Digital BW, The Print

Hey Jerry ,
Good Post! 
John is correct that plastics have UV in them and they need it.. A further thought on this .. Plastics over time degrade and the UV additive in it along with it.. That is not the case with glass. I'm sure over a totally different time element it also deteriorates. The issue I have with spraying a print directly is that will certainly be the minimal life span of a UV potential..
The comment regarding the mats is oh so true..  The will loose their whiteness or color typically quicker then a print and also without the glass over them will change shape or warp. Possibly no mats are used in the original posters scenario.. I typically use them.. for me as soon as dust would start to settle on the job it would be over as the cut edge of the mat would be subject to it also.. I like using glass and occasionally acrylic if the job is large. Admittedly I'm probably more traditional in my logic.. In the gallery area of the studio we have quite a few image on display.. The studio is quite tight but they all still get dusty.. 
I still contend that a great experience is simply to go to a place that one can visually experience the various coatings on art.. It is truly worth the effort.. The higher end material sare options here and are typically used to solve a display issue with reflectance but at a substantial price.. 

I am curious about laminating to accomplish this .. might be worth a try. Still doesn't deal with the mat though.

jimbo


  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: jerryhadam 
  To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 6:55 AM
  Subject: [Digital BW] Re: no glass vs. glass vs. plexi: which shows carbon print at its best?


    


  --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "john castronovo" <jc@...> wrote:
  >
  > The dirty little secret I heard is that ALL plastics have some u.v. 
  > filtering, more so to protect the plastic itself from breaking down than 
  > to protect what's behind it. Acrylite (and I suppose Plexi and others) 
  > in the normal grades filter a good deal of u.v., possibly over 80%, but 
  > the more exotic museum grades filter as much as 98% but for a high price 

  Some good info in here. I am not up on NMs Ernst and didn't actually go into that article. What my glass reps have told me ( I am a custom framer, gallery and photographer- http://saddletreegallery.com/ ) since I carry mostly Tru View I will reference that: 
  Premium Clear is "regular" glass and filters about 35% of UVA UVB from hitting your artwork. 

  Conservation Clear is available in regular and Non Glare finishes and filters at about 98.5 % rate. 

  Museum Glass is around 99 percent. 

  Jimbo - acrylic also comes in the "museum" coatings, and is known as Optium. It is easier to clean than the glass but nearly twice as expensive. Full sheets at wholesale are over a $1,000. So jimbo is right be prepared for sticker shock if you are looking into that. 

  One misnomer is that Museum coating eliminate reflections. They do not. They minimize to the point on not being easily seen. I have framed hundreds of pieces with museum glass and Optium. To prevent customer disappointment, I have a framed sample that I encourage them to take home and hang to show how well it works, but also to show that it will reflect some and to make sure that is acceptable. 

  Rule of thumb in framing is paper goes under glass. I have been using a Bienfang UV rated laminating product on a lot of my own photography and people really seem to like not having to deal with glass and reflections. 

  If you have your print coated with ArtShield or similar, I would think the degradation and dirtying of the mat would be as big of issue as the print. If I have coated a print I don't have any trouble dusting it. And it will need it. Once a white mat has dust on it, it's almost impossible to clean. Almost all mats that I have seen that aren't under glass will warp over time. Less so in the 8 ply. 

  That's all I have. 



  

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]