TJ said:
Considering the application, namely a temporary sign on an outdoor farm
stand, low quality paper obtained for free exchange of something I was
going to throw away anyway seemed like the logical choice. I expected
the signs to become soiled or damaged long before this, so why use top
quality materials? That they still look good says that perhaps the
quality wasn't as low as I thought.
I use inputs that are adequate for the application at hand. When an
application calls for higher quality inputs, I use them, but when it
doesn't, I don't. That is one of the ways I keep my livelihood on a
sound economic footing.
TJ
I agree. Perhaps you thought what I wrote was a
criticism; it wasn't. I called attention to the
low quality of the paper to make my point. My
point was to dispute those that say a high quality
or specific kind of paper is needed to resist fade
no matter what the purpose is. Generally,
recycled paper is of lower quality than new paper,
and generally the higher the brightness the higher
the quality (and cost).
