Re: Dry mounting

Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

From: Ed Buffaloe (EdBuffaloe@unblinkingeye.com)
Date: 04/28/02-05:38:14 AM Z


Re: Re Dry mountingHere is something that was published in Mastering the
Black and White Fine Print, Special Issue #11, published by PHOTO Techniques
magazine:

In general, my role as a photograph conservator, which doesn't come into
play until after the artist has created the photograph, is to stabilize the
condition of damaged or deteriorating prints. However, I often receive
questions from photographers about drymounting. When asked for advice about
the creation process, I can work with photographers to educate them on the
merits and permanence of specific materials and methods so that they can
make informed decisions. For example, I might tell an artist that it may
not be possible to unmount a mixed-media photographic work should that
become desirable or necessary in the future. Depending on the exact
circumstances and materials, the same releasing agents that break the bond
of the mounting adhesive may be likely to affect some element of the
photographic object. The final artistic choices, however, must always be
made by the artist.

Mounting can have many benefits for a photograph. The process keeps the
print flat by restraining it. Otherwise, changing humidity will eventually
cause most photographs, such as fiber-base black-and-white prints, to curl.
When mounted and flat, a photograph is also easier to view, display, and
handle, which translates into less damage over time. The increased support
provided by the mount lessens the chance of bending and cracking, and a
mount larger than the print protects its edges.

Whether you drymount your work or not the choice of appropriate materials
can have an immense impact on the overall stability and longevity of an
object. When deterioration occurs because the component materials of an
object are themselves chemically or physically unstable, conservators call
it "inherent vice' " Poor quality mount boards that turn brittle and acidic
are an all-too common example. Therefore, conservators strive to use and
recommend the most stable materials we know of, materials that have been
shown through the passage of time or through modern testing to resist
changing themselves or adversely affecting their surroundings.
Consequently, we often devise and prepare alternatives to the commercially
available drymounting products to suit a particular problem or object. This
is not to say that you should not use readymade drymounting products or that
they will damage your photographs. I have not yet seen damage to an object
from the proper application of drymount tissue; in historic objects, it has
often acted as a barrier, protecting a photograph from deterioration by the
poor quality mount. Commercially available drymounting materials possess
desirable properties, such as convenience and ease of use, which may make
them preferable to the photographer, and their selection justifiable to the
conservator.

If you drymount your photographs, use a product that consists of a
thermoplastic adhesive coated onto both sides of a paper support. Although
formulations change, this type is considered to be the easiest to remove and
the most stable over time. Drymount products that are simply sheets of
thermoplastic adhesive, lacking a paper layer, can be selected if the first
type is unsuitable for a particular application. The least desirable are
products that are pressure-sensitive, such as spray or cold mounting
systems. All materials other than the combination of a thermoplastic
adhesive and paper support are initially much more difficult to remove from
the photograph. And, since they are relatively new, little is known about
how these adhesives might change as they age; it is possible that they will
become difficult or impossible to reverse should future circumstances
warrant removal.

In terms of quality, the choice of the support for the photograph is as
important as how to mount it. If it is of poor enough quality, the board
can cause fading or staining in the print. A board may also become acidic
over time and discolor, changing the aesthetic of the entire object. The
physical integrity of a print is endangered when poor quality paper products
become weak and brittle with age. Unfortunately, terms such as 'archival'
and 'pH neutral' tell one nothing about quality. Look for a support with
fiber stock of 100% rag, cotton, and/ or alpha cellulose to ensure the most
stable and longest lasting product, whether it's labeled 'buffered' or not.
Many suppliers of conservation matboards apply the Photographic Activity
Test (ANSI IT 9.16 1993) to their products; if a board passes this test,
your photograph will be less likely to deteriorate over time.

--Barbara E. Lemmen (H.F. DuPont Winterthur Museum and the Univ. of
Delaware)


Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 05/01/02-11:43:31 AM Z CST