alternatives to dry mount press?

[David A. Goldfarb]

If conservators (in my experience, mostly pretty sober types who work in libraries and museums) decide in a few years that there is an acceptable approach to drymounting, then it will be easy to drymount any hinge mounted images.

While you can release a drymounted image that uses a "reversible" tissue by putting it back in the press, sliding release paper under it, and repeating until you get it all the way off, it's a pain to have to do it often, and there's always some risk of damaging the print, and in 10 years, when the mount may be, say, discolored from humidity or some other storage or display condition, you or the owner of the print might not know what kind of tissue was used.

The APUG Traveling Portfolio is a non-scientific but interesting real world test of what can happen to prints when they are shipped 20 times in a Tenba Port-FedEx shipping case and handled at each stop. Just the vibration between two mats in shipping causes wear that is quite visible, and it isn't too unusual to ship prints this way. I don't know if the prints have ever been removed by a customs inspector, but I suspect they aren't wearing clean white cotton gloves. At my place, we all put on white gloves to handle the prints, but is that happening at every stop? Have you been in a gallery where you've seen patrons handling mounted prints by the mount with their bare hands? We're all people who care about the prints, and the prints usually hold up reasonably well, but not the mounts, so if I include a mounted print in the portfolio, I remount it when it comes back, because the print is likely to be suitable for display, but the mount won't be.

 

[bill schwab]

While it is talked about that dry mounting has fallen out of favor, I don't see it among the galleries I deal with, nor have I seen any problems with collectors concerning the process. In fact, I used to corner mount my images and ended-up getting a lot of concern from some of my collectors about waviness in the paper in humid conditions. I ended up going back to drymounting once again and I have had no complaints since. I also have had a fair amount of purchases for museum collections and have had no problem with curators or conservators concerning my methods.

As for being reversable, it was recommended to me by one conservator to use a low temperature, buffered paper and I have been using the Bielfang BufferMount marketed by Light Impressions as SEAL Buffer Mount. It claims to be completely reversable and after tests I've done, it seems to be true. Delicate work to be sure, but I've screwed up several times in mounting and have been able to save prints by removing the mount and paper. The drawback is the cost... 100 sheets are $140.00

Here is a link that might help which describes this tissue type:

http://unblinkingeye.com/Articles/Archival/Cons/cons.html

Hope this helps.

Bill

 

[bill schwab]

Also, I don;t really like the signature on the mount and not on the print. If the board fails and you separate the print, you separate the signature.

Again with a suggestion. I print my images to a size of 8x8 on an 11 x 14 sheet of paper which leaves plenty of white space. My edition number and Signature go directly under the image on the silver print and I then mount the whole print, not just a trimmed version. When and if the print needs to be removed, the signature and edition number go with it.

Bill

 

[richard littlewood]

I dry mount all my stuff from 5x4" up to 40x30", and it really is the only way to keep FB prints looking good. Here in the north of England we have a climate that can warp a print under glass in a most un-predictable way, and you never know, when a print is displayed/bought it will not end up in a location where warping is extreme. About 5 years ago I gave an un-mounted, framed pic to a relative, I saw it the other day and felt bad! - the buckling of the print was way too much.
On the whole I've found museums more concerned with the mount/mat board than the dry mount tissue, and if a print is to be looked at and displayed throughout its life, and if hanging conditions are not 'museum standard' then dry mounting cant be beaten.

 

[photobackpacker]

Having drymounted with Seal tissue for years, I was really irritated that it is no longer being manufactured.

Has Seal discontinued one of its tissues? I use the Seal Colormount on my FB papers and it appears to be readily available. I am getting gunshy about dincontinued products.

 

[reellis67]

One of the issues that has come up just recently in regard to dry mounted images is how to save the work when the mount is damaged. In the wake of Katrina, many images have been lost in collections in Louisiana because the mounts were damaged by water, mud, pollutants, wastes, etc. Even though the print might have only needed a careful cleaning, the mount could not be cleaned or removed from the print. I have also seen some prints that were torn apart when the support board got wet and pulled on part of the wet print unevenly, while others were torn when the supports dried unevenly or adhered to a surface.

I don't think that the shift of thought on dry mounting has to do with making the lives of conservators easier as much as it has to do with unforseen happenings to works of art like mishandling, poor storage, misrepresentation of products by manufacturers, and other factors that may be out the influence of the creator of the image but that affect the long term ability to protect the work. And, as stated above, ideas change frequently so what is popular today may not continue to be popular next year.

- Randy

 

[Lee Shively]

Some provisions also have to be made for space. I can store 50 unmounted photographs printed on 11x14 photo paper in a relatively small box. Fifty prints mounted on 16x20 boards take up a lot more space.

 

[User Removed]

Like I said before, the mount of a print should be handled and cared for in the same way that a loose print is. I have several old Adams prints that are in perfect condition because the print was cared for properly. If your matted prints are having foxed corners, spots and stains, bends, or anything of the sorts....just learn to care for your artwork better.

As for storage, yes...loose prints take up less space then matted prints clearly. However, you can store TWICE the number of prints if you use 2ply mat, rather then 4ply. You can also mat to smaller sizes and purchase portfolio cases where the prints can be stored flat.

 

[Mongo]

To get back to Daniel's question...as a couple of people have mentioned, your problem is most likely that the iron is too hot. I used to do my dry-mounting with an iron (used only for this purpose), set at the low end of medium, with a piece of hot pressed watercolor paper between the iron and the photograph. Working slowly from the center outward, I was able to mount prints quite well. The problem was that it took too long, and I had to work throughout the entire process (which just isn't any fun).

My second solution (similar to the marble cutting board method mentioned above) was to get two marble floor tiles, 12" x 12" (for $1 on closeout at the hardware store), and heat them over a pan on the stove. No water...just use the pan to keep the marble off of the fire by balancing the tiles on the top of the pan. (Don't use a pan that you want to cook with for this, as you will destroy any non-stick surface by overheating it, and you will eventually scrape the pan with a tile that slips from your hand...it will happen.) Place the two tiles with their flat sides together atop the pan, heat for about five-ten minutes, then remove the tiles from the pan (very large, heavy oven mits are needed for this!), place a sandwich of watercolor paper, backing board, dry-mount paper, photograph, and another piece of watercolor paper between the stones, then set them aside for a few hours. The stones are probably too hot when they start out, but by allowing the whole stack to cool without moving, you'll get your picture mounted very well. The downside here, again, is time. But at least you don't have to work an iron over the prints...less effort.

My final solution was to get a press off of eBay. I got lucky by finding one that was in some strange category, and the sellers knew how to use DHL to move heavy things around. Shipping only set me back $25 or so, and I got the press for the opening bid...I think the entire thing cost me $105. Patience is your best friend on eBay.

 

[Marco S.]

Don't use a pan that you want to cook with for this, as you will destroy any non-stick surface by overheating it, and you will eventually scrape the pan with a tile that slips from your hand...it will happen.

Please don't use a Teflon or any type of non-stick coated pan when doing this. Teflon will release toxic fumes when overheated, enough to kill pet birds and possibly make you ill.

 

[Pastiche]

anyone have any idea on how to flatten prints w/o a hot press????
Maybe the two hot rocks method??? . . . yah. . I'll be in the market for a press soon as well.. I can see..