Timeless or Glamour II on matte paper

[shadowblade]

When I used Glamour II on matte papers, it had a tendency to make the paper warp or ripple.  HVLP spray on matte papers didn't work for me as it tends to apply a thin coat (both Timeless or GII) and never really gets worked deep into the paper substrate.  I'm not a fan of rolling, but rolling with Timeless (for matte fine art papers) is what I've found works for me---this is outside of the much easier to use Premier Art Shied spray, but this is not the same effect or coating or protection that we're talking about with Timeless, and really getting the coating worked in.

I was not able to locate the video I did for BC, but did find the series of photos I took of the process.  In short, I used a tight celled roller and used a lot of Timeless, and really worked the varnish in.  Quite different than how I would roll canvas substrates.  One even coat.  Matte finish.  Stays matte.  Timeless matte is a true matte finish.  It works well into the matte fine art paper, and feels exceptionally soft, almost like a soft wax.  I've poured liquids, coffee, ice cream and chocolate syrup---and rinsed it off in the kitchen sink.  Really.  No joke.    There's a video of that one too somewhere....

ken

I believe Bill T. has been spraying Timeless on Pura Velvet to good effect - he was the first to mention it soaking deep into the paper, through the inkjet layer, and holding everything in place (i.e. no more worries about the inkjet coating becoming brittle and cracking/delaminating over time). He was using Timeless Gloss, though, and diluting it a bit - perhaps this makes it penetrate the paper better, by making it less viscous and slowing down the drying to give it more time to soak in.. The overall effect, apparently, was two thickly-sprayed coats for a satin appearance, three or four for gloss.

I'd guess the matting agents would also reduce the ability of the varnish to penetrate into the paper, since the matting agents themselves stay on the surface and can't go through the inkjet coating.

How do you deal with dust settling on the print when rolling? I'd be very hesitant to roll a 20x60" panorama, for example, due to dust and the difficulty in getting an even coating.

Re: using Lascaux fixative prior to adding water-based acrylic sprays - Lascaux is solvent-based, so presumably incompatible with water-based coatings until it is thoroughly dry, with no trace of the solvent left. How long does it take to completely outgas, before you can apply the water-based spray?

[Paul Roark]

Regarding Lascaux dry time, it's not as fast as Print Shield.  It apparently uses less volatile solvents.  I think that may be why it penetrates so much better, while Print Shield appears to clog the pores.  There are reports of Print Shield turning into solid little balls before it hits the paper in hot dry areas.

I would let Lascaux dry for a couple of hours.  I don't think there is a risk of trapped solvent vapors in the long run because they will go through the back of the matte paper.  In fact, water vapor and oxygen slowly go through these coatings.

I'll be testing a few approaches with and without Lascaux and see if I can tell any differences.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

[Ernst Dinkla]

Regarding Lascaux dry time, it's not as fast as Print Shield.  It apparently uses less volatile solvents.  I think that may be why it penetrates so much better, while Print Shield appears to clog the pores.  There are reports of Print Shield turning into solid little balls before it hits the paper in hot dry areas.

I would let Lascaux dry for a couple of hours.  I don't think there is a risk of trapped solvent vapors in the long run because they will go through the back of the matte paper.  In fact, water vapor and oxygen slowly go through these coatings.

I'll be testing a few approaches with and without Lascaux and see if I can tell any differences.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

My experience too. More sprays tend to dry before they hit the print. I spray at close distance with them but that makes an even application harder. The Lascaux 2070 behaves better. The 2070 is versatile, adheres well on for example polyethylene without the swelling of PE that happens with other sprays so for RC papers it can be used too. It is flexible, a strip of foil with the varnish applied can be stretched to 150% and no cracks appear, 72 hours drying.

I see that the Lascaux 2070 is also available as a fluid in 1 and even 5 liter cans. Anyone experience with this varnish in normal and HVLP spray equipment?

--
Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst

http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
January 2014, 600+ inkjet media white spectral plots.

[shadowblade]

Regarding Lascaux dry time, it's not as fast as Print Shield.  It apparently uses less volatile solvents.  I think that may be why it penetrates so much better, while Print Shield appears to clog the pores.  There are reports of Print Shield turning into solid little balls before it hits the paper in hot dry areas.

I would let Lascaux dry for a couple of hours.  I don't think there is a risk of trapped solvent vapors in the long run because they will go through the back of the matte paper.  In fact, water vapor and oxygen slowly go through these coatings.

I'll be testing a few approaches with and without Lascaux and see if I can tell any differences.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

From a physical longevity perspective, I'd still be very hesitant to use Lascaux, or any other solvent-based acrylic spray, as the first coat. Since this is the coat that soaks into the paper base and holds the paper fibres and image layers together in one big, hardened mass of acrylic, it needs to be flexible - if it's brittle, it could just develop micro-cracks over time as the paper flexes and bends, eventually breaking down enough that the Lascaux-image-inkjet coating-paper layer crumbles away and fails entirely. You can see a similar kind of failure occuring in some oil paintings, with the brittle, inflexible layer of oil paints crumbling and flaking off the canvas base as it expands and contracts.

I still like the enhanced light/gas fastness that Lascaux seems to provide, though - I wonder if it would provide the same degree of protection when applied as the second layer, so that it is in front of the image, rather than encasing it in a brittle layer, and is itself supported on both sides by flexible water-based acrylic. I guess this depends on the mechanism of protection provided by the Lascaux spray - whether it is a chemical property of the spray itself (unlikely, since the acrylics it contains are the same basic family of acrylics as those in water-based coatings), or whether it is merely a result of it sinking into the paper and completely sealing the pigments from the atmosphere in all directions (unlike a typical coating, which seals it only from the front). If it is the latter, then I would guess a water-based coating would do just as well and produce a more flexible coating, provided the coating and paper combination are such that the coating can sink in properly (apparently watered-down Timeless will sink into Breathing Colour matte papers and Epson Watercolour, but not into Canson Rag Photographique).

I'd also be inclined to spray the back of the print with a water-based acrylic, both as an anti-curl layer and to seal the back of the print against moisture and pollutants. But the print would have to be completely dry and out-gassed in order to do this, and the water-based acrylic would also have to dry via evaporation rather than by absorption of the solvent (water) into the paper base, in order to avoid trapping the water in the spray within the paper.

In any case, spraying gloss coatings on matte paper seems to be the most promising way to produce a baryta-like gloss finish (or any other kind of finish, from satin to ultra-gloss) without the inherent fragility of baryta or the uncertain durability of a coating that isn't permanently bound to the paper substrate.