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

[DennisD]

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.

What exactly are members doing in this regard ?
and
What are the specific reasons for not dry mounting ?
and
What effect does dry mounting have, if any, on the pigment print ?

Please share your knowledge based on specific experience or fact (rather than conjecture) !

Thanks very much !

[vinny]

HEAT

Use scotch pma instead if you want flat prints without warping later.

[Peter Mounier]

Archival methods include not dry mounting, so that if the mount gets damaged the print might still be saved. But wet darkroom fiber based prints pretty much require dry mounting due to curling and generally not drying flat.
Since inkjet prints don't curl, there's no reason to mount a print in that way, especially if archival permanence is desired.
Inkjet prints can be dry mounted with no problems if that's your preferred way.

[ROL]

...attach to archival board with corners...

Is that true? It is accepted practice to use corners rather than hinge mounting?

[Tyler Boley]

I didn't dry mount silver either, after I learned more about the issue. But I did make sure they were well flattened. Any reflective surface, when not flat, looks less than optimal, mounting always addressed that well. Fine art matte inkjet prints have no discernible reflective properties, therefore, there's no advantage to mount from that standpoint. Additionally, the ongoing discoveries with how inkjet coatings absorb and react to adhesives and anything that outgases has lead me to never mount a fine art matte inkjet print. I've overmatted and framed many prints on William Turner up to 30x40+ without mounting (adhering to the backing) with no problems whatsoever, and they look great. Also, since I provide prints to some rental galleries, being able to swap prints in and out of standardized matte and frame sizes is a plus. Others I print for have framed similarly with other matte papers, Photo Rag, Epson Hot and COld Press Natural, Canson Rag Photographique, Edition Etching, etc.. successfully.

Also the surface delicacy of these papers, I'd never risk subjecting to a press and the handling involved.

Tyler

[Tyler Boley]

Is that true? It is accepted practice to use corners rather than hinge mounting?

yes, and hinging with an archival tape. The only problem I've had is using some of the available corners, the adhesive slowly slipped because these thick cotton papers have weight. So I make my own corners out of thin acid free interleave paper and tape them down with a lot of filmoplast.. no problems.
Tyler

[Peter Mounier]

... Additionally, the ongoing discoveries with how inkjet coatings absorb and react to adhesives and anything that outgases has lead me to never mount a fine art matte inkjet print.

The outgassing of inkjet glycol is fairly well documented, especially when enclosed in a frame with glass, but I haven't heard anything about adhesives, in particular dry mount tissue, being absorbed and reacting with the coating. Do you have a reference for that.

[Tyler Boley]

this seems to remain somewhat quiet even though some of us have been dealing with it from the beginning of inkjet coated papers. It's not the normal paper outgassing you hear about. I'll find you links tomorrow from work. It's a definite problem, some evaporates combine with the coatings and convert invisible sulphur salts to yellow brown. It's not paper yellowing. It also bleaches out with UV exposure.. more later. Just put anything with rubber feet on a scrap of coated inkjet paper like HPR, like a stapler, and check it out in a few weeks... even Epson's vinyl coated spring to secure rolls will leave a yellow stain from outgassing vinyl if left long enough..
Also very wise to be aware of this when constructing custom portfolio boxes and the materials used.
Tyler

[Peter Mounier]

Thanks Tyler! Very much looking forward to learning more about this. I think I'll try the rubber feet test right now and see what happens in the coming weeks and months.

[Tyler Boley]

Here's an older thread about it from the LL list-
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/fo...6174#msg326174

I had a long talk with Mark from Aardenberg about this as well, he's very aware of it but without controlled testing that requires time and money he will hesitate to make a definitive public statement. The above thread covers most of the bases. I'll see what I've in emails at work, we just had to deal with this again, I wish the manufacturers were more forthcoming abut it. I've not seen anything from Wilhelm about this either.

let me add, its been difficult to consistently force this result in testing, but water (humidity) seems to accelerate it.. and UV removes it. Of course hard exposure to UV is not the best idea for any art, but I know it works.
T