Tom Miller -dry mount quesiton

I will try to give you an answer from the perspective of a gallery/frameshop
owner, not to promote a brand or myself. Take this information and use it to
ask the right questions of whomever does your mounting. If you never need to
de-mount, and yor framer can drymount archivally, look carefully at a
variety of drymounted photo types to be sure you like the appearance.

I do not like the way drymounted photos look. Not my work, not any one
else's. In some situations there isn't a better solution.

> - - Is dry mounting archival?
Depends on a few things.

1) The mounting adhesive must be archival. Many are not. We occasionally
change brands but currently use TechMount. Their TM1 and TM2
products are permanent mounting tissues, neither acid-free nor intended to
be removable. TM3 is pH neutral, 100% adhesive (no tissue between adhesive
layers; it melts completely in the process), and 'removable' (more on
removability later). TM4 is also removable, archival quality, acid-free and
alkaline buffered tissue, pH tested to TAPPI Standard T435 (I don't know
what that is). '3 and '4 are recommended for photos. '3 is a way to mount
fabrics.

2) The mounting substrate should be archival in my opinion...not much point
in using archival mounting tissue with a lignin-based mounting board (I
assume the mounted photos I get from professional photographers are on
paper-based board because they look like it to me...I haven't verified.) We
sometimes ask why mount something with adhesive when you want handled
archivally? Your display method may not permit archival corners (visible) or
hinges.

3) Calling a mounting method 'removable' depends on how much fun you want to
have removing it. The removable mounts I have worked with work by re-heating
and separating while still hot. I don't find it to be very practical nor do
I recommend repeatedly heating a large item that cooled off half-way thru.
Maybe someone else has had better experience.

We use the rule of thumb that if archival handling is desired, don't put any
 adhesive at all on it. Purists use specially prepared reversible pastes
prepared from wheat starch. They spoil quickly (aside from a recent new
product) so are usually prepared as needed. Some of us have other things we
need to get done in the day.

Even water-reversible archival adhesive can cause cockling of the paper if
too much water is applied inadvertently.

When they won't show, I prefer archival mounting corners. The only objection
to those is greater risk of damage if framed artwork falls off a wall & hits
the floor. Large pieces may need supplemental support from hinges. Use
gummed water-activated tape, not pressure-sensitive (self-stick).
Water-based adhesives won't stick to RC paper.

Sometimes a large heavy paper item simply must be mounted with hinges. We
try to figure how to use as few as possible so the paper can expand and
contract without straining where the hinge bonds with the art. One trick for
thick heavy paper is to cut hinges, decide where they will go on backer
board, and cut slots thru the backer (the hinge will go thru the backer and
get taped down against the back - this is stronger and you won't have to
worry about adhesion failing there). Don't tape them down until the end.
Run hinges thru backer slots, apply hinges to art, let them dry well, then
tape them down on the back. May take more than one try.

A local pro-lab pressure mounts 'plastic prints' - ultra-glossy large photos
on polypropylene onto acrylic sheet. These look horrible dry mounted on
foamcore!

Now, opinion - I hate the way dry mounted photos look - I see 'orange-peel'
look in most of them. Framing industry and even mounting tissue industry
experts blame backer board surface tension. Mounting on matboard
helps...some.

I tried mounting two one-hour photos on acrylic sheet and they still had
orange peel. I think the problem is either the tissue or the photo paper.

I have seen pro-photog/pro-lab portraits lately mounted on a smooth plastic
board. I think they use pressure mount adhesive. I don't know if this is
archival, but we didn't convert to it because it came in limited sizes and
we don't have room for a specialized machine (you can use a rigid squeegee)
which wouldn't replace our other needs.

Mounting on 4-ply or 8-ply would allow standalone presentation. Conventional
mat is about the thickness of '3-ply' if it existed. 2 is really floppy.

 If I have a choice and it physically works in the situation, I sometimes
mount a photo with two hidden T-shaped hinges near the top on matboard. For
a float mount (entire photo is visible), leave space (maybe 3/4-1") around
it between photo and top mat. If the paper has 'body' (cockled, wavy), a
foamcore spacer can be put between the top mat and the backer mat so it
isn't pressed against glass. It looks nice too. Be sure to place the spacers
away from the mat bevel so you can't see the spacer!

Murray

_______________________________________________
Post to the list as PLAIN TEXT only - no HTML
pinhole-discussion mailing list
pinhole-discussion@spitbite.org
FAQ at http://spitbite.org/pinhole-discussion/list.html
Received on Mon Mar 8 19:33:10 2004