Ilford V Jessops heavy weight paper

Hookit · #1 (**permalink**) 14-04-2009, 08:14 AM

I have done a test using these inkjet papers and I have found Jessops own paper to be the better of the two. Jessops is a cleaner paper and using first black and whte print including a grey scale Jessops won hands down. I then did the same test using colour and again jessops won. The shapness was good on Jessops ad Ilford but the final print was far better and clean using Jessops own.

Geoff F · #2 (**permalink**) 15-04-2009, 08:34 PM

It partly depends on what you are doing. Jessops own brand is a good thick economical paper which prints OK and I have used it for producing prints for ID. But I'm not sure of the lightfastness of that paper. Will it compete with some of the more expensive brands for archive use; say in 20 years time? Although a lot of this also depends on the type of ink.

I still use Canon, Epson, Fuji, etc for long lasting glossy prints.

Hookit · #3 (**permalink**) 16-04-2009, 08:25 AM

Goef, Thanks for the reply. I have been a pro photographer for over 35 years and we have been digital for at least six years. To be honest not even the top brands can prove their papers will last 20 years plus. I always recommend people keep hard copies of their photos so if the image fades it can be re printed. As yet manufacturers cannot give a guarantee that discs will last as long as negatives. Do you recall in the early days of CDs that was going to be the answer for even you cannot damage them and they will not wear out as we all now know that is not the case. I think Blue ray will be the last disc type as we will get our films ect down line. My son’s latest mobile has an external hard drive and he can down load films from the internet using his phone.

Geoff F · #4 (**permalink**) 16-04-2009, 10:19 PM

Yes, it is difficult to know which is the best method for archive storage. Experts suggest that CD/DVD's should have a long life providing they are unmarked and kept in their plastic cases under perfect athmospheric conditions. And you never take them out for retrival of data.

I have a friend who used to produce microfilm storage but now most of his work comes from transferring data from paper copies to CD's for some UK companies and city corporations.

A couple of years ago he produced some CD's for a Council and they provided some identification labels to be stuck on the back of these discs. Something he always advises against. Recently they contacted him to say that the data on some discs was now unreadable.

He checked his copies, without the labels, and they were fine. It wasn't all of their labelled discs that were faulty just those from one sheet of labels.

So, as you say, we don't really know what is the ideal storage medium, and by the time we realise that something isn't any good it will be too late. Possibly, traditional negatives will still work out as the best option.