Digital BW, The Print

I echo jimbo's comment. We don't know what we're talking about until the original poster gives us more details.

If the paper is heavy, like the papers commonly used on this forum, I have matted heavyweight stock without adhesives and not seen any buckling. I simply tape the top of the print to the window, and let it float with a back matte attached to the front one to keep it tight. This I was taught by my local framer, since retired. 

However, I have seen prints done in Wallmart for instance, using very thin photographic paper, which must be kept flat in some manner, or they will get very wavy in the matte. I have seen a Club exhibition of some thirty prints with this showing, and they were done "professionally" by a local Camera store that was a major sponsor. I have a print done on one of those Kodak machines which is toast because the print got a wave that touched the glass and that spot lost its gloss.

It is true there are issues with drymounting but in the case I cited above, what else can we do?

Leslie Otterbein


On 2011-10-26, at 7:34 AM, mrjimbo wrote:

> David
> Something is missing for me on this thread.. We don't know what material the images are printed on. Maybe I missed it... If it was a fine art paper then yes they should not be mounted as they were.. If, however , they are a photographic type material is deemed acceptable to mount them to a substrate.. That last remark being said.. Epson has come out with a couple of newer papers that have defied most of the traditional mounting methods.. I have been at public displays where an artist was literally in tears due this ...Image puckers from delamming ...Anyway I was part of a test group sometime ago working with Seal to better understand what adhesive films were causing issues and which were proper to get past the issues.. We got there..There are still many framers that are doing it the old way and scrapping prints. Anyway, If the prints are mounted and this occurs typically they are scrap.. There are a few adhesive films that can be "undone" when ran back thru the heat cycle but generally the print is damaged in the process. So does anyone know what the prints were ran on?
> 
> jimbo
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: David Kachel 
> To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com 
> Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2011 8:08 AM
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] adhesion of print to mat
> 
> >>> Thanks for the quick response. Also thanks for the info. about NOT
> adhesiving a print to a mat, I kind of thought it shouldn't be done that way.
> I'm going to take the print(s) back to the framer and show him the outcome.
> Maybe he can straighten this out, these prints were special and I hate to
> give/sell anyone "crappy" work.
> 
> BEFORE you take them back, look to see how it was done. Your prints may be
> permanently damaged. You need to know exactly what has happened before you
> give the framer an opportunity to hide his mistake or do even more damage.
> If he in fact ruined your prints, he absolutely WILL NOT know what if
> anything can be done to rectify it.
> 
> David Kachel
> 
> ___________________
> 
> Artist-Photographer
> Fine B&W Photographs
> 
> www.davidkachel.com
> david@...
> 
> Gallery:
> www.reddoorfinephotographs.com
> director@reddoorfinephotographs.com
> 
> PO Box 1893
> Alpine, TX 79831
> (432) 386-5787
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> 
> 



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