What are options to frame/protect prints without glass

[msoomro]

I am looking to frame some prints without glass or plexiglass etc. Some prints are on matte paper which i can varnish and weather seal. For glossy papers what options are out there.  I am leaning towards UV proof laminating of some type - however open consider all options  .

thanks

[louoates]

Why not the glass?

[msoomro]

Weight and cost. I get custom frames and logistically it will be cheaper and easier to go without glass without compromising quality of display.

[DeanChriss]

Weight and cost. I get custom frames and logistically it will be cheaper and easier to go without glass without compromising quality of display.

I'm not quite sure if you're talking about a temporary display that needs to endure a couple weeks or something that's supposed to last a lifetime. If it's the latter you have a difficult task. We live in a world that's full of airborne dirt, grit, and curious fingers. Crud builds up on surfaces, they need to be cleaned periodically, and not everyone is extremely careful when they clean things. Glass is heavy, but very durable and relatively cheap unless you're talking about Tru Vue Museum Glass. Nothing stands up to cleaning with any sort of cloth and cleaner better than glass. Over time cleaning of softer surfaces produces countless micro-scratches that makes them hazy. To some extent you can avoid this with Plexiglas by blowing off grit if there is any, and using very soft cloths and special cleaners. If Plexiglas gets scratched you can always replace it, but lamination is permanent, and probably softer, so you have to throw away the whole print. That's fine for a temporary display, but not for anything that's supposed to last for a while.

Given the work involved with other processes I can't imagine any being cheaper, easier, or longer lasting than glass, but you may find a way to produce a better display. Beyond that I have no advise.

[Ken Brayton]

Laminates such as Premier Art ect. are the most common method if you are looking for framed prints. Face mounting is another method that can be used. Mounting to aluminum or wood can also give a nice presentation. However the longevity does get compromised without the protection of glass. I live in a hot humid location and I find that glass will trap moisture and result in mold growing on the print. In this area it is better to go without glass and get used to cleaning the prints with a feather duster on a regular basis. Not perfect but you make the best of what you have. Ken

[Wayne Fox]

The challenge with laminates is they often look “cheap”.  I’ve tried a few different ways over the years, and for some things it works pretty good.  I have a leathery texture laminate that looks great for things like portraits, but really don’t like it on landscapes.  I’ve tried glossy laminates on landscapes but it just doesn’t come across as nice face mounting to a thin piece of plexi or glass.

But other than spraying or coating, I think it’s the only option.

[msoomro]

Thanks all for the perspective and advice. My genre is nature / landscapes. So it seems a thin plexi glass will still be way better then good quality laminate. This brings up another question. What are some good sources of plexi sheets and cutter. I have a good framing source locally, but when I add customer glass or plexi it raise cost significantly at retail prices (my consumption is not very high but i can afford a home setup if its not hugely expensive)

cheers
msoomro

[DeanChriss]

If you Google "plexiglas cutter" you'll find countless hand cutters ranging between a few dollars and $20. One of those, a good cutting guide (just a thick straight edge with a non-slip backing), and some care is all you'd need to cut a piece of Plexiglas for an occasional print. A 36" cutting guide costs around $25 or so. Longer ones are more. It would also be a good idea to watch some "how to" videos online before you start. FWIW, cutting glass isn't as hard as you might think using a hand cutter and straight edge, and it's considerably cheaper than Plexiglas.

The best sources for Plexiglas or glass are typically local because shipping costs boost the prices considerably. Shop around. I've seen prices at some local vendors that are three times that of others.

[EDIT] Also check pricing at http://www.framedestination.com/. It's more than doing all of this yourself, but they do everything and they aren't horribly expensive.

[Gary Damaskos]

Mount on thick gatorfoam. Use this for print protection of gloss paper: Glossy (Paper) Overlam is a general-purpose laminate that provides a high gloss look.

Using both provides a very nice looking mount that is very resistant to handling, smoke, splatters, fingerprints etc. Been using for a decade and very happy with the results and durability.

Gary

[framah]

Just a note here about using plexi..

When you are cleaning the plexi, do NOT use any cleaner with ammonia in it!!! It will craze and haze the plexi till it is useless. Either a specific plexi cleaner or Glass Plus.

Personally, the glass is the cheapest part of any framing job unless you go with Museum glass. It doesn't make any sense to spend that little bit more to protect the piece, rather than leaving it open to the elements and likely damage.

My charge to laminate a piece is more than the glass would be.

[Pic One]

But isn't using glass, a material that is reflective and "glossy", in front of a print you thought would look best on matte paper, basically counterintuitive?

[DeanChriss]

But isn't using glass, a material that is reflective and "glossy", in front of a print you thought would look best on matte paper, basically counterintuitive?

Glare from glass, Plexiglas, or a laminate can be a problem in some situations. For those there are products like Tru Vue Museum glass with optical coatings that make the glass virtually invisible. It's really astounding, and really expensive. There are cheaper non-glare products that use a fine texture on the surface to diffuse the glare, but these can also make the print look a little soft and don't do as well with the glare. So there is at least one glazing solution that presents the print with little to no influence from the glazing.

It's also possible to eliminate or greatly reduce glare as seen from typical viewing positions by controlling the lighting, if possible. Note also that matte papers behind glass do not look like other papers behind glass. Papers maintain their look if glare from the glazing is controlled. The problem if no glazing is used, as mentioned above, is that crud (greasy film, grit, finger marks, etc.) will build up on the print and a bare print can't be readily cleaned. It's simply impractical to hang an unprotected print for any length of time.

[louoates]

I think most customers expect photographs to be framed behind glass.

[Pic One]

Glare from glass, Plexiglas, or a laminate can be a problem in some situations. For those there are products like Tru Vue Museum glass with optical coatings that make the glass virtually invisible. It's really astounding, and really expensive. There are cheaper non-glare products that use a fine texture on the surface to diffuse the glare, but these can also make the print look a little soft and don't do as well with the glare. So there is at least one glazing solution that presents the print with little to no influence from the glazing.

It's also possible to eliminate or greatly reduce glare as seen from typical viewing positions by controlling the lighting, if possible. Note also that matte papers behind glass do not look like other papers behind glass. Papers maintain their look if glare from the glazing is controlled. The problem if no glazing is used, as mentioned above, is that crud (greasy film, grit, finger marks, etc.) will build up on the print and a bare print can't be readily cleaned. It's simply impractical to hang an unprotected print for any length of time.

I suppose what you say is true.. but then we can throw out any discussions on the relative cost of inkjet papers since the glazing is exorbinent in relation.   If we accept that every matte print requires a sheet of TruVue in front of it, or a special lighting setup, all just to maintain the appearance of the print still being on matte paper, it becomes fairly a fairly impractical choice for a lot of situations.  OTOH if one prints for themselves.. who cares about grime.  Just print another every few years for a few bucks.

[DeanChriss]

I suppose what you say is true.. but then we can throw out any discussions on the relative cost of inkjet papers since the glazing is exorbinent in relation.   If we accept that every matte print requires a sheet of TruVue in front of it, or a special lighting setup, all just to maintain the appearance of the print still being on matte paper, it becomes fairly a fairly impractical choice for a lot of situations.  OTOH if one prints for themselves.. who cares about grime.  Just print another every few years for a few bucks.

I wouldn't say *every* matte print requires Tru-Vue Museum Glass or a special lighting setup. It depends where it hangs, the lighting that already exists there, where it will be viewed from, and whether the appearance is acceptable in that particular situation. It's not a matter of prints on matte papers looking like they're on glossy paper when they're mounted behind glass or Plexiglas, it's a matter of surface glare from the glass or Plexiglas obscuring the print and lowering contrast. The same issue exists no matter what paper is used, though it may be slightly worse for matte prints because of their lower Dmax. But, if you don't mind replacing your prints periodically, and doing whatever mounting/remounting work is involved with that, then good luck!

[Ken Brayton]

Paintings and other Art are not placed behind glass. Canvas prints are not placed behind glass. However prints on photographic paper seem to need glass protection. Why do inkjet prints with modern coatings need such protection when paintings and canvas prints do not?
Ken

[Robert Ardill]

Just a note here about using plexi..

When you are cleaning the plexi, do NOT use any cleaner with ammonia in it!!! It will craze and haze the plexi till it is useless. Either a specific plexi cleaner or Glass Plus.

Personally, the glass is the cheapest part of any framing job unless you go with Museum glass. It doesn't make any sense to spend that little bit more to protect the piece, rather than leaving it open to the elements and likely damage.

My charge to laminate a piece is more than the glass would be.

I use isopropyl alcohol to clean the acrylic if I am bonding the print to the acrylic sheet.  It's very good at removing solvents and dries very fast.  Glass cleaner is also OK.

I always ship framed prints under a 2mm cast acrylic sheet.  In my opinion it's much better than glass because it has no green tint.  I explain to my customers that the acrylic is more expensive than glass and much better: with the only downside being that it can scratch, so I give instructions on how to clean it (Windolene with a soft cloth).  I also explain that if there is slight scratching or abrasion that it can be removed with a fine polish like a car polish or Brasso and a soft cloth.

I've tried laminating with a semi-matte laminate but I agree that it doesn't look very good (it makes the print look cheap I think).  I haven't tried a gloss laminate.

Robert

[Geraldo Garcia]

Paintings and other Art are not placed behind glass. Canvas prints are not placed behind glass. However prints on photographic paper seem to need glass protection. Why do inkjet prints with modern coatings need such protection when paintings and canvas prints do not?
Ken

Not really. Drawings, pastels, charcoals, watercolors... All should be framed behind glass. Only canvas art (paintings or prints) are usually presented without glass. But even those are sealed/varnished, otherwise they would have the same fate as the unprotected art on paper. Unfortunately papers are not as tough as canvas and not really compatible with varnishes.

[louoates]

Geraldo, right on. Any art in those forms needs glass protection for longevity as well as adding to the "value" of the purchase.

[Gary Damaskos]

Form follows function - pov (point of view)  puts some twists on things, plus people - at least some people -  experiment and or do not follow convention, sometime with perfectly adequate and useful results, sometimes not.

Matte paper mounted and spray coated and displayed out of the way of abrasion (a wall for instance) - seems like I see this happening here and there, I do so with my own stuff - and things are rosy and swell. The papers are also "closer" to the viewing experience. Not all Matte papers can do this, but many can.

Gloss behind glass sucks to me. Gloss under clear gloss lam is strong and is  - well practical for many applications (form follows function) and from that perspective looks really beautiful to me. And displays proudly and without much fear of damage or degradation.
Durable, abrasion resistant, smoke resistant, adds depth, ... cheap is sometimes a learned perspective that may simply be an assigned adjective for cultural not practical reasons, then continued by momentum and traditionalists. Oh, and the print looks great hanging on a wall, better to my eyes than canvass because more detail and what I call richness. Please tho, each to their own ...

Just my thoughts ...
Cheers
Gary

PS I know the customer is always right saying, but for some folks the creating is the goal, and like some "baseball parks" we "build them and they will come". Historically there are artists that went this way and did fine, and their still are.