foam core

I've called around my local framing shops, and they all dry-mount photos
onto foam core.

I had the impression that a rag board, or illustration board, was to way to
go.

Any comments on this? I'd like these to last 50 years (but not necessarily
500 years).

--Mike

Uzytkownik "Mike" napisal w wiadomosci

I've called around my local framing shops, and they all dry-mount
photos
onto foam core.
Perhaps they simply do it because that's cheaper?

I had the impression that a rag board, or illustration board, was to
way to
go.
I believe that to mount the photos in a gallery or archival manner (in
other words, make them fit for sale or collecitng) one should mount
them on a special illustration board. That's acid-free cardboard,
rather thick (about 600 g/square meter). It's rather expensive (I'm
thinking in Polish terms, $6 per sheet 70x100 cm), but worth it.

Best regards,
Magdalena

On Wed, 26 May 2004 13:14:29 -0500, Mike wrote:


I've called around my local framing shops, and they all dry-mount photos
onto foam core.

I had the impression that a rag board, or illustration board, was to way to
go.

Any comments on this? I'd like these to last 50 years (but not necessarily
500 years).

--Mike


There is archival quality foam core now as well. I have used it. The
paper on the foam is exactly the same as the paper sandwiching
archival cardboard. I'm not a big fan of dry mounting photographs for
archival purposes, however. I would prefer archival hingeing with
Japanice rice paper and methylcellulose glue.

In article , Mike
wrote:

I've called around my local framing shops, and they all dry-mount photos
onto foam core.

I had the impression that a rag board, or illustration board, was to way to
go.

Any comments on this? I'd like these to last 50 years (but not necessarily
500 years).

--Mike



Frameshops do whatever the buyer requests, and in the mean time will
give you the cheapest crap if you don't specify what you want.

"Any Moose Poster" wrote in message
...
In article , Mike
wrote:

I've called around my local framing shops, and they all dry-mount photos
onto foam core.

I had the impression that a rag board, or illustration board, was to way
to
go.

Any comments on this? I'd like these to last 50 years (but not
necessarily
500 years).

--Mike



Frameshops do whatever the buyer requests, and in the mean time will
give you the cheapest crap if you don't specify what you want.

What do you suggest? Mount my 11x14 print onto 11x14 museum-grade rag
board? And then tape that onto a 16x20 foam core board which will serve as
my backing board for my 16x20 frame?

In article ,
"M" wrote:


What do you suggest? Mount my 11x14 print onto 11x14 museum-grade rag
board? And then tape that onto a 16x20 foam core board which will serve as
my backing board for my 16x20 frame?

No, I would use a 16x20 4 ply acid free rag board for both the backing matte and the
window matte, for support I would use acid free foamboard behind them in a frame.

McLeod wrote


I'm not a big fan of dry mounting photographs for
archival purposes, however. I would prefer archival hingeing...


Is there some reason to hinge? How about backing the print in
a frame and let it go at that? Am I leaving something out? We are
talking unmounted prints? Dan

On 27 May 2004 16:05:48 -0700, (Dan Quinn) wrote:

McLeod wrote


I'm not a big fan of dry mounting photographs for
archival purposes, however. I would prefer archival hingeing...


Is there some reason to hinge? How about backing the print in
a frame and let it go at that? Am I leaving something out? We are
talking unmounted prints? Dan

What I'm talking about is hanging the print on the backing board with
two strips of very thin material attached vertically. These strips
extend beyond the top of the print. A second strip is laid
horizontally across the vertical strip, holding it to the backing
board. What this allows the print to do is float behind the mat. If
the print has some value, or is ever to have value in the future it is
easily removed from the archival material with no damage.
For those reasons the mat is also usually hinged to the backing board
with a strip of framers tape and then the whole thing is taped to the
glass to seal it. If you are using a wooden frame for archival
matting the rabbet should also be sealed. I usually use aluminum tape
for that. The same substance that will yellow and ruin your print if
you use cheap cardboard (lignin) comes out of wooden frames and could
eventually damage your print or document. Archival foamcore can be
used as filler or do double duty as filler and backing board. The
whole back of the frame should then be sealed with single ply museum
quality rag.
Here is an example of what I'm talking about:
http://www.printmakingstudio.com/Stu.../overview.html

McLeod wrote:
On Wed, 26 May 2004 13:14:29 -0500, Mike wrote:


I've called around my local framing shops, and they all dry-mount photos
onto foam core.

I had the impression that a rag board, or illustration board, was to way to
go.

Any comments on this? I'd like these to last 50 years (but not necessarily
500 years).

--Mike



There is archival quality foam core now as well. I have used it. The
paper on the foam is exactly the same as the paper sandwiching
archival cardboard. I'm not a big fan of dry mounting photographs for
archival purposes, however. I would prefer archival hingeing with
Japanice rice paper and methylcellulose glue.

I am a big fan of dry mounting photographs for archival purposes.

I have found nothing archival other than dry mounting that maintains a
photograph flat enough.

Properly processed prints, properly dry mounted on archival mount board,
properly overmatted and framed, should last a very long time.

Ansel Adams did this. Are conservators having problems with his prints
that they would not had they been loosely mounted with rice paper hinges
and methylcellulose glue? Would the prints so mounted not have suffered
more damage by having their corners and edges unprotected? Would the
prints look as well in non-flat condition so the glare of the lighting
typical of museums and homes?

--
.~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User 85642.
/V\ Registered Machine 241939.
/( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jersey http://counter.li.org
^^-^^ 03:10:00 up 5 days, 10:25, 3 users, load average: 4.14, 4.12, 4.09

McLeod wrote



McLeod wrote

I'm not a big fan of dry mounting photographs for
archival purposes, however. I would prefer archival hingeing...


Is there some reason to hinge? How about backing the print in
a frame and let it go at that? Am I leaving something out? We are
talking unmounted prints? Dan

What I'm talking about is hanging the print on the backing board with
two strips of very thin material attached vertically. These strips
extend beyond the top of the print. A second strip is laid
horizontally across the vertical strip, holding it to the backing
board. What this allows the print to do is float behind the mat. If
the print has some value, or is ever to have value in the future it is
easily removed from the archival material with no damage.
For those reasons the mat is also usually hinged to the backing board
with a strip of framers tape and then the whole thing is taped to the
glass to seal it. If you are using a wooden frame for archival
matting the rabbet should also be sealed. I usually use aluminum tape
for that. The same substance that will yellow and ruin your print if
you use cheap cardboard (lignin) comes out of wooden frames and could
eventually damage your print or document. Archival foamcore can be
used as filler or do double duty as filler and backing board. The
whole back of the frame should then be sealed with single ply museum
quality rag.


I've an idea what you're talking about. I was expecting some
answers to the questions I asked. Backing a loose print in a frame
I'd think would be a good other way to display.
BTW, do you use a heated press for flattening. Dan