mylar vs polypropylene

Robert McGuinness

unread,

Mar 28, 1998, 3:00:00 AM3/28/98

to

I hope that someone will be able to help me. I am in the process of
writing up an exhibit for display and want to protect my pages and
philatelic items. Randy Neil in "The New Philatelic Exhibition Handbook"
suggest the use of mylar page protectors. My local stationery shop
carries Avery Brand page protectors made of polypropylene which they
claim is archival quality. On the back of the Avery box they claim that
the ph is balanced and that paper inserts will not deteriorate. My
question is which is safer or are both equal in ability to protect my
stamps and covers? I would appreciate any information anyone could give
me on this topic.

Laum1

unread,

Mar 29, 1998, 3:00:00 AM3/29/98

to

I believe Mylar is the best. It is very expensive though. However, if cost is
not an issue, buy Mylar.

The polyprolene is also safe. Avery (or K&M, which is now a subsidiary of
them) makes a lightweight and a heavyweight brand. It also comes clear for the
heavy and cloudy for the light. I do not recommend the lightweight brand. It
is flimsy and looks awful. If you buy the heavys, GO TO COSTCO. They are
cheaper than anybody by almost half. 100 heavys is less than $7 and cheaper
than all major office suppliers.

You will also have a problem with the holes in the protector. If you are
mounting the exhibit, they are not going to look good. If you are planning to
cut the holes off, recommend not a traditional paper cutter but one that is
roller blade. This will give you the best and cleanest cut. Regular cutters
will not do a good job.

If you need any more info, email me directly. You can also search under
dejanews for all postings related to this topic for more detail dicussions. I
did this same research about 6 months ago.

Mike

David Hopper

unread,

Mar 29, 1998, 3:00:00 AM3/29/98

to

Robert McGuinness wrote:

> mylar page protectors. My local stationery shop
> carries Avery Brand page protectors made of polypropylene which they
> claim is archival quality. On the back of the Avery box they claim
> that
> the ph is balanced and that paper inserts will not deteriorate.

The world's museums use Mylar. They are smarter and have researched this
more than you and I ever will. Having said that, Mylar is about $1 per
page. Not much really if the stamps are of any real value.

I am constantly amazed at collectors who spend thousands of dollars and
hundreds of hours on their collections and then get scared off by 1$ for
a sheet protector.

Best sources for Mylar are archival conversation suppliers. One I use is
Taylor Made Products in Lima, Ohio.

DWH

Laum1

unread,

Mar 29, 1998, 3:00:00 AM3/29/98

to

Well David, is a function of how many items you have to store. I agree with
you that Mylar is the best. However, if you need to store a couple of thousand
items, then Mylar's high cost will play a role in the decision. Especially
since this is a cost that is almost never recoverable when disposing a
collection.

Also, what do you do with individual covers not mounted on pages? It is
debatable that current cover protectors sold by philatelic supply houses are
archival safe. But can one afford Mylar cover protectors for thousands of
covers. Sometimes you have to take a what is hopefully a small risk and hope
that the manufacturer is telling the truth. Also, I think good air
conditioning helps.

Mike

Randolph Neil

unread,

Mar 29, 1998, 3:00:00 AM3/29/98

to

David Hopper wrote:
>
> Robert McGuinness wrote:
>
> > mylar page protectors. My local stationery shop
> > carries Avery Brand page protectors made of polypropylene which they
> > claim is archival quality. On the back of the Avery box they claim
> > that
> > the ph is balanced and that paper inserts will not deteriorate.
>

> The world's museums use Mylar. They are smarter and have researched this
> more than you and I ever will. Having said that, Mylar is about $1 per
> page. Not much really if the stamps are of any real value.
>
> I am constantly amazed at collectors who spend thousands of dollars and
> hundreds of hours on their collections and then get scared off by 1$ for
> a sheet protector.
>
> Best sources for Mylar are archival conversation suppliers. One I use is
> Taylor Made Products in Lima, Ohio.
>
> DWH

Taylor Made is in Lima, PA, not Ohio. POB 407, Zip 19037. You might
write for their price lists. Bear in mind that, even though Avery and
others advertise PPL products that are *safe*---the only substance used
and recommended by the Library of Congress is Mylar D. To my knowledge,
Tuck Taylor has the only company in the hobby that offers it.

David Hopper

unread,

Mar 30, 1998, 3:00:00 AM3/30/98

to

Laum1 wrote:

> Well David, is a function of how many items you have to store. I
> agree with
> you that Mylar is the best. However, if you need to store a couple of
> thousand
> items, then Mylar's high cost will play a role in the decision.
> Especially
> since this is a cost that is almost never recoverable when disposing a
>
> collection.

I agree you never recover the cost of the protectors, but will they over
the course of 20 to 50 years result in $1 less deterioration??

> Also, what do you do with individual covers not mounted on pages?

Buy Mylar cover protectors, orbuy archival boxes (fancy shoe boxes) and
store in those.

> Also, I think good air conditioning helps.

There is absolutely that climate control is very important. I collect
Australian States and Papua. You should see what a few years in the
tropics can do to stuff!!

DWH

David Hopper

unread,

Mar 30, 1998, 3:00:00 AM3/30/98

to

Randolph Neil wrote:

> Taylor Made is in Lima, PA, not Ohio. POB 407, Zip 19037. You might
> write for their price lists. Bear in mind that, even though Avery and
> others advertise PPL products that are *safe*---the only substance
> used
> and recommended by the Library of Congress is Mylar D. To my
> knowledge,
> Tuck Taylor has the only company in the hobby that offers it.

Tuck Taylor is not the only supplier. There are several other such as
Light Impressions in Rochester, Arcival Conservation Resources in
Washington DC and Ottawa, etc.

Tuck is however my preferred supplier for service and responsiveness.

DWH

Alan L. Stone

unread,

Apr 3, 1998, 3:00:00 AM4/3/98

to Robert_M...@bc.sympatico.ca

> I hope that someone will be able to help me. I am in the process of
> writing up an exhibit for display and want to protect my pages and
> philatelic items. Randy Neil in "The New Philatelic Exhibition Handbook"

> suggest the use of mylar page protectors. My local stationery shop

> carries Avery Brand page protectors made of polypropylene which they
> claim is archival quality. On the back of the Avery box they claim that

> the ph is balanced and that paper inserts will not deteriorate. My
> question is which is safer or are both equal in ability to protect my
> stamps and covers? I would appreciate any information anyone could give
> me on this topic.

Mylar is clearly superior to PPP or PET. I use Mylars
to protect my valuable comic books. The US Archives
use it to protect their materials as well. It has been
thoroughly tested and is the most inert. It doesn't
brake down over time like PPP or PET through exposure
to sunlight, pollution, humidity, or even acid from
fingertips. Mylars are much more expenisive, at least
ten times the cost, but you will never have to replace
them in your lifetime.

cheers, alan

Tonka USA

unread,

Apr 4, 1998, 3:00:00 AM4/4/98

to

Does anyone know what Lighthouse used in their Hingeless albums??

Robert McGuinness (Mr....@netcom.ca) wrote:
: I hope that someone will be able to help me. I am in the process of

David Lee

unread,

Apr 6, 1998, 3:00:00 AM4/6/98

to

In rec.collecting.stamps, Robert McGuinness <Mr....@netcom.ca> writes:
>I hope that someone will be able to help me. I am in the process of
>writing up an exhibit for display and want to protect my pages and
>philatelic items. Randy Neil in "The New Philatelic Exhibition Handbook"
>suggest the use of mylar page protectors. My local stationery shop
>carries Avery Brand page protectors made of polypropylene which they
>claim is archival quality. On the back of the Avery box they claim that
>the ph is balanced and that paper inserts will not deteriorate. My
>question is which is safer or are both equal in ability to protect my
>stamps and covers? I would appreciate any information anyone could give
>me on this topic.

Mylar is a trade name for DuPont's brand brand of polyester.. It
is safe as it is an inert plastic with no plasticizers. Plasticizers
are chemicals used in plastic manufacturing to increase flexibility;
however, it also will "outgas" over time and react as a solvent with
the inks.. Avoid any plastics made with polyvinylchloride (PVC) or
polystyrene based plastics. Look for polyester, polyethylene, polypropylene
and triacetate material.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.....

ga...@teleport.com

unread,

Apr 10, 1998, 3:00:00 AM4/10/98

to David Lee

Wouldn't this rule out all of Lindner's products?

Herb Ashendorf

unread,

Apr 10, 1998, 3:00:00 AM4/10/98

to

There is an excellent but brief article in the American Philatelist,
page 322, of the April (current) issue. It also gives further sources
for research.
You might also contact the Chicago Philatelic Society. They are in the
midst of publishing the results of some very extensive research they
have been doing. A number of reports have been issued.

Frank Schlattner

unread,

Apr 11, 1998, 3:00:00 AM4/11/98

to

David,

DL> Mylar is a trade name for DuPont's brand brand of polyester..
It is
DL> safe as it is an inert plastic with no plasticizers. Plasticizers
are
DL> chemicals used in plastic manufacturing to increase flexibility;
DL> however, it also will "outgas" over time and react as a solvent
with
DL> the inks.. Avoid any plastics made with polyvinylchloride (PVC) or

There are two types of PVC available: with and without chemical
softeners. The soft pvc (with chemical softener) should be avoided.
But the hard type is one of the best choices for stamps.

Frank

-------------------------------
Frank Schlattner
2:2471/1071.101
sch...@gmx.de