Display glass or not

[Melvin J Bramley]

What are the best options for displaying RC prints and FB prints .
Does either style of paper look better under glass or displayed au naturel?

Does processing technique affect the choices?

Are papers designed to be presented in either way?

 

[MattKing]

I've moved this to the Presentation sub-forum.
I put my matted RC prints behind glass.
Sometimes, I like to share them without the glass - when I'm confident that the people I'm sharing them will handle them carefully.
But they are always matted.
I haven't dry mounted them for years - I use artist's tape to affix them to the backing board.

 

[MurrayMinchin]

When framing FB silver gelatin prints I used acrylic because of its clarity...prints under glass had an icky green cast.

Now doing platinum toned alt process prints on Washi and considering going glazing free. If mounted with traditional Asian techniques, they could be removed and cleaned once a generation or every couple hundred years.

 

[thinkbrown]

I'm certainly not running a gallery, but I do all my prints on RC with a ~1/4" border and have a wall full of 8x10s hanging in basic frames with glass.

 

[brian steinberger]

I would recommend a glass by tru-vue called Ultravue 70. It has 70% UV blocking but also anti reflective properties. It really does have better clarity than regular or conservation clear glass.

99% UV blocking and anti-reflective is available as museum glass and is super expensive.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

I would recommend a glass by tru-vue called Ultravue 70. It has 70% UV blocking but also anti reflective properties. It really does have better clarity than regular or conservation clear glass.

99% UV blocking and anti-reflective is available as museum glass and is super expensive.

You do nice work Brian. People should check your website link in your signature section.

 

[cirwin2010]

I'm also going to recommend glass. Silver gelatin prints aren't the most durable medium out there. They hold up fine to careful handling, but if something got on the print and you needed to clean it, that could pose some issues.

Along with preventing damage to the print's surface, glass will also protect the print from UV damage ass well. With some exceptions, all glass will block some amount of UV. Your local framing shop will typically have some options for additional UV protection and anti-reflective glass. I personally like spending the extra money on the anti-reflective "museum" glass for my prints, but that is an expensive option, especially once you have larger prints/frames.


General recommendation: glass it worth it. If you have the funds, anti-reflective UV glass is fantastic.

Now for a more nuanced answer!

Most commercially available darkroom paper contains OBAs (optical brightening agents) in the baryta layer (below the gelatin). This help produce a bright white base and gives the print more brightness, whiteness, and contrast. OBAs work by absorbing UV light and reflecting back visible light hence the "brightening" aspect. You can tell OBA and OBA free paper apart by shining a UV light on it. OBA paper will glow and OBA free paper will be dull.

OBAs break down over a long time with UV exposure. It is part of why old paper turns yellow or grayer. This is part of what you are preventing when using UV blocking glass. But the flip side of that is your prints will loose some of that extra brightness and whiteness when displayed behind UV glass. Do I personally notice this difference on the wall? No. But you can see it somewhat if you put an uncovered print next to one behind UV glass.

UV blocking glass may render the benefits of certain papers null, specifically in the case of Ilford cooltone paper. That paper appears to be loaded with extra OBAs giving it a much brighter a slighter cooler appearance in the whites/highlights. Behind UV glass, it looses that advantage (in my opinion!).

Counterpoint is that much of this is moot unless you are displaying your prints under florecent lights or sunlight.

Side note: I also remember Fomatone MG Classic not glowing under UV when testing some of this, so I believe it is OBA free if memery serves correct.

Another side note: I find it interesting that darkroom papers typically contain OBAs, but so much of the literature on darkroom printing/processing is focused on archival permanence. Whereas high end art papers and printer papers will be very prominently advertised as OBA free for archival purposes/delivering consistent performance over time. There are some research papers and resources out there on OBA degridation. I'm honestly not sure concerned one should be about OBAs in darkroom paper.

 

[MurrayMinchin]

I stopped using glass after getting a phone call for an emergency reframing job.

A fellows wife and 5 year old daughter had purchased a framed print for his birthday present. The daughter was walking towards him with the birthday wrapped print, and dropped it. The glass broke, the print was unharmed, but she was devastated.

Acrylic from then on.

 

[DREW WILEY]

All my black and white work involves fiber-based paper, always drymounted for display purposes. I do print on RC color paper - mounting those is a more involved topic. Always have, always will display prints ONLY fully framed and protected in that manner. Anything else risks spider webs and fingerprints at the least. The only exception I can think of is in the humid tropics, where glass enclosure has a high mold and mildew risk.

Almost never glass - it's fragile and risky to ship, and is a poor thermal insulator when it comes to condensation or mildew risk. Once in awhile I have used true optically coated picture glass - pricey; but that's one way to get rid of glare without resorting to a semi-frosted surface. Clear acrylic is also more transparent than glass.

Acrylic is standard for me (generally Acrylite FF). Needs to be wiped-down with anti-static fluid. The bigger the size, the more it can bow a little toward the light. You also have to take into account a small amount of expansion/contraction dimensional change within the picture frame, especially with bigger sizes (athough it's less a factor than humidity-relared dimensional changes with hydroscopic materials like matboard itself). Optically coated non-reflective acrylic is available, but really expensive.

So-called UV preventative acrylics have either a light pink or light amber tint which affects the visual color balance of blues especially. When I tested them, they only prolonged color print dye life about 5% - not really worth the extra price in my opinion. You shouldn't subject your prints to high UV illumination or direct sunlight to begin with.

"Museum glass" is very heavy. It's much like a Tiffen lens filter - two panels of glass with a tinted plastic film sandwiched inside. A bit of mythology seems to be involved. To get the alleged 99% blockage of all wavelengths of UV, it would need to be tinted around the same amount as an 81A amber filter or lighting gel. That would introduce at at least 15% neutral density, so you'd have to up the footcandle illumination to begin with - plus you get an annoying warm hue shift. Leave that kind of material for museums to decide about. It doesn't make a bit of sense for black and white prints unless susceptible inks are involved. In fact, some galleries deliberately use high-UV spotlights to make the added optical brighteners really 'pop'. (Poor choice for color prints, however).

OBA's or not, papers are going to degrade over time anyway if tortured with a lot of UV. UV makes people themselves look prematurely older. Yesterday's Miss Coppertone is today's Miss Prunedale.

 

[brian steinberger]

You do nice work Brian. People should check your website link in your signature section.

Alan, thank you so much!