Digital BW, The Print

Tom,

You wrote:

>Given all the negatives associated with coatings, does anyone EVER
>use the museum glass (I think this is the correct terminology) as an
>alternative when framing photographs? ...

I have been considering the issue and decided to use standard acrylic for
most of my framing.  The main reasons are that glass tends to get broken and
has too much color.

In researching the information I've found that standard glass absorbs a
little less than 50% of the UV.  Acrylic absorbs more than 60%.  The UV
absorbing glass and acrylic absorb 97%.  However, since I already have UV
absorbing glass in my home, and I use incandescent spots for most picture
lighting, I don't think UV is a major issue for me.  Visible light,
especially blue light, causes damage also.  So, even UV glass or acrylic
will not protect against strong sunlight.

The main disadvantage to acrylic is the scratching.  There is now a
scratch-resistant silicone coating that some acrylic has.

In standard form the acrylic is slightly more expensive than glass, but in
UV form the glass is apparently much more expensive.  I didn't find any
readily available source of UV glass that was appropriate.

Here are the prices for 22x28 inch acrylic that I use for my framed 16x20
prints.

Light Impressions:  $39 for Acrylite OP-3 UV acrylic; $50 for the scratch
resistant "AR OP-3."

My Los Angeles supplier (Solter on Pico in West L.A.): $9.36 for standard
acrylic; $23.44 for Acrylite OP-3 UV acrylic.

Standard acrylic from other sources can be over $20 for a 22x28 piece -- so,
shop around.  The best internet prices I found were at
www.pictureframe-usa.com.  However, my L.A. supplier is cheaper.

So, for my uses, the $9 standard acrylic for a 22x28 will do just fine.  But
if someone wants to pay big bucks for the ultimate protection, the Light
Impressions $50 AR OP-3 is the ticket.

Paul
http://www.PaulRoark.com

I also use standard acrylic for all my photos.  I started at places like TAP
Plastics that had very high prices.  I eventually found a wholesale
suppier of all kinds of plastics.  The last time I went there I bought 2
51x100 inch sheets.  They cut them up into 8 22x28's and 8 20x24's for free.
Total cost: $102.   So yes it really pays to shop around.

Roy

> 
> Here are the prices for 22x28 inch acrylic that I use for my framed 16x20
> prints.
> 
> Light Impressions:  $39 for Acrylite OP-3 UV acrylic; $50 for the scratch
> resistant "AR OP-3."
> 
> My Los Angeles supplier (Solter on Pico in West L.A.): $9.36 for standard
> acrylic; $23.44 for Acrylite OP-3 UV acrylic.
> 
> Standard acrylic from other sources can be over $20 for a 22x28 piece -- so,
> shop around.  The best internet prices I found were at
> www.pictureframe-usa.com.  However, my L.A. supplier is cheaper.
> 
> So, for my uses, the $9 standard acrylic for a 22x28 will do just fine.  But
> if someone wants to pay big bucks for the ultimate protection, the Light
> Impressions $50 AR OP-3 is the ticket.
> 
> Paul
> http://www.PaulRoark.com

Roy, 

where are you getting your acrylic? Those are great prices...please 
share...

Gregory Schern
Inkjet Goodies
www.inkjetgoodies.com
info@...

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "royvharrington" <roy@h...> 
wrote:
> 
> I also use standard acrylic for all my photos.  I started at places 
like TAP
> Plastics that had very high prices.  I eventually found a wholesale
> suppier of all kinds of plastics.  The last time I went there I 
bought 2
> 51x100 inch sheets.  They cut them up into 8 22x28's and 8 20x24's 
for free.
> Total cost: $102.   So yes it really pays to shop around.
> 
> Roy
>  
> > 
> > Here are the prices for 22x28 inch acrylic that I use for my 
framed 16x20
> > prints.
> > 
> > Light Impressions:  $39 for Acrylite OP-3 UV acrylic; $50 for the 
scratch
> > resistant "AR OP-3."
> > 
> > My Los Angeles supplier (Solter on Pico in West L.A.): $9.36 for 
standard
> > acrylic; $23.44 for Acrylite OP-3 UV acrylic.
> > 
> > Standard acrylic from other sources can be over $20 for a 22x28 
piece -- so,
> > shop around.  The best internet prices I found were at
> > www.pictureframe-usa.com.  However, my L.A. supplier is cheaper.
> > 
> > So, for my uses, the $9 standard acrylic for a 22x28 will do just 
fine.  But
> > if someone wants to pay big bucks for the ultimate protection, 
the Light

> > Impressions $50 AR OP-3 is the ticket.
> > 
> > Paul
> > http://www.PaulRoark.com

Hi Roy,

Would you please let us know how to contact this supplier.  Is 
there a website?  Thanks,

Tom Andrews
www.wildlandart.com

> 
> I also use standard acrylic for all my photos.  I started at places 
like TAP
> Plastics that had very high prices.  I eventually found a 
wholesale
> suppier of all kinds of plastics.  The last time I went there I 
bought 2
> 51x100 inch sheets.  They cut them up into 8 22x28's and 8 
20x24's for free.
> Total cost: $102.   So yes it really pays to shop around.
> 
> Roy
>  
> > 
> > Here are the prices for 22x28 inch acrylic that I use for my 
framed 16x20
> > prints.
> > 
> > Light Impressions:  $39 for Acrylite OP-3 UV acrylic; $50 for 
the scratch
> > resistant "AR OP-3."
> > 
> > My Los Angeles supplier (Solter on Pico in West L.A.): $9.36 
for standard
> > acrylic; $23.44 for Acrylite OP-3 UV acrylic.
> > 
> > Standard acrylic from other sources can be over $20 for a 
22x28 piece -- so,
> > shop around.  The best internet prices I found were at
> > www.pictureframe-usa.com.  However, my L.A. supplier is 
cheaper.
> > 
> > So, for my uses, the $9 standard acrylic for a 22x28 will do 
just fine.  But
> > if someone wants to pay big bucks for the ultimate protection, 
the Light

> > Impressions $50 AR OP-3 is the ticket.
> > 
> > Paul
> > http://www.PaulRoark.com

The place is Laird Plastics.  I'm in Northern California so I went to the one
in San Jose, CA.  There does seem to be a website  http://www.lairdplastics.com/
and there are other locations.  Looking on their website, the prices seem to
be somewhat higher but I don't know why.

I went directly there with the plan to buy big sheets and cut them up myself.
When I explained what I was doing and that it would be nice to fit them in
my car, they said they'd be glad to just cut them to size.  So I don't really
know if the cutting was a special favor or standard practice.  But in any case
the acrylic was about $51 for a 51x100 sheet last October.  
BTW, its Lucite L Cast Acrylic with a paper cover.

Roy

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "gschern" <gschern@y...> wrote:

> Roy, 
> 
> where are you getting your acrylic? Those are great prices...please 
> share...
> 
> Gregory Schern
> Inkjet Goodies
> www.inkjetgoodies.com
> info@i...
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "royvharrington" <roy@h...> 
> wrote:
> > 
> > I also use standard acrylic for all my photos.  I started at places 
> like TAP
> > Plastics that had very high prices.  I eventually found a wholesale
> > suppier of all kinds of plastics.  The last time I went there I 
> bought 2
> > 51x100 inch sheets.  They cut them up into 8 22x28's and 8 20x24's 
> for free.
> > Total cost: $102.   So yes it really pays to shop around.
> > 
> > Roy
> >

Paul, thanks for all the information. You're an amazing resource.

I just did a little checking and realized I should have been asking about
"museum quality glass" since "Museum Glass" is the Tru Vue brand name for
their top-of-the-line glass. Denn Glass is another of these top-tier glass
products apparently.

In your comments, when you refer to UV glass, are you referring to the
standard UV glass or the museum quality glass products that are coated to
both reduce glare and protect against UV?

Paul (and Roy), the Tru Vue site indicates their Museum Glass does not
require a special cleaner. Is the same true for the acrylics you are using?

If price were not an issue, would you still choose to use the acrylic
products?

Thanks for your input.

Tom

   Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 10:02:34 -0700

   From: "Paul Roark" <paul.roark@...>
Subject: Re: Coating revisited -- Acrylic/glass prices

I have been considering the issue and decided to use standard acrylic for
most of my framing.  The main reasons are that glass tends to get broken and
has too much color.

<snip>

The main disadvantage to acrylic is the scratching.  There is now a
scratch-resistant silicone coating that some acrylic has.

In standard form the acrylic is slightly more expensive than glass, but in
UV form the glass is apparently much more expensive.  I didn't find any
readily available source of UV glass that was appropriate.

Here are the prices for 22x28 inch acrylic that I use for my framed 16x20
prints.

Light Impressions:  $39 for Acrylite OP-3 UV acrylic; $50 for the scratch
resistant "AR OP-3."

My Los Angeles supplier (Solter on Pico in West L.A.): $9.36 for standard
acrylic; $23.44 for Acrylite OP-3 UV acrylic.

Standard acrylic from other sources can be over $20 for a 22x28 piece -- so,
shop around.  The best internet prices I found were at
www.pictureframe-usa.com.  However, my L.A. supplier is cheaper.

So, for my uses, the $9 standard acrylic for a 22x28 will do just fine.  But
if someone wants to pay big bucks for the ultimate protection, the Light
Impressions $50 AR OP-3 is the ticket.

Paul
http://www.PaulRoark.com




Message: 17
   Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 20:13:30 -0000
   From: "royvharrington" <roy@...>
Subject: Re: Coating revisited -- Acrylic/glass prices


I also use standard acrylic for all my photos.  I started at places like TAP
Plastics that had very high prices.  I eventually found a wholesale
suppier of all kinds of plastics.  The last time I went there I bought 2
51x100 inch sheets.  They cut them up into 8 22x28's and 8 20x24's for free.
Total cost: $102.   So yes it really pays to shop around.

Roy

Hi!,

Does anyone know good sources (websites preferred) for Denn Glass, 
TruVue Museum Glass, and any other good UV resistant museum quality 
glass for framing?  Many thanks!

Tom Andrews
www.wildlandart.com


> Paul, thanks for all the information. You're an amazing resource.
> 
> I just did a little checking and realized I should have been asking about
> "museum quality glass" since "Museum Glass" is the Tru Vue brand name 
for
> their top-of-the-line glass. Denn Glass is another of these top-tier glass
> products apparently.
> 
> In your comments, when you refer to UV glass, are you referring to the
> standard UV glass or the museum quality glass products that are coated to
> both reduce glare and protect against UV?
> 
> Paul (and Roy), the Tru Vue site indicates their Museum Glass does not
> require a special cleaner. Is the same true for the acrylics you are using?
> 
> If price were not an issue, would you still choose to use the acrylic
> products?
> 
> Thanks for your input.
> 
> Tom
> 
>    Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 10:02:34 -0700
>    From: "Paul Roark" <paul.roark@v...>
> Subject: Re: Coating revisited -- Acrylic/glass prices
> 
> I have been considering the issue and decided to use standard acrylic for
> most of my framing.  The main reasons are that glass tends to get broken 
and
> has too much color.
> 
> <snip>
> 
> The main disadvantage to acrylic is the scratching.  There is now a
> scratch-resistant silicone coating that some acrylic has.
> 
> In standard form the acrylic is slightly more expensive than glass, but in
> UV form the glass is apparently much more expensive.  I didn't find any
> readily available source of UV glass that was appropriate.
> 
> Here are the prices for 22x28 inch acrylic that I use for my framed 16x20
> prints.
> 
> Light Impressions:  $39 for Acrylite OP-3 UV acrylic; $50 for the scratch
> resistant "AR OP-3."
> 
> My Los Angeles supplier (Solter on Pico in West L.A.): $9.36 for standard
> acrylic; $23.44 for Acrylite OP-3 UV acrylic.
> 
> Standard acrylic from other sources can be over $20 for a 22x28 piece -- 
so,
> shop around.  The best internet prices I found were at
> www.pictureframe-usa.com.  However, my L.A. supplier is cheaper.
> 
> So, for my uses, the $9 standard acrylic for a 22x28 will do just fine.  But
> if someone wants to pay big bucks for the ultimate protection, the Light
> Impressions $50 AR OP-3 is the ticket.
> 
> Paul
> http://www.PaulRoark.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Message: 17
>    Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 20:13:30 -0000
>    From: "royvharrington" <roy@h...>
> Subject: Re: Coating revisited -- Acrylic/glass prices
> 
> 
> I also use standard acrylic for all my photos.  I started at places like TAP
> Plastics that had very high prices.  I eventually found a wholesale
> suppier of all kinds of plastics.  The last time I went there I bought 2
> 51x100 inch sheets.  They cut them up into 8 22x28's and 8 20x24's for 
free.

> Total cost: $102.   So yes it really pays to shop around.
> 
> Roy

Hi group..

don't know exactly how their prices stack up, but a factor will be
shipping costs, so if you can find a local distributor, it would be more advantageous...

This site will give you a list of dealers to look too..

http://www.cyro.com/

Mark MacKinnon

Paul, thanks for all the information. You're an amazing resource.

I just did a little checking and realized I should have been asking about
"museum quality glass" since "Museum Glass" is the Tru Vue brand name for
their top-of-the-line glass. Denn Glass is another of these top-tier glass
products apparently.

In your comments, when you refer to UV glass, are you referring to the
standard UV glass or the museum quality glass products that are coated to
both reduce glare and protect against UV?

Paul (and Roy), the Tru Vue site indicates their Museum Glass does not
require a special cleaner. Is the same true for the acrylics you are using?

If price were not an issue, would you still choose to use the acrylic
products?

Thanks for your input.

Tom

   Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 10:02:34 -0700

   From: "Paul Roark" <paul.roark@...>
Subject: Re: Coating revisited -- Acrylic/glass prices

I have been considering the issue and decided to use standard acrylic for
most of my framing.  The main reasons are that glass tends to get broken and
has too much color.

<snip>

The main disadvantage to acrylic is the scratching.  There is now a
scratch-resistant silicone coating that some acrylic has.

In standard form the acrylic is slightly more expensive than glass, but in
UV form the glass is apparently much more expensive.  I didn't find any
readily available source of UV glass that was appropriate.

Here are the prices for 22x28 inch acrylic that I use for my framed 16x20
prints.

Light Impressions:  $39 for Acrylite OP-3 UV acrylic; $50 for the scratch
resistant "AR OP-3."

My Los Angeles supplier (Solter on Pico in West L.A.): $9.36 for standard
acrylic; $23.44 for Acrylite OP-3 UV acrylic.

Standard acrylic from other sources can be over $20 for a 22x28 piece -- so,
shop around.  The best internet prices I found were at
www.pictureframe-usa.com.  However, my L.A. supplier is cheaper.

So, for my uses, the $9 standard acrylic for a 22x28 will do just fine.  But
if someone wants to pay big bucks for the ultimate protection, the Light
Impressions $50 AR OP-3 is the ticket.

Paul
http://www.PaulRoark.com




Message: 17
   Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 20:13:30 -0000
   From: "royvharrington" <roy@...>
Subject: Re: Coating revisited -- Acrylic/glass prices


I also use standard acrylic for all my photos.  I started at places like TAP
Plastics that had very high prices.  I eventually found a wholesale
suppier of all kinds of plastics.  The last time I went there I bought 2
51x100 inch sheets.  They cut them up into 8 22x28's and 8 20x24's for free.
Total cost: $102.   So yes it really pays to shop around.

Roy