Pros & Cons - Dry Mounting Pigment Ink Prints from (digital printer)

[neil poulsen]

I've been using corner tabs to mount 16x20 prints. But the prints are heavy enough that I need to use heavy duty tabs. Otherwise, the print cuts right through the bottom tabs.

I would be concerned about applying heat to inkjet prints.

[DennisD]

Thanks very much to Vinny, Peter and ROL for your contributions.

Tyler, special thanks for sharing your wealth of knowledge.

I know that the museum and collector community typically dislikes any form of permanent mounting... perhaps, even more so in recent years.

Having come from a tradition of darkroom printing and dry mounting, I prefer the finish and look dry mounting provides.

I have been dry mounting inkjet prints for a while with excellent results, but knowing and hearing of common practices, I'm questioning what I'm familiar with as it applies to current work and materials.

Thanks to everyone for sharing information, experience and advice.

[Tyler Boley]

I have talked to some people who handle collections in their work who take the view that mounted prints are far less likely to be bent or torn in handling when mounted, so there is no definitive consensus. If you prefer mounted prints, and can do it without damage and with materials that won't shorten life, I'd say go for it. Here is some more info we dug up a bit ago, the only acknowledgement from manufacturers I've run across-
http://www.stcuthbertsmill.com/st-cu...o/handling.asp
See the last bullet point under "after printing" and also click the link to Mitsubishi.

Everything else I found was re-iteration of what has already been posted. Vinnie, the 3M scotch PMA stuff was the main suspect in a recent problem project. I spent an hour on the phone with them, they would not tell me chemical contents, nor confirm the absence of materials we were concerned about. They kept handing me up the chain (actually quite helpful) and I finally got to someone who told me it was definitely NOT recommended for "fine art". You will also find in an older publication that Wilhelm recommends it NOT be used with fiber papers.. this was before inkjet.
Tyler

[Kirk Gittings]

FWIW I drymount all silver prints and any ink print larger than 11x14. Oddly enough in this dry environment there is a fair amount of moisture discrepancy (I am guessing) that leads to non-dry mounted prints warping even in museum shows, which is unacceptable. OTOH I have a couple of hundred prints of all types in various museum collections (the vast majority purchased) and dry mounting has never even been once as an issue. As a matter of fact it has never been mentioned period.

[Andrew O'Neill]

It seems the accepted practice for mounting pigment prints is not to dry mount,
but to leave a wide border around the print, attach to archival board with corners and then overmat.

Sorry but, what's a pigment print?

[Peter Mounier]

Pigment print in this case is referring to pigment ink/inkjet printer prints.
Thanks for the info Tyler.

[paulr]

OTOH I have a couple of hundred prints of all types in various museum collections (the vast majority purchased) and dry mounting has never even been once as an issue. As a matter of fact it has never been mentioned period.

Seems like conservators work for the curators, not vice versa. I've never even been asked what kind of print something is (but they always figure it out).

As far as mounting vs. not mounting, I don't even think there's a standard anymore. If you look at what's hanging in museums and galleries, you see everything, including methods that look great but that probably cause handling and conservation headaches (face-mounting on acrylic). There are a lot of gigantic inkjet and lightjet prints out there ... I assume these are usually mounted onto some kind of board even if they're framed behind glass. When you get into prints that are measured in yards, is there another practical way to present them?

I haven't dealt with this yet. I have a body of work in progress that's probably going to be printed in ink, around 36" wide. Unless I can come up with a better idea, they'll be mounted. I fully understand why mounting poses some conservation problems, which is one reason I haven't done it in the past. But I'm going to be worried more about presentation than about a hypothetical conservation ideal.

[Drew Wiley]

First of all it's a bit misleading to label inkjet prints as pigment prints - that's a common marketing misnomer. The inks are composed of dyes, pigments, and lakes.
Second, despite all the rumors, I've never heard of ordinary photographic prints being considered less "archival" due to drymounting. In many ways it helps to protect
the print. I'd want to be certain all the glycols were outgassed first..... Now as per 3M repositionable transfer adhesive, that's a med tack acrylic with little bubbles
in it which pop under higher pressure to give a threshold of permanent mounting on small pieces. None of these mfgs of acrylic foils like overstating anything because many applications for them are commercial. PMA's biggest problem is simply bonding failure. It's designed for amateur use, since high-tack adhesives are tricky to work with. But acrylic foils are standard even in museum installations of color prints for commissioned work costing far more than any of us have expectations of getting for our typically smaller pieces. Usually "deckle-edge" float or hinged mounting is an esthetic choice reserved for papers which are intended to look like watercolor papers, typical of Pt/Pd prints etc. My own philosophy is that the mounting (and often framing too) is an esthetic decision controlled by the
artist (me), and I have yet to see either a collector or curator question that. But I am aware of realistic archival considerations.

[Andrew O'Neill]

Thanks Peter and Drew. I make carbon transfer prints, which are pigment prints, and requires a different approach when it comes to dry mounting.

[Tin Can]

Good to know and a simple answer. I dry mounted my first silver prints 15 years ago, and they are fine.

I will ponder this no more.

FWIW I drymount all silver prints and any ink print larger than 11x14. Oddly enough in this dry environment there is a fair amount of moisture discrepancy (I am guessing) that leads to non-dry mounted prints warping even in museum shows, which is unacceptable. OTOH I have a couple of hundred prints of all types in various museum collections (the vast majority purchased) and dry mounting has never even been once as an issue. As a matter of fact it has never been mentioned period.