Exhibition Quality Prints
Mendoza, Eddie
to pictures that are corner mounted as being "wrinkled."
I mount all of my pics with corner mounts and have never
noticed a problem with wrinkling. That's what the cover
mat is for, to flatten it out. Then when I put it in a frame
the glass presses the cover mat tight against the print so it
is nice and smooth.
Am I missing something here? Or are those references in regards
to another style of mounting?
Orville Clark
Pete Bergstrom
I don't think you're missing anything - every framed-but-non-drymounted
print I've ever seen has been so badly wrinkled that it's a pain to look at
the print.
Personally, I dislike having the overmat touch the print at all.
Pete
kev...@bmd.com
writes:
I have to agree. I have always used corner mounts and the results have been
great.
To each his own I guess...
---
Kevin Solie
Director of Development: benchMark Developments, Inc.
Software Engineer: Tapestry Computing
Tyrus Monson
Its probably appropriate to clarify which types of prints we are
talking about. RC paper, unless creased in handling, will lay
quite flat.
Smaller prints - 4x5 up to 8x10 - may look quite flat with corner mounting
and an over mat.
When you get into larger sizes of prints, it is easy to get
some waviness in the surface once the print is displayed vertically.
(Well, how else are they normally displayed?)
Fiber papers are tricky to dry so that they are really flat, and here
is where people begin to find a big advantage in dry mounting.
Of course, you can try to convince viewers that the waviness is an
integral part of the art.
Now may be the time to begin a thread on how to dry fiber prints
wave & bump free.
Timothy D. Shoppa x4256
>> Now may be the time to begin a thread on how to dry fiber prints
>> wave & bump free.
>>
> fiber prints wave/bump free. Here are two that I use:
>
> 1) A Weighted Blotter Book - The best and most overlooked solution.
> Much more efficient, space-wise than fiberglass screens
> (which I also own and don't use anymore). Prints come
> out without waves or bumps. The only problem that you
> ever have to contend with is curl, which is eliminated
> by the corners and matte during framing.
>
> 2) Heat Print Dryers - These leave you without waves/bumps
> but introduce other problems such as those that are ferrotyping-
> related. In the past I have gotten around those by dipping
> the prints in Edwal LFN wetting agent before placing
> them in the dryer. I don't use mine anymore because Option 1
> is easier and more efficient.
I have found that a very efficient way to dry my double-weight fiber
prints is to just hang them up until almost completely dry, or until
completely dry. At this point they've gotten a good amount of curl
and still have a lot of wrinkles. I then heat up my Seal Dry-Mount
press to 200 F or so, then I sandwich the print between two pieces of
release paper, and press it for a minute. After I take it out
all the wrinkles are gone; Letting the print cool for a minute or
so under a heavy piece of glass prevents it from curling while drying.
Edkirkpat
225 degree dry mount press for about 45 seconds. Cool down the print on
another clean piece of mat board with a heavy metalic cooling press, like
the kind from "Light Impressions".
This works for me every time and with no deleterious effects.
Ed Kirkpatrick
Sterling VA
David Dyer-Bennet
Well, how about wavy? Or at least obviously non-flat. And we're talking
about 16x20 prints here, not 8x10. I've seen various reasonably safe ways of
attaching the print to the backing board (hinges, corners), and all the prints
I'm thinking of had overmats, and glass (well, usually plexi) over that and a
frame holding it all together. I find the prints notably nonflat, and it
bothers me. It doesn't take much nonflatness; light reflections show it up.
--
David Dyer-Bennet Network Systems Corporation
d...@network.com Brooklyn Park, MN +1-612-391-1353
d...@terrabit.mn.org My postings represent at most my own opinions.
Web URL: http://www.mtn.org/~ddb (SF, photography)
PLEXCO
Hey, now there's a good idea! There are many ways to dry
fiber prints wave/bump free. Here are two that I use:
I have found that all methods to "dry" an FB print flat still produce less
than optimum results, and invite dry mounting. What I do -- seeing as I
have a dry mount press -- is to dry the prints on screens, and then later
press them one by one in my dry mount press at 250 degrees between two
sheets of archival mount board for about 45 seconds each. As each print
comes out of the press, and is replaced by another, I place it in an
enlarging easel to hold it flat while it quickly cools, to then be
replaced by the next print in line, etc. The results are as flat as if dry
mounted, and sometimes the effect is as though you had never really seen
the print properly before. I have had no ill effects with this method, and
I find it the best of both worlds -- dry mounting and leaving the print
unmounted.
Tyrus Monson
Just a little hint for those who don't have a mounting press:
After washing, squeegee the print free of all drops of water. A residual
pool of water, or a collection of drops, will cause locally slower
drying. A wrinkle will result, even if the print is kept pressed flat
between sheets of absorbant blotting paper during drying.
John Camp
>
>One method which I have never seen referred to anywhere else was taught
>to me by an artist friend of mine. The method involves taping the
>print onto a flat smooth surface (plywood painted with glossy paint
>works just fine) while still wet. The tape used is a wide paper tape
>with water-soluble glue, and it must be at least 2.5 cm wide. The
>print is taped down on all four sides, and since the strain on the
>tape is considerable while drying, care must be taken to attach the
>tape evenly and firmly. The paper shrinks slightly when drying, so
>the tape causes the print to be stretched evenly in all directions.
>When the print is dry, the tape is cut (using a sharp knife) along
>the edges of the print, and you have a beautiful, permanently flat
>print. The main disadvantage of this method is that about 1 to 1.5 cm
>along each edge of the print is permanently marked by the tape,
>and must either be trimmed off or covered by a mat. The main problems
>that I have had using this method is keeping the drying surface clean
>and even (getting the remains of paper tape off it is not always easy)
>and getting hold of a suitable type of tape. A big advantage is that
>you don't have let anything touch the print surface, so there is no
>danger of damaging the print itself, mechanically or chemically.
>
>--
>Helge Nareid - Nordmann i utlendighet
>Optical Engineering Lab., RIKEN, Wako, Saitama 351-01, Japan
>E-mail: nar...@optsun.riken.go.jp
>WWW: http://optsun.riken.go.jp/nareid/home.html
It never occurred to me that this might work on photographs, but it is a common
way of making perfectly flat and very taut water color paper -- you stretch it
either on a board, as above, or using ordinarily artist's painting stretchers.
When using the stretchers, you fold the watercolor paper over the edges of
the stretchers, and then hold it in place not with tape, but with thumb tacks or
push pins. The tape or pins must provide a firm grip, because the shrinking
paper produces an unbelievably powerful pull. When dry, the paper
is as taut and flat as a tamborine. Photo print paper might
shrink less, and I wonder if using push pins might not work without folding the
edges. If it did work, you might be able to use a lot of pins, none more than
1/8 inch from the edge of the paper, so that the hole-y (it that a word?) margin
could be trimmed later. If this could be made to work, it would provide a very
flat un-chemically-treated air dried print...
(One problem of using tape and board is that sometimes the boards dry
unevenly...with artist stretchers, you'd have a print with air on both sides.)
JC