[alt-photo] Re: bottom-weighting mats

[Laura V]

On 12/1/11 16:50 PM, Diana Bloomfield wrote:

> Anyway . . . sorry-- you directed your question to Laura, I know-- but
> the no-glass option compelled me to comment.

No problem, and I totally agree that our work (any work on paper really) 
looks much better without glass. The last time I exhibited, it was 
without glass (I did it mainly to save money though). The prints were 
matted, but only with single thickness on the back so they did buckle a 
bit, and a couple of them had even jumped off the wall when I arrived on 
the next day. Tomas, how did you hang your unmatted works?

Anyway, back to glass for protection...I would recommend it for long 
term display. A painting on canvas is much more durable, humidity 
resistant and easier to clean than a work on paper. Works on paper are 
just more fragile.

Tomas, your question about whether a very small mat is just as good as a 
wide one...I suppose it works just as well to keep the glass from 
touching the print. The only question is whether the wood from a wooden 
frame would contribute acid to the print being in such close proximity, 
and I don't know the answer. Probably a question for an archivist.

Laura