Whats So Bad About Copy Paper?

In making an album for my low value stamps (bout 20 cent catalog)
I hear people screaming don't use printer paper because acid.
What do the effects of using this paper look like, say with using just hinges over time and how long does it take for the problems to start happening?

Above are examples of toning, the paper become brittle and brown. Note the edges of the paper on the album page above and note the stamps on the cover. This is the effect of lignin (part of the cellular structure in woody plants) which decays over time and releases acids. Also note that many paper coatings in modern paper can also become acidic. And lastly, paper can absorb atmospheric acids (carbon dioxide, sulfur dioxide, and nitrogen oxides) and become toned.

'Acid free' markings on paper are designed to fool buyers, it often only means that the paper manufacturer threw in some buffer into the pulp during the paper making process. Not only do you not know how much buffer they used but the buffer only lasts for a while (just like eating a TUMS after a spicy meal, the buffer does not keep working days later).

How quickly acidification begins and how severe it is depends upon many factors such as the storage environment. This is why you see inane posts like "well I have been using cheap paper for years and it is fine". The number of variables that can impact paper storage is huge and personal experiences are anecdotal (at very best).

I recommend people be good stewards and not be cheap when making decisions regarding stewardship. You can read more here
https://stampsmarter.org/learning/H...sePaper.html
Don

I don't plan on storing it like (with printer paper) that for very long, 50 years later I could switch to something else if I notice problems with my particular paper.

Good for you! But then it will be too late


Peter

I hope you will rethink your proposition.

Don't half-ass it. Just do it right the first time, or you're better off just leaving everything in a stock book.

There are acid and lignin free copy papers- HP Premium is one. IMO copy paper is too light in weight.

Speaking of 26 year old copy paper, here is a bring back memories print job cover page. I had saved them to use as scrap paper. I came across when looking for colored paper. There was no formal recycling program then.

This back when we used VM at work for IBM BookMaster print jobs sent to network printers. We had print bins (mine was 602-0033) to pick up our printouts.

I feel we are going overboard with this. This is putting Volkswagen stamps in Rolls Royce packaging.

The copy paper of today is far better than the copy paper of 50 years ago. It does not tone and discolor. I have volumes of copies made 30-40 years ago which show no visible deterioration. For those who think it is an acid-factory, please cite us some research. The stamps/covers themselves are more likely to be their own problem than today's copy paper.

That said, typical 20# copy paper is generally too flimsy. 24# isn't too bad. I would be far more concerned with the ink/toner stability and contact with any philatelic item.

John,
Good stewardship is a good thing in public forums, anecdotal information is not. Saying that cheap copy paper does not tone or discolor based upon your single observation does not mean anything. Have you done any testing? Do you have any evidence based information to back up that statement? It is your personal observation based solely and totally upon your exact environmental conditions and variables. Todays papers also have a significant number of various coatings on them (to facilitate laser and inkjet printing) that can cause acidic issues.

Instead of telling everyone that they can use unknown papers with impunity or listen to any of us; the best recommendation is that folks test the materials they are using themselves. It is easy and inexpensive. Why guess or gamble? Why not approach this important issue with a degree of good discovery beyond 'I have not seen this happen'?
https://www.ebay.com/itm/114694060076
Don

Don,
You have made a very strong assertion in your first post in this thread, thus I am asking for a citation of scientific studies to back up your claims that modern copy paper is as bad as you claim. Simple.
My "testing" is having a chemistry degree, a packaging degree and 40+ years collecting experience with keeping my collectibles cool, dark, and dry.
What I am seeking in not your anecdotal evidence or mine, but "real" peer reviewed data.

My first thought, like Phillystamper, was weight. Pulp/cotton/acid talk aside, you need a heavy paper to handle the stamps and hinges and moisture (wrinkles) from the hinges, and to handle the abuse from flipping pages (even gently). Regular copy paper will look like garbage pretty quickly, IMO.

John,
There are many online articles which describe the issues with paper conservation, most only provide simple overviews and often deal with photographs and scrap booking. Google Scholar searches reveals a bit more but this tends to go to the other end of the scale and is not light reading. But for a person like you (chemist) this article from the Journal of the American Institute for Conservation, Volume 31, Issue 1 (1992) - RECENT SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH IN PAPER CONSERVATION
https://cool.culturalheritage.org/j...-01-014.html (You may find the referenced articles more fruitful.)

I have previously posted a number of links in various threads in this community. This link provides a 'Defining 'Permanent Paper Standards' ('Permanent as in 'archival') https://www.loc.gov/preservation/re...m/pp_x3.html

I have previously posted this link which is titled 'Care, Handling, and Storage of Works on Paper' https://www.loc.gov/preservation/care/paper.html

And also this link for the 'NISO TR01-1995, Environmental Guidelines for the Storage of Paper Records' http://www.niso.org/publications/ni...aper-records

Also note that ISO 9706 was developed on the basis of the standard ANSI Z39.48:1984, American National Standard for Information Sciences — Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials. Folks can purchased the entire ISO standard from ISO at https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/#iso:std...:v1:en:sec:C
if interested but they won't find any section dedicated to stamps, stamp albums, or album pages. The standard almost exclusively deals with the acid content in paper. It's important to recognize that papers satisfying ISO 9706 are using a standard which was not designed for stamp collecting. A ISO 9706 compliant (pH neutral/acid free) paper might NOT achieve the standard required for a stamp album having a life measured in decades.

Please note that some manufacturers claim 'archival' as paper which meets or exceeds the following specs;
- High alpha cellulose pulp from purified wood fiber with 25% Cotton
- Buffered with calcium carbonate 2-3% alkaline reserve, pH 9 ±0.5, acid–free.
- Board passes the PAT (Photographic Activity Test) ISO IT 18916 (formerly ISO 14523 ANSI IT9.16).
- Sulfur content is less than 0.0008% reducible sulfur
- Lignin content is tested by TAPPI 236 cm-85 and has a Kappa number of less than five.
This type paper is not cheap, 8-1/2 x 11 (148 grams per square meter) typically runs around $9.00+ per 50 sheets.

And to anyone who likes to use sheet protectors or other methods which enclose the paper, you might want to read this article, "An Attempt To Save South Carolina's Historical Documents Is Destroying Them" at https://www.npr.org/2017/02/21/5154...troying-them Note the paragraph "You're effectively forming an envelope where you're keeping the acids in the paper, not allowing them to migrate out," says Molly McGath, a researcher at Johns Hopkins University.

Lastly, I have spent hours searching for current accelerated aging testing for current consumer grade papers. As far as I can tell, it is non-existent; paper manufacturers either do not do testing or they do not publish the results. (Which in and of itself tells us something; if the 'archival' or acid free' claims had real data behind them manufacturer would be touting this in the marketing.) Cheap consumer grade paper is a commodity item, there is no oversight and there are no regulations. Recycled paper makes things even more obfuscated; the original paper source is not known but into the pulp slurry it all goes. And the various coatings that are currently being used, many of which are evolving over time to meet current printing technologies, have no research that I can find.

I appreciate your request for research, the trouble is that this request is moot when paper manufacturers do not publish any testing information. I have been testing things in my possession over the years but did not keep records; I tested only to sort out what I was using. I also think the value of a community like this is to educate and as such I try to avoid anecdotal comments.

I also promote folks collecting any way they desire and if dropping significant amounts of money on paper for 'cheap' stamps is not feasible or prevents a person from enjoying the hobby than that is bad. The goal is for people to make educate decisions and hopefully at least periodically test (which is very simple and easy) what they have. Waiting until the paper/stamps/covers are toned is too late.

I am sure that a person like yourself, who has a huge amount of paper items stored, would be looking at significant amounts of money (beyond what many of us could possibly afford) to conserve at true archival levels. Unfortunately our hobby has precious little information published on how to conserve covers, never mind other important paper resources material like books. Does the lack of information mean that we should ignore the topic or does it mean we should try to raise awareness?
Don

Edit:
From the Society of American Archivists

Interesting discussion!

Though not strictly related to "this" discussion, I think that the following items are of interest (probably been discussed here before):

https://classic.stamps.org/userfile...Plastics.pdf

And, of course - the Salm Foundation studies

https://www.collectorsclubchicago.o...tamp-albums/

and

https://www.collectorsclubchicago.o...ic-products/

which are fascinating (and eye-opening) reading!

John

I rather like the idea that the acidic stamp could damage the cheap photocopying paper.

This is a very interesting point.




I have a recent anecdote (sorry!) that bears that out. Few months ago, purchased an Italian collection with some quite nice stamps - all hinged on cheap lined graph paper. Some of the pages were enclosed in sheet protectors, some not, according to the whim of the previous owner. From what I could see, there was increased toning/foxing on some of the stamps that were enclosed, not apparent on those that were not. Again, only anecdotal, but in this case it appears that the combination of long-term storage on cheap paper and enclosure was negative for the stamps involved.

~Greg