dry mounting printsgreenspun.com : LUSENET : Large format photography : One Thread
When briefly working in a framing store, their policy was that you never mount an original photograph. You "hinge" it with archival linen tape to the board. I was wondering what you're opinion was.
-- Raven (firstname.lastname@example.org), October 11, 2000
your : )
-- Raven (email@example.com), October 11, 2000.
absolutely use linen tape to mount your photos - every art museum i have dealt with has requested this, and it is the standard method of archivally mounting all types of paper-based art work.
-- jnorman (firstname.lastname@example.org), October 11, 2000.
I do custom framing and this is the norm for better framing shops. The downside is the damnable wavy prints with humidity and temperature changes-the prints look like worse than buffalo chips at the wrong time of the year. With large prints, unless you frame with a lot of space between the image and the glazing the print can end up touching it. I dry mount most of mine unless there is a specific request, backed up with dollars, not to. A nice, clean and flat print looks a lot better than the wavy seasick look.
-- Dan Smith (email@example.com), October 12, 2000.
I hate the look of hinged prints. Not only wavy, it is also impossible to get a clean looking border. I dry mount everything. I prefer the clean look of a flat, trimmed print with some space between it and the window mat. As far as I'm concerned, the mat board is part of the art work. If it only lasts a century or so, that's fine with me (I do process for permanence, mount on cotton board and use buffered "archival" mounting tissue). However, I make prints for display, not public record or historical reasons. I think you have tol decide how you like to present you prints. If you are drawing on them, making collages, using multi-media or coloring them the archival question is moot anyway. Well processed monochrome prints that have been dry-mounted have lasted for centuries already. No reason why that won't continue to be true. Regards, ;^D)
-- Doremus Scudder (ScudderLandreth@compuserve.com), October 12, 2000.
As an extension to this question, is there any reasdon to treat archivally printed digital prints in a different way to conventional wet printed prints.
-- John Rushton (firstname.lastname@example.org), October 12, 2000.
Personally, I like the look of hinged prints, I have a dry mount press, and I use it for flattening prints. When its time to show my work, I feel the hinged method works best for me. Besides, I could always count on screwing up the print when I tryed to dry mount it. I am not so sure that dry mounted prints have been around for centuries. Seems that photography didn't get its start until the mid 1800's. I also don't trust the claims of some dry mount material that it is archival. The prints I make are archivally processed, so why take the chance with a dry mount system. I also live in Arizona, so I have not experienced the problems assosiated with more humid climates.
-- jacque staskon (email@example.com), October 12, 2000.
If you're really trying to be archival hinged cloth tape is the way to go. I usually make a tape "T". also use distilled water to wet the tape rather than your tounge or tap water. The big advatage to doing it this way is that if a restorer needs to do some thing to your print in the future it's easy to work with. If you are worried about flatness, a good way to work is by always using the next size up in paper ie if you are going to make an 11x14 print print on 16x20. this helps since the majority of paper wrinkling from humidity takes place at the edges it is hidden far under your matboard.
-- doug (firstname.lastname@example.org), October 12, 2000.