de-glueing a photo

[Rik]

Hi,
i have photo which i believe to be a fiber based paper. its glued to a soft board kind of material. i would like to de-glue it. (not sure if this is correct english...)
i only have one chance at this, as this is the only copy i have.
any suggestions/proven technology for this?
i tried to get between the photo and the board with a thin knife, but that won't work. it will destroy the photo.
i want to have it off the board because i want to see if anything is written on the back, and more importantly i want to matt/mount it properly.
thanks for your help
Rik
The Netherlands

 

[Claire Senft]

It may be dry mounted. If it is then using an iron, or putting it into you oven if it will fit and heating to 300ºF will melt the tissue. The coners will lift away from the mount and the print can be stripped easily from the mount. Careful not to scorch your fingers. You can try by using the iron in one corner and seeing if it lifts away. Do not use too high of a heat.

If it is glue then I can give you no advice.

 

[Rik]

hi Claire
it won't fit in the oven, the photo is 13x19 and the board more like 17x23 inch. i'm afraid i dont have an oven that size.
should i apply the iron to the photo or the back of the board? (presume the last...)

 

[Mike Wilde]

Sure you have done this, but shoot a copy neg first?

I was going to head down the same path as the previous post- heat to release adhesive - but if the adhesive then bleeds through the back of the photo because it is old and all/most of the volatile material that might have once been the 'liquid when hot' phase of the glue has morphed itself away, you are 'REALLY STUCK'.

So shoot a copy of the photo. In the northern hemisphere - shoot with the light of a north window on a cloudy day will assure a pretty even light if there is no copy stand/lights available to you. Do your best to use a slow speed film, f/8 or so, meter on a gray card, get square to the artwork, don't cast a shadow on it, etc...

 

[User Removed]

Whosever photograph it is, they probably did not write anything on the back of the photograph itself. They would have written any information on the back of the mount.

When a photograph is drymounted to a mount board, the mount board becomes part of the photograph and should be treated as part of the photograph.

I would suggest leaving it on its original mount and corner mounting it into a holding mat. You risk damaging the photograph and mount by doing something stupid like putting it into your oven...that is not the proper way to do it (and a knife is surly not the way either).

Why is this photography so important to be removed from the mount?

 

[removed account4]

i never dry mount ... if i need to glue something i use wheat paste or rice paste. it releases in water.

i wouldn't bother removing the photograph from your mount. ryan is right, if the photographer had anything to write s/he would have written it on the back of the mount.

 

[bdial]

Don't do it!
As stated before, it is most likely dry mounted. Having done it before, I'd only attempt removal if I had access to a proper dry mount press, and then only on a print I could afford to damage. I've only done this on newly mounted prints, for something that has been in place for perhaps years, it would be a very risky proposition.
On the other hand, if it really is glued, with something like common white glue, soaking might loosen the glue enough to peel off the print. Though the risk of damage is much less, it would be very messy, and you would still have substantial risk of damage. It likely would require a great deal of soaking, and doing so would risk softening the image enough that it could come off the paper.
IMHO, it would only be worthwhile if you knew there was writing, and it was very important to read it.
If it really is vital to remove the print, my advice would be to take it to a museum conservator, and pay them whatever they ask.

 

[User Removed]

Watch this guy have like, an original print of Pepper #30 by Edward Weston or something. HAHAHA!

 

[Rik]

Watch this guy have like, an original print of Pepper #30 by Edward Weston or something. HAHAHA!

I'm sorry but i don't see the point of this remark? I just asked a question on a technical matter. Whether this relates to a $100.000 or $5 print i think is not really the issue?

 

[Rik]

thanks for the serious answers, i'll forget about the idea and just enjoy it as is !

 

[User Removed]

I was just making a joke Rik, thats all.