Digital BW, The Print

Can anyone explain the difference?

On 07/24/2011 07:16 PM, Lew Schwartz wrote:
> Can anyone explain the difference?
>

The lowest quality acrylic sheets are made in an extrusion process from 
molten acrylic pellets and will show stria in the sheet, less even 
surfaces, etc if compared to cast acrylic sheets. The last produced as 
in mold (between glass) polymerised acrylic that is considered the best 
optical quality plastic available. Styrene transparent sheets are always 
produced as an extrusion directly from molten styrene pellets.With 
polystyrene the optical effects are worse and its surface will scratch 
faster. Polystyrene will yellow in time and usually its optical quality 
is also reduced if it has to have more impact strength by adding other 
components. For example the ABS qualities. There are copolymeres of 
styrene and acrylic but they still do not deliver the quality of cast PMMA.

-- 
Met vriendelijke groeten,   Ernst

Try: http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/

|      Dinkla Grafische Techniek      |
|         www.pigment-print.com        |
|                 ( unvollendet )                 |

Are they vaporous in any way, with possible effects on traditional
photographic or inkjet prints?

On Sun, Jul 24, 2011 at 3:14 PM, Ernst Dinkla <edinkla@...>wrote:

> **
>
>
> On 07/24/2011 07:16 PM, Lew Schwartz wrote:
> > Can anyone explain the difference?
> >
>
> The lowest quality acrylic sheets are made in an extrusion process from
> molten acrylic pellets and will show stria in the sheet, less even
> surfaces, etc if compared to cast acrylic sheets. The last produced as
> in mold (between glass) polymerised acrylic that is considered the best
> optical quality plastic available. Styrene transparent sheets are always
> produced as an extrusion directly from molten styrene pellets.With
> polystyrene the optical effects are worse and its surface will scratch
> faster. Polystyrene will yellow in time and usually its optical quality
> is also reduced if it has to have more impact strength by adding other
> components. For example the ABS qualities. There are copolymeres of
> styrene and acrylic but they still do not deliver the quality of cast PMMA.
>
> --
> Met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst
>
> Try: http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/
>
> | Dinkla Grafische Techniek |
> | www.pigment-print.com |
> | ( unvollendet ) |
>
>  
>


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

On 07/25/2011 12:19 PM, Lew Schwartz wrote:
> Are they vaporous in any way, with possible effects on traditional
> photographic or inkjet prints?

Hard to say, depends much on the quality grades I guess. Check the 
polystyrene heatlth aspects on Wiki. It is used for food packaging. 
Styrene does not decompose fast so that is positive. Plasticiser could 
migrate. The other way around; an inkjet print could contain glycols, 
alcohols and glycerine after printing (the outgassing issue) that could 
be more a problem for polystyrene than for glass and acrylic as it is 
not inert to solvents and the fluids mentioned are mild solvents.


-- 
Met vriendelijke groeten,   Ernst

Try: http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/

|      Dinkla Grafische Techniek      |
|         www.pigment-print.com        |
|                 ( unvollendet )                 |

Ernst,
Your comments have been very helpful and make sense.. Styrene is also has a 
lower RA value (hardness) so it would be softer.. I would also be concerned 
regarding down the road occasional cleanings.. Windex and similar cleaners 
might harm the surface far more quickly then glass or acrylic.

jimbo
  ----- Original Message ----- 

From: "Ernst Dinkla" <edinkla@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2011 6:35 AM
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Acrylic vs styrene for framing


> On 07/25/2011 12:19 PM, Lew Schwartz wrote:
>> Are they vaporous in any way, with possible effects on traditional
>> photographic or inkjet prints?
>
> Hard to say, depends much on the quality grades I guess. Check the
> polystyrene heatlth aspects on Wiki. It is used for food packaging.
> Styrene does not decompose fast so that is positive. Plasticiser could
> migrate. The other way around; an inkjet print could contain glycols,
> alcohols and glycerine after printing (the outgassing issue) that could
> be more a problem for polystyrene than for glass and acrylic as it is
> not inert to solvents and the fluids mentioned are mild solvents.
>
>
> -- 
> Met vriendelijke groeten,   Ernst
>
> Try: http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/
>
> |      Dinkla Grafische Techniek      |
> |         www.pigment-print.com        |
> |                 ( unvollendet )                 |
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other resources as 
> they are often being updated.
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to 
> unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same 
> page.
>
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep 
> them short.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames. 
> Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from the 
> membership without notice.
> - Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital B&W 
> printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be removed from 
> the membership.
> - By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and 
> guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group Owner 
> and Moderators. See \ufffdGroup Topic, Rules and Guidelines\ufffd in the Files 
> section:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/
>
> BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT 
> YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE \ufffdOWNER\ufffd AND 
> \ufffdMODERATORS\ufffd OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO 
> YOU FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR 
> EXEMPLARY DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF 
> PROFITS, GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF THE 
> \ufffdOWNER\ufffd AND \ufffdMODERATORS\ufffd OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN 
> ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE 
> OR THE INABILITY TO USE THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) 
> UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR ALTERATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) 
> STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT 
> YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE 
> PRINT YAHOO GROUP.
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

You are asking the wrong question here- cast acrylic is optically better, neither plastic is particularly healthy for the print and should always be separated from the print surface by a widow mat, or fillet(spacer) or both - also - both plastics generate static electricity when cleaned/dusted which can if discharged damage the surface of a print - when possible/practical use glass - when plastic must be used be sure to separate it from the print


Berel Lutsky
Associate Professor of Art
UW Manitowoc
920-683-4735

On 07/25/2011 03:39 PM, Lutsky, Berel wrote:
> You are asking the wrong question here- cast acrylic is optically
> better, neither plastic is particularly healthy for the print and
> should always be separated from the print surface by a widow mat, or
> fillet(spacer) or both - also - both plastics generate static
> electricity when cleaned/dusted which can if discharged damage the
> surface of a print - when possible/practical use glass - when plastic
> must be used be sure to separate it from the print
>
>
> Berel Lutsky Associate Professor of Art UW Manitowoc 920-683-4735

While I do see problems with any inkjet print surface in direct contact
with the framing glass: glass, PMMA or PolyCarbonate, I do not think
that PMMA is worse in that case than glass. Actual humidity/condensation 
issues may be worse with glass due to its specific heat capacity. PMMA 
is quite inert and for on that aspect comparable to glass.

Diasec with its silicone based glue is used with all the three 
transparant materials mentioned above. For inkjet prints the contact 
material is the glue itself or an intermediate foil + glue when RC 
material has to be mounted that way.  The last words about Diasec 
mounting and archival + fading properties are not yet said.


-- 
Met vriendelijke groeten,   Ernst

Try: http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/

|      Dinkla Grafische Techniek      |
|         www.pigment-print.com        |
|                 ( unvollendet )                 |

Berel, It is that static charge that I was questioning in the effects that
Mark recently had to deal with. When we mounted cibachromes on sheets of
plastic, we cooked them for a day or so at ??? I forget the temp but I want
to say some where around 125F to 150F with the protective paper barrier
peeled off. Has any of the recent light fast testing been done with plexi in
the mix?  
 
Eric Neilsen
Eric Neilsen Photography
4101 Commerce Street, Suite 9
Dallas, TX 75226
 
www.ericneilsenphotography.com
skype me with ejprinter
www.ericneilsenphotography.com/forum1
Let's Talk Photography
 
  _____  

From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Lutsky,
Berel
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2011 8:39 AM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Acrylic vs styrene for framing
 
  
You are asking the wrong question here- cast acrylic is optically better,
neither plastic is particularly healthy for the print and should always be
separated from the print surface by a widow mat, or fillet(spacer) or both -
also - both plastics generate static electricity when cleaned/dusted which
can if discharged damage the surface of a print - when possible/practical
use glass - when plastic must be used be sure to separate it from the print

Berel Lutsky
Associate Professor of Art
UW Manitowoc
920-683-4735



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

Styrene is very inexpensive low quality glazing. It is often very thin and easy to scratch. Often used in very inexpensive frames such as cheap poster frames. As others have mentioned no glazing should touch the artwork if you are concerned about longevity. Standard acrylic is more optically pure than standard framing glass and much more optically pure then low quality glass, which has even more green tint. UV glass (including Museum glass) and acrylic have a slight yellow tint, which will have a minor warming effect on the print.

Cheers,
Mark
http://www.framedestination.com/
http://www.facebook.com/FrameDestination

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Lew Schwartz <lew1716@...> wrote:

>
> Can anyone explain the difference?
>

On 07/25/2011 04:21 PM, mrgs1001 wrote:
  UV glass (including Museum glass) and acrylic have a slight yellow 
tint, which will have a minor warming effect on the print.
>
> Cheers,
> Mark

Or a lot of warming if the paper depends on FBAs for its white reflectance.

-- 
Met vriendelijke groeten,   Ernst

Try: http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/

|      Dinkla Grafische Techniek      |
|         www.pigment-print.com        |
|                 ( unvollendet )                 |

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Lutsky, Berel" <berel.lutsky@...> wrote:
>
> You are asking the wrong question here- cast acrylic is optically better, neither plastic is particularly healthy for the print and should always be separated from the print surface by a widow mat, or fillet(spacer) or both - also - both plastics generate static electricity when cleaned/dusted which can if discharged damage the surface of a print - when possible/practical use glass - when plastic must be used be sure to separate it from the print


I'm very interested in your conclusion that static discharge can damage a print directly in contact with acrylic. I get the theory, but have you ever actually seen it happen? The primary reason conservators have always recommended that photographs not be placed in direct contact with cover glazings is that in high humidity conditions ferrotyping will occur where the emulsion sticks to the glass. Some inkjet papers will suffer the same fate, so as a general rule the recommendation to use a spacer is a wise general policy to follow. However, some inkjet papers won't suffer this fate, and a borderless-no overmat look can be very aesthetically appealing in this situation. That leaves the issue of static discharge, damaging such prints as an interesting prospect.  I've never seen it occur.  Just wondering if you have actually witnessed this problem or seen examples of it in the real world of inkjet prints on display?

Kind regards,
Mark
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com