Best practices for archival printing and framing?

[mearussi]

So far this is my best understanding:

1. paper--100% cotton, no OBAs, no TiO2, with a light coating of spray varnish (from Hahnemuhle, Moab,
 or Premier Art only) to seal the micropores

2. ink--OEM only, preferably rated for 200+ years

3. glass--colorless framing glass (or acrylic) with a UV coating (but not so much as to add a yellowish tint), AR Museum would also be nice but is spendy

4. mat board and backing board--should be 100% cotton and alkaline buffered

5. mounting the print--so far outside of just hanging it (which causes it to buckle) I know of no archival way. Do you?

5. frame--only metal is truly archival as all wood out gasses to some extent

This is the best information I've gathered over the last few years. I'm relatively new at this so if I've missed something or have something wrong please let me know.

Thanks

[Eric Brody]

i agree with your thoughts on this, but hopefully without meaning to hijack the thread, would ask the question "why worry?"

I have been helping the family of a dear friend who just passed away. He had boxes of lovely archivally processed silver gelatin matted 16x20 prints. He was an excellent but not well known photographer. I'm sure these prints will last for millennia. I know his technique was meticulous. What to do with all these images? The question even arose with prints he had purchased. Many were by top notch photographers we'd all recognize but were not always their "famous" work.

My wife has asked me several times what to do with all my gear and photographs should I predecease her. These days, with archival inks and acid free boards, these images could last a long, long time.

I have more questions than answers but think it remains a decent topic for discussion.

[mearussi]

You ask "why worry."

Several reasons:

1. First, I just want to know.

2. When I advertise something I want to make sure it is what I say it is. When you sell a piece it's nice to know exactly what you're selling. If you just slop something together neither you nor your customer really know.

3. Price tradeoffs-- archivability comes at a price, some contributing features cost more than others. When you're aiming to sell at a particular price point it's good to know exactly what the tradeoffs are and which ones affect archivability the most (or the least).   

4. Display conditions can vary widely. I keep hearing that no one should really be worried about their prints lasting 200 years, but that's not the point. A print rated for 200 years under ideal conditions may last only 20 years under much harsher conditions. If I sell to a business with huge south facing windows that expose my prints to a lot of harsh indirect sunlight I don't want them fading in a couple of years. So I want to know everything I can do to maximize display life under the worse conditions and not just the best.

5. Pride. I want to be proud of my work and the quality I put into it.

[Eric Brody]

1. Wanting to know is worthwhile in and of itself, agree.
2. When selling, it's nice to assure the purchaser of reasonable longevity. I sold some prints years ago made with dye inks, they faded, I reprinted them with pigment inks, also agree.
3. Also agree.
4. Agree
5. Also agree, pride is worth a lot.
Most all of your points relate to print sales. It appears you sell way more than I do or than my friend did. My questions relate to those of us who sell rarely, give often, and largely just produce images for sheer joy with no commercial intent.

[nirpat89]

So far this is my best understanding:

1. paper--100% cotton, no OBAs, no TiO2, with a light coating of spray varnish (from Hahnemuhle, Moab,
 or Premier Art only) to seal the micropores

2. ink--OEM only, preferably rated for 200+ years

3. glass--colorless framing glass (or acrylic) with a UV coating (but not so much as to add a yellowish tint), AR Museum would also be nice but is spendy

4. mat board and backing board--should be 100% cotton and alkaline buffered

5. mounting the print--so far outside of just hanging it (which causes it to buckle) I know of no archival way. Do you?

5. frame--only metal is truly archival as all wood out gasses to some extent

This is the best information I've gathered over the last few years. I'm relatively new at this so if I've missed something or have something wrong please let me know.

Thanks

Regarding #5, dry-mounting used to be deemed archival before museums and galleries started wanting something that was reversible.  Nowadays the standard seems to T-hinges which can be archival based on the materials used and less prone to buckling due to temp/humidity fluctuations that might be a problem when using corners.  I am not sure I understood what you meant by just hanging.

[mearussi]

Regarding #5, dry-mounting used to be deemed archival before museums and galleries started wanting something that was reversible.  Nowadays the standard seems to T-hinges which can be archival based on the materials used and less prone to buckling due to temp/humidity fluctuations that might be a problem when using corners.  I am not sure I understood what you meant by just hanging.

I meant T-hinge. I use roll paper and just using a T-hinge will not deal with the warp, that's why I'm glad Mark has had good luck with pressing the print directly against the glass it eliminates that problem.

[MHMG]

I meant T-hinge. I use roll paper and just using a T-hinge will not deal with the warp, that's why I'm glad Mark has had good luck with pressing the print directly against the glass it eliminates that problem.

To be clear, I've also had excellent results with wide margin prints with overmattes that both fill the frame edge to edge. No t-hinges or corner mounts or adhesives of any kind, just the traditional air gap afforded by the use of an overmatt and the freedom of the print to expand and contract slowly and evenly during seasonal temp/RH cycles.

The key to the print cockling problem is eliminating any local pressure and pinning points in the sealed package and providing a moisture vapor barrier that significantly slows down moisture ingress/egress from the framed print's microclimate, thus allowing the print, mount boards, and Matt boards time to very slowly and evenly expand and contract in unison.

cheers,
Mark
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com

[dchew]

To be clear, I've also had excellent results with wide margin prints with overmattes that both fill the frame edge to edge. No t-hinges or corner mounts or adhesives of any kind, just the traditional air gap afforded by the use of an overmatt and the freedom of the print to expand and contract slowly and evenly during seasonal temp/RH cycles.

The key to the print cockling problem is eliminating any local pressure and pinning points in the sealed package and providing a moisture vapor barrier that significantly slows down moisture ingress/egress from the framed print's microclimate, thus allowing the print, mount boards, and Matt boards time to very slowly and evenly expand and contract in unison.

cheers,
Mark
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com

Mark, I've been following the threads where you describe your approach; brilliantly simple. Running some experiments now with Artglass and it looks pretty good, at least so far with Matte paper. The one thing I am trying to figure out is the evil spring clips with metal frames. The key you mention is not to have local pressure points. It seems those spring clips are just pressure points around the edge - with the print paper extending to the edge it is obviously pinched at the perimeter. I've been bending the clips to make them less tight but that's pretty uncontrolled. I wonder if anyone has addressed this with another solution?

Dave

[MHMG]

Mark, I've been following the threads where you describe your approach; brilliantly simple. Running some experiments now with Artglass and it looks pretty good, at least so far with Matte paper. The one thing I am trying to figure out is the evil spring clips with metal frames. The key you mention is not to have local pressure points. It seems those spring clips are just pressure points around the edge - with the print paper extending to the edge it is obviously pinched at the perimeter. I've been bending the clips to make them less tight but that's pretty uncontrolled. I wonder if anyone has addressed this with another solution?

Dave

Hi Dave, I prefer the beauty of wood frames so much that I haven't worked with metal frames in years, so I've never attempted my wide margin no t-hinging method with metal frames. I can see where sliding the assembly, especially slightly oversized PE foam into the metal frame and also those metal clips would indeed be problematic. I'll give it a go sometime to see if some of those issues can be overcome. One metal frame I had professionally done years ago used soft dowel-shaped wedges made of styrofoam hidden under the metal edge to hold the glazing, image, matte, and backerboard snugly in place. If you are concerned about styrofoam (I'm not because it's not touching the print), you could probably substitute a material like ethafoam or even the PE foam rolled tightly into small tubes to replace the metal spring clips. The pressure would undoubtedly be less and also much better distributed.

Wood frames have a distinct advantage with my framing method because they allow all the material components to just drop easily into the rabbit edges of the frame. It makes my method much much easier to accomplish. I just line up everything to the bottom edge and symmetrically gapped side to side so that the glazing and print assembly is resting at its natural hard stop in the frame and image and overmatt stay perfectly aligned. The worry about acids and peroxides off gassing from the wood can be eliminated using a a frame sealing tape with metal foil layer like this one: Lineco frame sealing tape

It takes a little practice to lay in the frame sealing tape into the rabbits of the frame, but that resolves any concerns about wood versus metal with regard to best practices.

And one last tip: I add the wide margins to the image using a two step "canvas size" operation in PSCC to add a little visual weighting to the margin running along the  bottom of the image. I then add a 2pixel black stroke around the edges of the canvas white area so that when it gets printed on the roll, I can later trim the print perfectly aligned to the overmatte without having to make any further measurements. Perfect alignment is, of course, very important when one chooses to have the overmatte include a slight reveal around the edges of the image.

cheers,
Mark
http:/www.aardenburg-imaging.com

[Paul_Roark]

BTW, there are frame spacers that allow framing under glass without the mat board. 

See, for example,
https://www.jerrysartarama.com/frametek-econospace-art-and-glass-separator?gclid=Cj0KCQjwhJrqBRDZARIsALhp1WTTgo44fwVFykt7cflr_4Z1CBEmU2ZZO1qYdkwyn6hqnHFWYrFnI-MaAlHYEALw_wcB

You can also print a faux mat board onto the paper to get the look of a traditional matted print.  See, for example, http://paulroark.com/11x14-in-13x19.jpg

FWIW,

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

[datro]

Mark, I've been following the threads where you describe your approach; brilliantly simple. Running some experiments now with Artglass and it looks pretty good, at least so far with Matte paper. The one thing I am trying to figure out is the evil spring clips with metal frames. The key you mention is not to have local pressure points. It seems those spring clips are just pressure points around the edge - with the print paper extending to the edge it is obviously pinched at the perimeter. I've been bending the clips to make them less tight but that's pretty uncontrolled. I wonder if anyone has addressed this with another solution?

Dave

+1.  I also use the typical nielsen metal frames and pressure clips and have been wondering how I would apply Mark's process and somehow eliminate the clips.

My first thought is to try using the PolyFoam "caulk backer rod" material that you can get at the big box home supply stores.  I think it's made from closed-cell polyethylene which should be pretty inert.  I've seen thicknesses ranging from 1/4 inch up to 5/8 inch which would probably cover most situations regarding the left-over rabbet depth .  Basically you would cut four pieces of the backer rod to match length and width of your frame and insert under the metal frame.  With the right thickness of backer rod, you'd have even , light-to-moderate pressure around the entire frame.  I haven't yet tried this, bit I wonder if it could work

[dchew]

+1.  I also use the typical nielsen metal frames and pressure clips and have been wondering how I would apply Mark's process and somehow eliminate the clips.

My first thought is to try using the PolyFoam "caulk backer rod" material that you can get at the big box home supply stores.  I think it's made from closed-cell polyethylene which should be pretty inert.  I've seen thicknesses ranging from 1/4 inch up to 5/8 inch which would probably cover most situations regarding the left-over rabbet depth .  Basically you would cut four pieces of the backer rod to match length and width of your frame and insert under the metal frame.  With the right thickness of backer rod, you'd have even , light-to-moderate pressure around the entire frame.  I haven't yet tried this, bit I wonder if it could work

Great idea. I was just thinking it needs to be something with a round cross section to stuff in there. I know exactly what you are talking about, and remember using it when caulking some dormers. Off to Home Depot!

Dave

[Ferp]

Perfect alignment is, of course, very important when one chooses to have the overmatte include a slight reveal around the edges of the image.

I was wondering about this.  I have a strong preference for a slight reveal, and the only way I've found to ensure perfect alignment with a matte larger than the print is to t-hinge to the matte rather than the backing.  You can get stable, perfect alignment with your technique?  How big a reveal do you allow?  With small reveals like 5mm, absolutely perfect alignment is needed.

[MHMG]

I was wondering about this.  I have a strong preference for a slight reveal, and the only way I've found to ensure perfect alignment with a matte larger than the print is to t-hinge to the matte rather than the backing.  You can get stable, perfect alignment with your technique?  How big a reveal do you allow?  With small reveals like 5mm, absolutely perfect alignment is needed.

Yes, I can get perfect alignment with my technique, and for me it's much less time consuming than other methods plus it's free of adhesives and localized pinning points that can contribute to cockling of the artwork (there are other microclimate issues which can cause cockling as well, but let's leave that for another discussion). Anyway, technique does require technique True of T-hinging, cold mounting, corner mounting or any other framing method to put an overmatt perfectly in position on the image.

cheers,
Mark