From: Robert W. Schramm (schrammrus@hotmail.com)
Date: 03/20/02-06:12:38 PM Z
Let me put on my archivist's hat for a moment. The use of the word
"archival" means different things to different people. Archivists deal in
hundreds of years and follow a rule that says don't do anything that cannot
be undone since in many cases we don't know what might take place in terms
of changes over long periods of time. In the case of dry mounting, we do not
consider it archival because of the glue. This glue is not known to be safe.
Perhaps it will cause some interaction with the material making up the image
or the paper support over a long period of time. But more important, dry
mounting cannot be undone easily. I have heard of people using lamination as
a means of prolonging the life of a print. Perhaps it does over a short
period of time but what happens to the plastic in 100 years or so? The
question is one of what you mean by "archival." I have seen inkjet printing
inks that can be used to make a print which will not fade for 30 years
described as "archival."
If the intesnse heat of the dry mounting process does not affect your image
and your are only interested in in the print lasting for your lifetime and
you are mounting on an "archival" mounting surface, then I would guess there
is no problem. But if you are printing for posterity,I would avoide dry
mounting.
Unfortunitly, there are other factors such as high relative humidity and
exposure to UV light. Usually only museums worry about controling these
factors.
Bob Schramm
>From: Sandy King <sanking@clemson.edu>
>Reply-To: alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca
>To: alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca
>Subject: Archival matters
>Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2002 16:48:51 -0500
>
>Advice sought on the following matter.
>
>Most of my carbon prints are on sized watercolor papers. However,
>with these papers the relief or dimensional appearance that many
>people associate with the carbon process, is either lost or
>diminished when compared to the same image on fixed out photographic
>papers, especially on mat surfaces. For that reason I have lately
>been using fixed out photographic papers for many of my prints.
>However, I am uncomfortable with the fragility of these supports,
>especially single weight papers, and am considering the possibility
>of dry mounting my prints on photographic papers to a 2-ply or 4-ply
>mat board, or perhaps even to an art paper. I am convinced from
>reading about the issue that dry mounted prints will have better long
>term permanence but wonder about other archival considerations.
>
>Thoughts on this matter would be appreciated, as would be sites on
>the web that may deal with the issue.
>
>Sandy King
>--
Check out my web page at:
also look at:
http://www.wlsc.wvnet.edu/www/pubrel/photo.html
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 04/10/02-09:28:54 AM Z CST