Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Printing: Printers, Papers and Inks => Topic started by: Let Biogons be Biogons on March 28, 2007, 04:15:12 pm
-
I'd like to mount some prints that have a pretty stiff curl (thick
fiber-based matte paper that was printed off a roll). My normal approach with linen
tape to mount the prints to mat board just doesn't cut it. So I'm
looking for recommendations. What works for you? I'd prefer it to be
archival, and if an adhesive, re-positionable. These are Piezo K7
prints that measure roughly 17x20". I would prefer to avoid the expense involved in aquiring a dry mount press of that size since I don't expect to have this need for long. Thanks for the help.
-
Un curl them. I have a homemade version of this:
http://www.inkjetart.com/misc/droller/index.html (http://www.inkjetart.com/misc/droller/index.html)
-
I have a homemade version of this:
How did you make yours? I read on another post where someone taped several yards of canvas to a 3" cardboard tube - rolled up about a yard of the canvas (I assume to create a smooth surface) - then insert paper and roll up. I wondered if the canvas wouldn't damage the print - or maybe cover the print with something?
How long do you need to leave the print rolled on the tube?
-
I've just mounted on to foamcore about a dozen 13" and 17" wide panoramas up to 30" long. Many of them had pronounced curl since they came off the tail end of a roll.
I used a re-positionable, acid-free spray adhesive from Pro Art: PO Box 1417, Beaverton OR 97075-1417. I elected to use it in non re-positionable mode, ie I sprayed both the print and the substrate before mounting.
Adhesion was instant in this mode, so I used standoffs made from offcuts of foamcore to ensure accurate positioning before attachment. The system worked perfectly, requring only gentle smoothing/adhering of the print from center to edges. For this, I recommend cotton gloves. I used matte paper which is very susceptible to marking.
No delaminating, rippling or bubbling yet, and they've been attached for over a week in some cases. If you use this adhesive be sure to FULLY clean the spray nozzle after use. It clogs easily.
-
I have a homemade version of this:
How did you make yours? I read on another post where someone taped several yards of canvas to a 3" cardboard tube - rolled up about a yard of the canvas (I assume to create a smooth surface) - then insert paper and roll up. I wondered if the canvas wouldn't damage the print - or maybe cover the print with something?
How long do you need to leave the print rolled on the tube?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=109274\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Instead of canvas taped to a 3"" cardboard tube, I use a product which we here call Vilene - a thin white interfacing material purchased from fabric stores. It comes in rolls af about 5m. It is available in 2 types- with an adhesive backing or without. It is used as an interfacing for dressmaking. The Iron on one is used for stiffening collars and waistbands when you are making garments. Don't get the iron on one - get the non-iron on one. It is light, and does not damage prints in any way from my experience. I have used it on high gloss film media and it works really well.
I leave the print rolled up overnight usually.
Julie
-
Peter:
Can you provide additional details on your process for mounting 17 x 30 inch prints? Made up some 17 x 24's and got close (1/16 inch) but would like to be dead on. i.e. you only get one shot at getting it correct.
Perhaps a photo of how you use the standoff would be appreciated so that the prints exactly match the mounting board.
Thanks.
Jim
-
That's interesting. I might try some 3" PVC pipe, and some interfacing/Vileme material. I suppose any type of non-woven fabric might work. $259-299 for the original version seems a bit excessive for what it is.
I noticed in the description of the De-roller, that is said, "See the white "carrier" film that is lying almost perfectly flat on the table? It took several years to find a carrier material that had virtually no curl memory, and was able to unroll onto the table and lay fairly flat time-after-time, after having been wound tightly around the chrome-plated De-Roller tube."
It took them "several years" to find this material?! They got to be kidding, or they really weren't very focused on getting this done.
Instead of canvas taped to a 3"" cardboard tube, I use a product which we here call Vilene - a thin white interfacing material purchased from fabric stores. It comes in rolls af about 5m. It is available in 2 types- with an adhesive backing or without. It is used as an interfacing for dressmaking. The Iron on one is used for stiffening collars and waistbands when you are making garments. Don't get the iron on one - get the non-iron on one. It is light, and does not damage prints in any way from my experience. I have used it on high gloss film media and it works really well.
I leave the print rolled up overnight usually.
Julie
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=109295\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
That's interesting. I might try some 3" PVC pipe, and some interfacing/Vileme material. I suppose any type of non-woven fabric might work. $259-299 for the original version seems a bit excessive for what it is.
If you use PVC pipe, just make sure it is entirely smooth. Sometimes in transit it gets a few 'bruises' and because of the hardness of the pipe may be difficult to eliminate with several wraps of material. I use an old paper inner roll, or a post pack tube.
Julie
-
Peter:
Can you provide additional details on your process for mounting 17 x 30 inch prints? Made up some 17 x 24's and got close (1/16 inch) but would like to be dead on. i.e. you only get one shot at getting it correct.
Perhaps a photo of how you use the standoff would be appreciated so that the prints exactly match the mounting board.
Thanks.
Jim
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=109302\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Since it's foamcore I'm mounting to, I don't care if it's a little bit out of alignment. I can easily trim it after mounting. I get pretty darn close, though, with my technique. I use an Olfa utility knife with snap-off fresh, sharp blades. If you're mounting on masonite, ymmv.
Take a few, narrow strips of foamcore or anything slender and non sticky (soda straws work well, but they're too short for 17" wide prints) and lay them on the upper surface of the previously-coated substrate. Position the print carefully, laying it on top of the standoffs, but keeping it just off the surface of the substrate. The thinner your standoffs, the closer the print can be to the surface and the easier it is to verify alignment. However, you need more of the thin standoffs to prohibit contact.
Once you have good alignment, withdraw the centermost standoff and allow the print to contact the substrate from edge to edge, smoothing it onto the surface with your (gloved) hands or a clean cloth. Then, working outwards left and right from the center, gradually apply the print to the substrate, smoothing and adhering, removing standoffs as you go. I screwed up the first one, but learned from my mistakes. I suggest a dry run with an unimportant print first.
I'm very satisfied with the results, and I've done a fair bit of dry mounting with a proper press. Next thing I need to figure out is how to make the edges of the foamcore black.
-
Peter,
Black foamcore is available, but the surfaces are black as well. If your paper is heavy enough it shouldn't show through. I've not tried it as I frame everything so the backing is not visible and white doesn't matter.
As far as standoffs, you can use 1/4 inch wood dowels. I've used these when appying laminates to countertops. My dad was a carpenter and cabinetmaker.
Rich
-
Thanks Peter for the step by step. It is a great help.
Will try some 1/4 inch dowels and see what happen as I have a 17 x 30 inch print to place on masonite. Use 3M Super 77 for the glue and apply the 3M product to the masonite only at this point. The directions state to use when "aggressively tacky".
My only concern is that since the adhesive is tacky will not the dowels also stick to the masonite? When doing counter tops the adhesive is applied to each side and is dry to the touch. But in the mounting procedure for the Super 77 the adhesive is still wet and very sticky to say the least.
Found using a new clean paint roller does a good job of rolling out the print.
Jim
-
>My only concern is that since the adhesive is tacky will not the dowels also stick to the masonite?
They do slightly when I use the spray glue I'm using, but they're easy to detach.
>When doing counter tops the adhesive is applied to each side and is dry to the touch.
Exactly. That's how I came to use this procedure for prints.
>But in the mounting procedure for the Super 77 the adhesive is still wet and very sticky to say the least.
You might need to experiment, letting it dry a little more than the instructions indicate.
>Found using a new clean paint roller does a good job of rolling out the print.
Many of these adhesives are pressure sensitive. The harder you push, the better the adhesion. I've found two instances where the prints weren't stuck properly along the edges. They were from early stages of this experiment where I was using a J-roller (left over from my countertop job ) I hadn't applied enough force with the roller. Since I resorted to hand pressure, I've had no delaminating.
I've gone through more than a few Olfa blades, that's for sure. To cut foamcore cleanly, you need a supersharp blade.
-
Jule - thanks for the Vilene tip. I guess I'm off to the fabric store
-
Peter:
Appreciate the run down.
Tried the following which worked very well.
1) Placed the hardboard on the work area.
2) At the far edge of the hardboard placed a thicker piece of material to act as a paper stop for the print.
3) Held down the back edge and curled up the paper. (weights could be used if a helper is not available)
4) Sprayed the front edge of the hardboard.
5) Unrolled the print and it laid down perfectly over the wet glue.
6) Turned the hardboard around, lifted the print and coated the remaining area.
7) Laid down the remaining part of the print.
The alignment was perfect and it worked well with the very sticky glue.
Jim
-
Peter:
<snip>
The alignment was perfect and it worked well with the very sticky glue.
Jim
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=109836\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Beauty, Jim. Glad it's working out.
What kind of glue? You used Masonite? I might try that next. Masonite has a little more "gravitas" than foamcore.
Peter
-
What kind of glue? You used Masonite? I might try that next. Masonite has a little more "gravitas" than foamcore. :D
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=109942\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Peter:
Noticed that another poster used the same glue without any print returns. It is not tested for longevity so we are all on our own. It is 3M Super 77 Multipurpose Adhesive spray. Comes in 16.75 oz cans for about ten bucks.
Yes using Masonite, for about eight bucks ($8.63) for a 4 x 8 foot 1/8 inch thick sheet. Like the stuff from Lowes better than the Home Depot brand. Lowes is smooth on two sides while the HD is only smooth on one side. Of course pricing will vary with location!!!
Jim
-
What kind of glue? You used Masonite? I might try that next. Masonite has a little more "gravitas" than foamcore.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=109942\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Is masonite "acid-free" oir achival? Does it have any issues with the outgassing of formaldehyde or any other less-than-desirable chemical?
-
It is 3M Super 77 Multipurpose Adhesive spray. Comes in 16.75 oz cans for about ten bucks.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=109996\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
While purchasing 20X30 foamcore at Wal Mart, I got some "Duro" adhesive spray (made by Loctite fwiw) for about three bucks for 11 oz. I'll try it for my next batch of prints.
Your Masonite is about $.37 per square foot, a third the price of my foamcore at about $.90 per square foot.
Time to limber up the table saw.
-
Time to limber up the table saw. :)
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=110066\")
Peter:
Have not tired the Wal Mart Duro. May have to do that as it is 1/2 the price of the 3M material.
Do not have a table saw but use this nice saw from Festool. Had one print in which the frame was too small by 1/8 inch. Was not sure how the saw would cut a mounted image on Masonite. Placed the guide on top of the image and cut it perfectly 1/8 inch smaller.
[a href=\"http://www.festoolusa.com/faster.aspx]http://www.festoolusa.com/faster.aspx[/url]
Jim
-
I'd like to know about that too.
Often, Masonite, particleboard, and plywoods will outgas some fairly nasty stuff. I'd be very curious to know if there are any "archival grade" Masonite type products available.
I found this while surfing:
http://www.niso.org/standards/resources/z3979dft.pdf (http://www.niso.org/standards/resources/z3979dft.pdf)
In that document, in APPENDIX B
"Materials generally recognized *not* to be safe in the construction of exhibition cases" (emphasis mine) are listed the following (among others):
Wood panel products
Interior plywood
Interior particleboard
Waferboard
Chipboard
Untempered hardboard (e.g. Masonite)
Oil tempered hardboard (e.g. tempered Masonite)
Fiberboards
That seems to indicate that we should not use Masonite for archival uses.
But there are some other interesting things in that document about using "barrier" materials too. It sounds as if a layer of aluminum foil between the print and the evil substrate could help things. But you'd still be in trouble if the Masonite was enclosed with the print.
How about using aluminum panels? With the right adhesive, that should be very archival. You can have aluminum sheets cut to whatever size you need at a sheet-metal or air-conditioning shop. But aluminum can be expensive and you need to file the edges and corners of the sheared panels to make them safe for handling.
-
Yes there are issues with a number of materials. But considering the cost and the need to not make it archival the choice is towards less costly materials. I can understand the needs of some to make the print last for 500 years. Some clients may desire to pay that extra cost. Others do not, and will opt for being on the cheap side.
What is interesting is that if we look at the master painters I would bet none of them had any concern about the archival quality of their work. Some paintings made it while others did not. And here 300 to 700 years later we are now preoccupied with the archival qualities of prints and data. And using water based colors on plaster walls - was that a good idea? i.e. disaster is just one earthquake away.
For inkjet prints it is not a one of a kind print issue. i.e. a real painting is one of one If the inkpet print fades, or otherwise self destructs then just print another one and go on with life. The client gets a new print and you are out five bucks worth of paper and ink.
In my case I charge under fifty bucks for a 17 x 24 print (not mounted) with no guaranties. If they paid $250 for that then there would be a concern to use some other language that would specify and define what archival really is. It would then be important to see if the paper and ink had any archival qualities and specify a remedy if there is a failure.
In general, some print makers will make an issue of archival, while other will not. The choice, as I see it, is between the photographer, the client and their checkbook.
Jim
-
That all makes good sense.
I suppose it comes down to "how" archival we're talking.
It would be cheap and easy to just cut a piece of Masonite and then use spray glue to mount one of these prints to it. The result should look nice and be easy to hang, etc.
So it's an attractive way to go.
But if the print turns to some ghastly color in six months, then it probably wasn't worth the effort. If it lasts ten years, then it probably was.
It'd be nice to know approximately how long things would last, but there are so many materials, glues, and other variables that it's kind of hard to even guess sometimes
Jim H.
-
That all makes good sense.
It'd be nice to know approximately how long things would last, but there are so many materials, glues, and other variables that it's kind of hard to even guess sometimes :)
Jim H.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=110340\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
You are very correct.....
Even with a tested material one can never be sure as conditions the print is exposed to is beyond the control of the photographer.
And we would all like to know if the 3M glue or the Walmart glue will last beyond the end of the day. Groups do test, but in the long run those "tested" products will cost more. And in many cases, a lot more just for the knowledge that it is a better product. You and I can only make a best guess estimate and move forward.
As an example, did a quick test of IJA MC Luster with iPF5000 inks. No issues with running water. A 12 hour soak did make the ink soft and easy to rub off. After drying (the paper is now warped) the ink is once again rub proof. And have a sample in a south facing window for a month. No color change from the covered to non covered side. Good scientific controlled tests - not by a long shot! But is good information to know in place of real scientific information. Helpful, maybe!
Jim
-
For inkjet prints it is not a one of a kind print issue. i.e. a real painting is one of one If the inkpet print fades, or otherwise self destructs then just print another one and go on with life. The client gets a new print and you are out five bucks worth of paper and ink.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=110332\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I think that for museum quality prints and photographic collectors, you might want it to be "archival", which in this context usually means about 100 years -- this level of performance is what Canon and HP have been trying to catch up with Epson on over the past couple of years. Alot of the quality paper and ink combinations these days reach that standard. If I have made the effort to assure that the print is archival, then I am not going to mount it on something that is not and potentially ruin the print over time. I'm not going to worry about another $1 or so if it ensures that the mount is archival. Masonite is nice because it is nice and stiff, but if using is going to affect the print over time, I will look for something else (like quality foam core or mat board).