Best frame glass?

[Steve Sample]

I have one more question. The framing job I have previously posted about, used non-glare glass. I always thought that my photo was poorly printed as it seemed somewhat muddy in the shadow areas. After getting the 4 x 5 negative rescanned by James Beck, I think that this is true. What a difference a drum scan made in the image detail and contrast!! But, I also am limited by my frame glass.

I took the frame apart and noticed that the non-glare glass was very dirty on both the outside and inside, but also not very clear. It was only a little better after cleaning. It was archival quality,but seems to detract from the clarity, color and sharpness of the image. I need to find a more clear glass that provides UV protection. In hindsight, non-glare may not be the best choice.

What glass do you recommend for fine art framing and display? Thanks again, again. Steve

[Arne Croell]

The best is an optically coated glass, similar to lenses with a coating, and UV-absorbing. In the US the best known brand is probably "Museum Glass(R)" from Tru-vue: http://www.tru-vue.com/Tru-Vue/Products/33/. it is expensive, though. They also make a cheaper version called AR-Reflection-free which has less UV absorption. Similar products are made by other companies, the equivalent from Schott is called Mirogard (R): http://www.us.schott.com/2009_architecture/english/products/non_reflective_glass/mirogard/. Tru-vue also makes a coated acrylic version called "Optium" (even more expensive). If all of those are too expensive, clear acrylic will provide better UV control than regular glass, and is shatterproof (but scratches easily).

Note that Tru-vue's "Reflection control" glass is an antiglare one similar to what you have, with a slightly matte surface which will reduce sharpness and contrast.

[Joe O'Hara]

Agree with Arne. "Non-glare glass" is actually a misnomer; it is really "all-glare glass" and will wreck the contrast of any photograph. You pictures will look better in plain glass or acrylic, best in the coated stuff if you can afford it.

[Rust Never Sleeps]

I have seen many photos get the life sucked out of them from framing glass, even the "good" standard Tru-vue glass. The Museum Glass is expensive and people probably will not shell out for it. I am going to try the face mounting to acrylic for now and see how it works. There is also flush mounting onto gator for simple hanging around the house to keep cost down.

[Jim Noel]

I over-mat and frame my platinum prints without glass as I believe any glass detracts from the image.

[Drew Wiley]

The very best is optically coated acrylic, and will cost you about $600 at the wholesale level for an odd-sized relatively small sheet.

[bob carnie]

There is three levels of glass we use.
these figures are close approximate based on a 40x60inch single sheet.

Regular glasss- $20 sheet
AR glass- $180- $200 sheet
Museum Glass - $250 sheet

we have clients that select any of the above depending on budget and location of Frame.

[bob carnie]

I should add we never have sold Non Glare Glass for the life sucking reason in the 14 years operating a frame shop. Maybe one in 1996, that was it.

We do like the optically clear plexi Drew mentions , pain to work with but looks great.
We use this for shows that move around alot or long distant shipping.
I do not have the figures on price , but probably like the AR glass range.
EM Plastics sell it.
Glass is Tru-View.