wrong conditions or you’re not using the right type of paper or ink or especially a C-print and you tell them it’ll last a hundred years, then about five years it gets faded? They do want replacements.
Justin: Yeah. It makes sense. I mean, it’s all that education and that liability certainly falls on the lab to educate the customer.
Justin: Otherwise, they have no way to know. Can’t assume that that’s going to be common knowledge or anything like that.
Justin: Well, great. I think we’ve pretty much covered everything we planned to talk about. Obviously, if the listeners are interested in this stuff, this is pretty juicy content, so definitely recommend reading that article that’s forthcoming to kind of build on this conversation that we had today. Can’t wait for that to come out.
Renée: Yeah. It’s been too long in coming, I have to say. I kind of got in and just when you get into it and then, I mean, obviously, you’d have to be an industry insider or somebody at the level of Henry Wilhelm or a Mark McCormick-Goodhart to understand how this testing’s done, but there are very few people that understand it’s based on a little focus group, like with Henry as the expert observer saying, “What do you think?” Then they’re saying, “This is objectionable,” and then they take a measurement and say, “Oh, that’s a 35% loss. That’s way too much for us.”
The other thing, I get a lot of questions. Again, people are saying, “Oh. I have this older printer and I bought one that’s several generations newer and I can’t get the prints to match and my customers are upset with it.” Well, it goes to people that are doing these limited editions. We’ve talked about that before, too. You might want to think about doing smaller runs and having them printed all at once, because it’s very hard to go back and match.
If you’re interested, I think I was asked to just basically give a quick summary on how to achieve a 100-year print. It’s basically what we’ve talked about. Don’t do chromogenic prints. Use an inkjet pigment printer, not one with dyes. Use OEM inks. Use the newest model printer as the ink sets keep getting improved in terms of longevity as well as gamut. Sometimes people hold on to these thinking they’re saving money or avoiding nozzle clog problems, particularly in the case of Epson, but then they have a disadvantage with print permanence. Use OBA for your papers. Choose the papers carefully. 100% cotton. The best are 100% cotton based with the baryta.
Buy a luxmeter. They’re pretty inexpensive. You can get one as cheap as 15 bucks or so on Amazon and measure lighting levels around your house and figure out, where’s the best place based on that to place it. I try to keep things at about 228 lux or less. The lower, the better. That would be my advice.
Other than that, I’ll be explaining in detail how to assess Mark McCormick-Goodhart’s database – it’s a free membership – and how to interpret those reports. It’s just a little different, but I think it’s easier because you can correlate any display lighting condition and lux level with the number he reports in megalux. You can look at it visually. If you’re a numbers person, look at the numbers, but we’ll go through that, and I’m going to include a little video with a sample report. Again, I’m grateful that he gave me permission to use screen shots in the article, which is not easy to get.
That was one of the other reasons this was delayed. It kind of took a while. He’s a busy person.
Justin: It’s going to be well worth it, that’s for sure.
Renée: It’ll be worth it because you have to understand Wilhelm’s in his 70s. I think he’s maybe headed into retirement. Again, I think things are going to change, and as people get more educated, they’re going to demand people use the newer I* metric. Don’t know what’ll happen with that, but there’s a lot of papers and printers in there. I was surprised myself, as much as I think I knew, I know nothing. Jon Snow.
Justin: You’ve definitely brought some great information today. We appreciate you, as always, stopping by and chatting about these false assumptions. Like we say, education’s the most important part. So learning as much as you can from either a consumer level or business owner level is just, can’t stress how important that is. We appreciate you bringing accurate information to the show as you always do.
Renée: You’re welcome.
Justin: We look forward to that article.
Renée: Okay. Thank you very much.
Justin: Take care, Renée.
Renée: You, too.
Justin: All right, guys. That’s it for today’s episode. If you enjoyed that discussion, you’ll definitely want to check out Renée’s written blog post series titled, The Ultimate Guide to Digital Printing. It’s a huge three-part series and one of the best resources available anywhere on the Internet for printmakers looking to master their craft. Renée really went all out for this thing, and there’s even a 40-minute video lesson on analyzing color gamut in part number two. Be sure to check the show notes for the link to that. The third and final part of the series is still forthcoming, so make sure you opt-in to our mailing list if you’d like to be notified when that piece drops.
As always, subscribe to iTunes to stay updated with the podcast and hit the BC blog at breathingcolor.com/blog for all of our great written content. I want to think of a quick shout out and thank you to Cassie8Lang and Swizzleschtick for recently reviewing the AskBC Podcast on iTunes. You guys are awesome and your feedback has been a huge help to us. So we really appreciate it. Until next time, I’m Justin from Breathing Color. Thanks for listening.
Thanks for listening! For more free episodes of #AskBC, check out the full archive!
If you liked this post, you’ll love these related ones: