"Mike Kohary" <spam_at_be.gone> wrote in news:c1gi3o$kvu$0_at_pita.alt.net:
>> They are the same quality as the color RC paper that's been sold in
>> galleries for decades. Has the market changed so quickly that
>> "traditional" color prints are no longer saleable?
>>
>> Or is a new marketing angle you are going after?
>>
>> I'm really curious.
>
> No, I just want to make sure the prints are "professional quality",
> and will last for a long time if stored/displayed properly. This is
> my first foray into selling prints, so I don't know what has been
> traditionally used anyway.
>
>
In the past (before inkjet printers), people mostly used RC paper that
got developed with chemicals. There are probably some minor variations,
but basically color prints are pretty much the same. Places like Costco,
Wal-Mart and the like print on the same sort of RC paper that custom labs
might print on, and they probably use very similar chemicals, too.
In the past there were (and still are) a few "alternative" processes,
like 4 layer pigmented seperations. That sort of stuff is pretty exotic
though.
If you make your prints with chemicals, then they are a known quantity to
"the market." People have a few decades of experience working with
chemical color prints. If you roll your own on an inkjet, then there is
an unknown quality that will only become known as decades pass.
Any given inkjet setup might have greater longevity than a chemical
print. Those made with pigmented inks probably are. Those made with dye
based inks probably are not. Anyone remember a couple years ago when
Epson had to recall their new premium paper due to color shift?
Bob
--
remove the backwards "SPAM" to reply.
| 
