Concerning Inks, Papers, and Digital Printmaking

We are currently at one of the most significant junctures of fine art image making since the introduction of the printing press. This intersection between art and technology is not so much about replacing prior technologies as with augmenting the existing tools and adding new image making and image management toolsets. At a time like this, one must be cautious of two major temptations. One is to try to mold the new methodologies with the old definitions. The other is to oversell the new as replacing everything from the past. Digital printmaking is in an early state of development. As such it needs guidance to transform what has been learned in the past with the opportunities of the future. Art and visual literacy exist in a continuum of evolution.

The permanence of print has been a major concern for all media. The more mature fields have sorted out most of the problems. The more recent disciplines, like photography and film making, are still fine tuning their products for permanence.

To look at digital printmaking one needs to consider from where the tools evolved. For the sake of brevity we will only be discussing Inkjet printing technologies, as they are the most prevalent in fine art printmaking.

What is recently overlooked is that none of the digital printmaking technologies was purposely built for the job of fine art printing and the associated archivability. The iris technology, which has its beginnings in the late 1980s, was intended for producing proofs and comps. The intent was to check the quality of the work to be printed by large print houses and once approved, thrown out. The large format Roland, Colorspan, Hewlett Packard and Encad devices (early to mid 19090s) were developed for technical graphics, cartography, and signage, not fine art. The desktop printers from Epson, Hewlett Packard, and Canon (mid 1990s) were and still are designed primarily as office printers for text and basic graphics. Most of the better quality printers sold today are nearly continuous tone. When artists see the output from these devices they see them as another tool for image making. They are only half right. The print quality is good, but the manufacturers are only now waking up to the fact that significant number of users expect them to be archival as well. The inks and papers are in a rapid development phase by the respective manufacturers to overcome the permanence issues without giving up color gamut (range). Epson, Roland, and HP now offer pigment inks with photo quality images that are archival (100 years).

Digital fine art printmaking is a new field that is still in development stages. Testing standards are needed to validate material and methodology claims by manufacturers. Since 1995, Wilhelm Imaging Research has been doing independent testing and research on archiviability of digital and photographic printing. Wilhelm brings 25 years of experience to the field and is one of the founding members of the American National Standards Institute (ANSI). As of January 2000 Wilhelm reported that ink cannot be evaluated independent of paper. The ink/paper relationship is highly dependent and complex. Different paper used with the same ink can have a different lightfastness in excel of 20 to 1. Obviously paper and ink manufacturers need to cooperate in their R & D efforts.

Brief Overview of Inkjet Printing

The way in which inkjet devices lay down ink requires a very exacting relationship of ink and paper. In inkjet printing picoliters of ink are applied very rapidly achieving a dot size as small as 11 nanograms giving a resolution up to 1440 x 720 dpi (some devices vary the dot size resulting in an apparent resolution of 1800 dpi). Both dye and pigment based inks are used. Currently the dye-based inks give marginally better color gamut but do not last. The dye-based inks work into the paper fibers. Pigment-based inks have the greatest longevity (200 years and counting for some ink/paper combinations), but can have a little less color gamut. Pigment-based inks leave stable pigment particles on the surface of the paper. Depending on the inkjet technology, coating the paper with an undetectable receptor allows the ink droplet to be absorbed and dried immediately (reducing dot gain) and leaving the color on the surface where it can be seen. The permanence and vibrancy of the ink/paper relationship is based on the chemistry between the ink and the coating. The base paper gives the foundation and texture for the coating to reside on. The traditional ink/paper relationship tends to be more mechanical, thus the understanding of digital printmaking and testing cannot be based in traditional terms only.

In recent years the need for validated archivability has been pushing the ink and paper manufacturers hard to produce the best ink/paper products and to make them available for different printing devices. Every three months there are significantly better choices. Now, traditional mills in Europe have formulated their papers and coatings specifically for fine art digital printmaking. Printer manufactures are producing a wider array of continuous tone printers using six colors and up to 50" width at a fraction of the cost of the older technologies. Some are being purposely built for fine art with open architecture (adaptability). The artist and digital printmaker are benefiting dramatically.

These developments have greatly increased the ability of the artist to represent his or her work and has opened the possibility of self-publishing limited editions. The empowerment potential is quite large. Unfortunately, numerous individuals see this in an opportunistic light only and use it to produce a product, not art. Yes, it can be quicker and simpler to produce something digitally, but as in everything else, the shortcuts are apparent and the intent is glaring. The consequence of this reflects poorly on the body of artists using digital tools. Hopefully,  collectors and peers will respond appropriately. Even with all the technology, not everyone can produce a fine art digital print. The investment in building a body of knowledge and executing the craft with competency is far more than the sum of fine equipment and archival materials. In the digital world, we have extensive system calibration and specific file (artwork) management. Image capture, serious image processing, and color management are each major topics. The fine art printmaker is still the master craftsman, only now the master has many more tools to exact marks on paper.

Given today's technology, there is no excuse for substandard work as to color exactness, fading, color shifting, or yellowing. The archival materials and methodologies are there for anyone seriously pursuing a fine art digital print. The responsibility resides, as it always has, with the printmaker.