PDA

View Full Version : Face mounting and alternatives?



paulr
14-Dec-2012, 11:05
I have a broad question and a specific one.

Specific first: I'm considering face mounting for the project I'm working on now and have zero experience with it. The prints will be inkjet, 30 or 36 inches wide. Are there some papers that are better suited to facemounting than others? I'm assuming the smoothest gloss papers would make the most sense, but these tend to not be the higher quality papers. Any advice appreciated.

The broad question: I'm not married to face mounting. The look is great for what I'm doing, because this work needs to be very shiny, and preferably contemporary looking. But the fragility and irreversibility of the whole thing makes me nervous. Especially for big exhibition prints that are going to be handled and knocked around in transit.

All my experience is with old fashioned overmats, frames, glazing etc.. Is there any other contemporary mounting or framing method I should look at? I don't want an overmat. I want a very liquidy gloss and modern presentation. I'm not averse to a frame, but a frame would have to intrude minimally on the image area. If someone made welded stainless steel frames that would be amazing. I'm curious about prints made directly on metal. I don't know if there are any laminates made that offer good protection and are suitable for artwork. All suggestions welcome.

Drew Wiley
14-Dec-2012, 11:30
One work of caution - either face mtg or lamination requires the inkjet to be completely
outgassed per glycols, which depending on the climate might take up to several months.
Both are skilled techniques and require special equip. Talk to Bob Carnie about this.

greenrhino
14-Dec-2012, 11:34
Hi Paul,
Generally you dont want to facemount a rag paper, something smooth and glossy will have better adhesion and long term viability. I'm not a fan of it for the reasons you've mentioned and there is a long term issue of failure over time with face mounting. It does look slick, but its generally not a whole lot cheaper than framing for what that is worth.

In a frame it is not necessary to have an overmat. The point of an overmat is to keep the artwork away from the glazing. This can be done by using rag filtets as a spacer to back the image away from the frame. I'm sure you've seen it, its pretty standard in Chelsea, especially for oversize images. The image does need to be mounted for this to be successful. You could print a digital C-print on something like Fuji super gloss which has a very wet super shiny surface. It should have glazing to protect the image but I work with people that choose not to glaze for exhibitions and then add glazing when a print os sold and going into a collectors home.
You could float the image in the frame so that there is no frame intruding on the picture area as well. This could be done as a shadow box or a traditional frame. If you find the glazing an issue you could use museum anti glare which is expensive but amazing clear and with good lighting can nearly disappear.

Film laminates have all the same issues as plexi face mount, but can offer some level of protection from the environment.

I hope this helps

Anthony Accardi
Green Rhino Inc.

bob carnie
14-Dec-2012, 12:20
For big face mounts we are using Fuji Satin,, your print provider will be able to get this.
We also use Flex and Metal off the Lambda.

word of caution, Face mounting can be very expensive, most shops will not touch provided prints, and if they do make you sign a waiver that requires you to replace the print at your cost if there is any damage.

Peter Lik ** sp ** who seems to be a target of much abuse here is probably the worlds expert on this, he has put his money where his mouth is and custom designed a workspace to extremely high dust, humidity, static, cleanleness to extreme specs and from what I have heard from a very reliable source spends over 3/4 million just on the face tissue.
If I had his success Financially I would mimic his set up in a heartbeat, but unfortunately my shop cannot handle this to the volumne that he does.
We do face each week but I can tell you its not my framers best days.

Do not use matt papers as the shadows will create problems for you.

Something we see here quite often is the big ass Resin mounts which take a nice matt paper and then pour resin to create a very compelling look. Very thick, very smooth looking
My lab does not do this but a lot of my clients do this with great success.. There is a gal in San Fransisco that gets me to print out her shows , ship the prints in tubes to her and she does the Resin in
her apartment.. She is pretty hard core about this whole process, we were sending work to Greece before she moved to the west coast.

This look is very sellable here in Toronto at half the price of face to plexi ....Though we do not vouch for its permanence but it really looks nice. ..


There is also a 10 mill lexan **very expensive** that we love using for upscale commercial jobs and some fine art applications. It works over all papers and when we
work with this material my Framer is in happy spirits. But it is a laminate and really looks commercial too me.



FWIW - I am a traditionalist and prefer AR Glass on Rag Matts.

Something to consider, but for the life of me I cannot find the vendor or even know if it was ever launched.... But Liquid glass that is sprayed on surfaces which is very protective and
something I would really like to see come on the market place... Lightweight, easy to apply, but something very new, which I am still trying to source.

Ink jet on metal is a trend as well , It requires a Durst Rhoe or OCe flatbed where one images onto metal that is either painted white or not, or imaged onto white diabond.
unfortunately there is no real protection for this technology, as well the resolution sucks to my eyes.

Hope this helps

Drew Wiley
14-Dec-2012, 13:29
Well, Peter L's workspace can't be all that clean, because all his frames look like there's a
smashed psychedelic moth in the middle - maybe he dips them in fluorescent dye first.
But it is ironic how the worst of so-called painter perfected a high-end graphics process
to fake his own work, and now how some extremely cheesly so-called photographer has
mastered glossy print presentation. The client never sees the actual item being delivered -
just a gallery sample (even a big trans over a wall lightbox). But if they can afford to spend
17k for that, they should just rip the print itself out, retain the frame, and put something
of more serious esthetic value inside, like a black velvet Elvis rug.

Drew Wiley
14-Dec-2012, 13:41
On a less cynical note, Bob, have you had any luck static mtg Fuji Supergloss? I did some
mid-sized Cibas this way, but the Fuji poly base doesn't have the same characteristics.
And the foggy climate here makes it difficult under the best of circumstances. But with a
optically coated glass or plexi, it was the most flawless presentation available - nor orangepeel at all. I also figured out a permament bond for polyester as smooth as a mirror
surface, actually based on application techniques used to mount thin mirror laminates
perfectly smooth. But the damn adhesive is hazardous and anti-archival. Another no-so-
practical experiment. So guess I'm stuck with high-pressure rollers and the usual substates
of dibond, gator, and ultramt. But I like the full presentation: window mat, glazing, frame.
I'm coveting one of those big SpeedMat wall-mounted rigs.

bob carnie
14-Dec-2012, 13:58
Static Mounting please elaborate
I have done silicon, cold tissue, hot tissue , glue but static??



On a less cynical note, Bob, have you had any luck static mtg Fuji Supergloss? I did some
mid-sized Cibas this way, but the Fuji poly base doesn't have the same characteristics.
And the foggy climate here makes it difficult under the best of circumstances. But with a
optically coated glass or plexi, it was the most flawless presentation available - nor orangepeel at all. I also figured out a permament bond for polyester as smooth as a mirror
surface, actually based on application techniques used to mount thin mirror laminates
perfectly smooth. But the damn adhesive is hazardous and anti-archival. Another no-so-
practical experiment. So guess I'm stuck with high-pressure rollers and the usual substates
of dibond, gator, and ultramt. But I like the full presentation: window mat, glazing, frame.
I'm coveting one of those big SpeedMat wall-mounted rigs.

jhogan
14-Dec-2012, 14:30
I have a fair amount of experience with the face-mounting process, both in the creation and the handling of the work, so I hope this rather long post will be of value to you and/or others considering it.

The usual construction of a finished piece will begin, of course, with the print itself. You'll want to leave an unprinted "trim border" of about 1" around the print for handling. A good way to transport unmounted prints is to wrap them snugly around cardboard tubing (like printer paper cores), with each print separated by glassine. Take them to the framer yourself.

Since the print will be covered with a permanent two-sided adhesive (on both surfaces) you'll want the smoothest possible paper; this decreases the chance for tiny air pockets to be trapped between the paper and the adhesive. The current default is Epson premium gloss.

Think of the finished piece as a sandwich: clear acrylic on the top, adhesive film, print, adhesive film, and, at the bottom, an opaque substrate that will also serve as a mounting surface for hanging hardware (often a cleat arrangement of aluminum or wood).

You'll find there are numerous thicknesses and finishes of acrylic sheeting available. Make sure your framer is using one with UV stabilization.

As for the undermount, there are many choices available. Common: Di-Bond, Aluminite, Omega panel, Sintra, and more acrylic sheet. I've actually seen 1/4" aluminum sheet used, hilarious for a 40x50." Often the choice is made by the artist simply on how the edges of the work look, to add "heft" (very 90's). Creating some type of subtle frame around the work looks much better, in my opinion, and allows for greater flexibility in material choice.

There are very specialized tools needed for this process. Being able to create large, perfect pieces in this manner is the result of the work of serious craftspeople and will be expensive. Figure a minimum of US$50.00 (before tax and shipping) per square foot.

Make sure you are aware of the framer's policy regarding prints that are damaged during the mounting process, or if the finished piece is somehow defective (bad sheet of acrylic, dust under the mount, etc.)... Who is responsible for the cost of reprints? What happens to a damaged or rejected work? Make sure they get run through a saw to prevent them from being "salvaged" later on.

Important: before placing a big order (or even a small one), take one of your own proof prints to the framer and have them cut it up into pieces, then mount it to various combinations of of the face/undermount materials. This way you'll be able to see the difference between materials and how they affect the finished product. Look at them under different lighting sources. Make sure you note the brand names and dimensional details (with costs, lead times, etc), so when you go back with your prints later you'll know exactly what to order and how much it costs.

Make sure you get firm dates for delivery of finished work, and leave enough time for the possibility of something going wrong.

Once the piece is completed, all the elements are considered part of the "work." Practically speaking, there is no way to unmount or unframe the work for conservation purposes, such as those done to traditional loose prints... For all but the most insignificant scratch there is little that can be done to save a marred surface; the piece will be considered a total loss and will have to be remade. (Insurance, anyone?)

For this reason it's important to plan for transporting your finished work. At the size you're describing, the pieces can be rather heavy and unwieldy, while still extremely delicate.

In my experience, the following applies: if you yourself are not an experienced art handler and are actually overseeing the transportation and installation of the pieces, it will be necessary to have crates built, or, if you have experience, build them yourself. Art crating is just as specialized a process as face mounting, and it costs a lot, especially for international shipment.

When pricing your work, make sure to add the cost of the crating (assuming individually crated pieces), since the crate is usually included in the purchase, at least for bigger works.

When the work comes off the walls, it's gonna live in the crates. So, unless your show sells out, you're going to need a place to store those crates, one which should be climate controlled and secure. NEVER trust your gallerist to store the crates/work indefinitely... Too many horror stories to detail here, but lots of gallery folks never seem to get the "unsold" work back to the artists.

In summary, although face mounting photographic prints can be strikingly beautiful, it requires much more planning, preparation and financial resources when compared with the handling, display, and storage of "traditional" works on paper.

I hope this is helpful.

Drew Wiley
14-Dec-2012, 14:53
Static mtg is elegant in the sense of being extremely simple and totally reversible, but needs a low humidity environment. As you have no doubt already noticed, the poly base
of Ciba easily develops a static charge and attracts dust etc. So you need an extremely
dust-free work environment. Then you need an acrylic substate which will remain flat,
like a laminate with acrylic sheet on top, or thick enough acrylic sheet not to bow, and you
create a static charge on it using a wool bonnet or wool sock, just like you did as a kid
with a balloon. It's that simple. The print literally clings to it. I use just a tiny spot of perm
acrylic adhesive at the top border of the print. The static cling itself seems to be permanent, or relatively so. But there's a size limit, maybe up to 20x24 or so, of the print
itself. Totally smooth. I've heard of people doing this with Fujiflex too, but haven't personally had any luck, probably because it is nearly always damp here, and I don't have
forced air heating in the lab, just passive electric.

bob carnie
14-Dec-2012, 15:32
Thats a new one on me Drew, learn something every day. Humidity in Toronto right now is about 3 %, April 30th or so it will pop up over 50%. Not sure it would work in our town.
I try to humidify my whole lab , 4500sq ft but you should see the windows in Jan/Feb , complete Ice and I worry the windows on the door will break.
Do you actually sell them to clients with this type of mount?

jbhogan- pretty much wraps it up nicely... I agree with everything he/she said.
We do not take face to plexi lightly and there can be major consequences if not handled right.


We had a Gallerist in New York begging our shop to repair a face to plexi... that was installed in Ontario.. air bubble was observed by the end client, they asked us to try to fix, by pinpricking through the back
and hopefully the air would escape and flaten out we backed away from this can of worms as fast as we could. I have seen air bubbles go away after time but not counting on it. And impossible to tell
the client .
We have made our errors with this method and without understanding clients would never consider doing face mounts, it is a small but significant part of our business.

Face to Plexi is old finish dating back to early 80's that keeps on getting mileage even today, My framer just wishes it would go away. Watching a silicone mount is pretty amazing, any dirt is pushed out but boy what a stink and I doubt very archival.


Static mtg is elegant in the sense of being extremely simple and totally reversible, but needs a low humidity environment. As you have no doubt already noticed, the poly base
of Ciba easily develops a static charge and attracts dust etc. So you need an extremely
dust-free work environment. Then you need an acrylic substate which will remain flat,
like a laminate with acrylic sheet on top, or thick enough acrylic sheet not to bow, and you
create a static charge on it using a wool bonnet or wool sock, just like you did as a kid
with a balloon. It's that simple. The print literally clings to it. I use just a tiny spot of perm
acrylic adhesive at the top border of the print. The static cling itself seems to be permanent, or relatively so. But there's a size limit, maybe up to 20x24 or so, of the print
itself. Totally smooth. I've heard of people doing this with Fujiflex too, but haven't personally had any luck, probably because it is nearly always damp here, and I don't have
forced air heating in the lab, just passive electric.

Drew Wiley
14-Dec-2012, 16:24
Yeah, Bob... but I'm not a commercial lab. The static mtd prints I've sold have always been my own images. But so far, no failure in the bond, even shpd to different climates.
But there's a size limit, a point at which the exp/contr differential between the print and
substrate kicks in - do wouldn't recommend it for a 30x40 Ciba. But this is somewhat academic, since not many Cibas are going to be printed anymore. For Fuji gloss it will be
hi-tac acrylic adhesives in a roller press, then conventional plexi over a window mat, or
if someone can afford it, optically-coated acrylic. I have a completely proprietary method
of face mtg which works quite well both visually and in terms of print protection, with min
glare. But like all forms of face mtg is tricky and expensive. Clients can rarely afford it,
though I've done public exhibitions of big prints this way. The huge advantage of my system is that nothing adhesive ever goes onto the actual face of the print, so it is a partially reversible system. But for the cost, I'd now rather just use coated acrylic to deal with secondary reflection issues.

paulr
18-Dec-2012, 00:54
Thanks for the feedback, everyone. Miles to go before I'm in a place to make these decisions, but you've given me a lot to consider.

rdenney
18-Dec-2012, 06:45
...Watching a silicone mount is pretty amazing, any dirt is pushed out but boy what a stink and I doubt very archival.

The vinegar stink of silicone is the acid solvent as it is off-gassing. I can well imagine that it undermines archival performance. There are silicones that do not use an acid solvent, though I don't know what to suggest there.

(I learned this using sealants while renovating my aluminum-bodied motorhome--the acid-borne silicone sealants caused the aluminum to corrode. The silicone itself is a poor choice for that--I have since learned about polyurethanes--but that's a separate issue.)

Back on topic: Several decades ago, it was a popular "craft" project to encase "artwork" in clear acrylic. (I use quotes for "artwork"--the fad was to do this with jigsaw puzzles.) The material was an acrylic resin that was mixed with a hardener and poured onto the surface, where it would flow out to provide a level surface and then harden. I suspect this is what Bob was talking about which is client who moved from Greece to California. If so, note that this stuff will be absorbed into the print if it is porous, and with some materials may cause a color change. The surface will be fairly durable but will scratch as easily as the face-mounted stuff. It may be possible to buff out small and shallow blemishes, though.

As for frames, why wouldn't the build-yourself extruded metal frames work? I've seen many anodized aluminum frames that make a very thin border and that have a color that resembles stainless steel.

Rick "wondering if it would be possible to get a local job shop to build frames that resemble subway-car windows" Denney

paulr
18-Dec-2012, 10:07
As for frames, why wouldn't the build-yourself extruded metal frames work? I've seen many anodized aluminum frames that make a very thin border and that have a color that resembles stainless steel.

Rick "wondering if it would be possible to get a local job shop to build frames that resemble subway-car windows" Denney

I'm definitely looking into this. The shiny nielsen frames that I've seen look more like chrome than stainless, and have a more finely brushed look to them than what's ideal. They're still a strong a possibility. Making frames resemble subway windows would be going too far, but I would love to mimic the material esthetic. coarsely brushed staineless, with a lot of relief from the wall but a very small lip over the edge of the print ... and welded corners. It would be a great DIY project for someone.

Drew Wiley
18-Dec-2012, 10:30
Rick - completely solvent-free, noncorrosive pourable silicones are available, but marketed
to the tech industry for potting electronics. Expensive. I've used em for encapsulations,
but never in contact with the print emulsion itself. I won't go there. Merely for the frame
perimeter after dehumidifying and air-vac the hermetic sandwich. Acrylic and polyester
liquid encapsulation of everything from tarantulas to photos is nothing new, but hardly an
"archival" option.