Curly Prints.

[Enrique Vila]

I've been working with B&W 4x5 for a number of years, but just recently did my first incursion on printing bigger that 8x10 (at the moment i'm trying 16x20).

What I've found, besides 16x20 being a completely different kind of animal, is that once the print is complete and dryed, the amount of curl it gets is simply horrible, making my prints almost unmountable in a recular cornered mat.

Is dry mount my only option? or is the anything else I could do? I would like to avoid buying a dry mount press and/or any other equipment if at all possible.

Hope someone can give me some light on this...

Enrique.-
Melbourne, Australia
http://www.vilaphoto.tk

[Joe Egge]

Enrique - Try using 1/3 the recommended amount of hardener in your fix. You will retain adequate protection against surface scratches, and the prints will not curl. Of course, this requires using a nonhardening fix that allows you to add the hardener. I use Ilford's nonhardening Hypam fix with Hypam hardener added at 1/3 the suggested amount.

Joe

[domenico Foschi]

I wouldn't use hardener at all, especially because I tone a lot.
The surface of MGIV has never given me any trouble , the MGIV warm rarely, in situations of extreme carelessness.
Once the prints are dried, press them with a heavy sheet of metal or something that can distribute the weight uniformly and let it "cure for two days. You won't have the problem anymore.

[John Cook]

Having been forced to work exclusively with RC for the last 30 years for commercial reasons, I am now in the process of getting back into fiber printing for my retirement. So I, too, am experimenting with this very issue.

Papers, like everything else, have probably changed since the 1960's. But my early experience with fiber paper and hardener was that it had to be just right. Too little hardener and the print surface became soft and tacky. Prints would stick to blotters and dryer aprons and become “flocked” when peeled off. Placed under weights to flatten, they would stick to each other. I once spent all night printing for a final print critique in art school, only to find I had a 2-inch solid “brick” of bonded prints under the lead weights.

On the other hand, too much hardener or too much time in a hardening fixer can make print emulsions brittle, like the crazed glaze on antique pottery. I have seen even over-hardened 5x7 matte portraits crack under a drymount press.

So be cautious about getting too creative with the print hardener.

The second tidbit I have learned is that paper expands as it gets wet and shrinks as it dries. If the print is unevenly wet, it will dry unevenly. This is what (in addition to emulsion-induced edge curling) causes ripples and scallops. So get some clean white motel towels and meticulously dry the print before leaving it to dry. A sponge or squeegie is not sufficient. Especially on one of those Arkay flat bed heated dryers. Even one drop of water or fingerprints from wet hands can create problems.

Another option which will probably upset the archival crowd is to bathe the print in something to help it dry more evenly. Ilford (I think) recommends a bath of wetting agent for this purpose. Years ago, when we ferrotyped single weight prints on a gas-fired drum dryer, we used a similar solution from Pako called Print Flattening Solution. Hard to find, but still manufactured.

Lastly, I recently ran across an obscure website which recommends drying fiber prints by hanging from spring clips under tension. The method is to suspend the print from the top corners with Pony spring clamps. Then add the weight of two more clamps at the bottom corners. Sounds like it might work, if combined with some of the above ideas.

I am going to try to build a wooden frame with miniature clamps attached to each corner with common rubber bands. This should provide adjustable tension. The plastic (non-rusting?) mini-clamps I have chosen are these:

http://www.leevalley.com/wood/page.aspx?c=2&p=41712&cat=1,43838

[George Hart]

Enrique, getting flat fibre-based prints is very easy when you use a technique borrowed from watercolour painters. I give a final brief wash in Ilford's wetting solution (more dilute than they recommend), then lay the print face-up on a piece of thick glass. Fix the print to the glass using half-inch masking tape all round. Remove after 24 hours, and you have a perfectly flat print!

[KenM]

I've found that if I only squeegee the emulsion side of the print (leaving the back alone), my prints dry practically flat with only a bit of ripple. It's extremely dry here in Calgary (as long as you ignore last June where we received close to 300mm of rain), and I suspect that keeping the back of the print damp slows down the drying process just enough to compensate for any uneven contraction.

John: we have a Lee Valley in Calgary. It's a dangerous place to go with a bank card :-)

[lee\c]

My process is that I squeegee the fiber print on both sides. I use a glass surface for this. I then place the freshly squeegeed print on a frame with fiberglass screening attached. The print is placed face down and allowed to stay there a minimum of 12 hours. The print might have a slight curl toward the emultion. Then the print is placed in a drymount press and allowed to stay there for about a minute at 180F. The print is then placed on my desk face down and allowed to cool. This has been my process for about 25 years. It will yeild very flat prints. Also, the slower you can dry the prints the less curl the print will have.

leec

[Eric Biggerstaff]

I live in Colorado and the humidity is very low, which also tends to make prints curl more. I do what others have suggested, use no hardner in your fix, wash well, lightly squeege both sides, lay face down on fiberglass screens (I use two sceens for each as this helps with curl in my area), when dry- press it in a dry mount press for a minute and then cool face down under a weight. That will give you a flat print ( at least as flat as one will get). There are chemical products that are supposed to help with this issue, but I have never used them and I know a few well known photographers who will say to avoid them.

With large prints, it is more difficult that with small. In terms of mounting your print and not wanting to purchase a dry mount press, well I think it all depends on how much ripple you are willing to live with. Large prints that are corner mounted on a mat board with a window mat covering will almost always have some ripple, it just depends on to what degree you are willing to live with.

There have been other email strings recently about the merits or dry mounting or not, that is a personal choice. But remember, there are trade offs with each that you need to weigh.

[John Cook]

Since I am the last person alive who has ever done wet mounting, and since no one east of the Mississippi has even a remote hint of interest, I will not do my usual hundred words on the subject.

But you have to admit, it is quick, easy, and totally eliminates the two major bugaboos of curly fiber prints and expensive, difficult to store drymount presses.

And archival pastes are available...

[Eric Biggerstaff]

John,

Teach us! I have never done the process and would like to know.

[Joseph O'Neil]

I went the "wussy" route. Dry mount press.
joe

[Brian C. Miller]

John, are you refering to Yasutomo Nori Paste (http://store.artcity.com/yas-np56j.html) or pure rice starch (http://www.framingsupplies.com/ToolsTapesGlues/ToolsTapesGlues.htm)? (After you wrote that, I remembered AA mounting everything with paste) I spent some quality time with Google, found a recipe for making (cooking) your own paste, and also found this Yasutomo Nori Paste which looks like its ready to use from the bottle or jar.

[Enrique Vila]

Thanks all!!

I´ll try to fix without hardener.

Cheers,

Enrique.-

Melbourne, Australia

http://www.vilaphoto.tk

[John Cook]

Brian and Eric,

The materials you mention sound excellent. The archival glue I found was similar to this:

http://www.lightimpressionsdirect.com/servlet/OnlineShopping?Dsp=20300&PCR=30000:220000:223000:223100

But for my everyday expendable stuff, I use premixed wallpaper paste. It has plenty of "tack" on towel-wiped barely damp prints, obviating the need for weights. The type intended for Mylar wallpaper seems suitable for RC paper, as well.

But in the old days with single weight Kodak Mural R, we used to coat the board with (slightly dilute) Elmer's white glue with a paint roller and let it fully dry. Then flopping on the sopping wet print would reactivate the glue and the print would stick. With a Kodak hard rubber squeegee we dried off the print and let it dry flat, no weights, overnight. A second sheet of paper on the reverse side was needed to keep the board from curling as the print dried and shrunk. Don't know if this mural technique would work with double weight papers today. Thus, the wallpaper paste.

Used to use 1/4" double tempered masonite. But now prefer Gatorboard as a base.

By the way, I still have a mural mounted with Elmer's in 1970. No visible deterioration as yet.

[paulr]

"Papers, like everything else, have probably changed since the 1960's.

They have ... and one significant way is that they all (at least the ones that I've used since the 80s) have pre-hardened emulsions. Adding more hardener just causes problems.

[Brian C. Miller]

John, when you say a second sheet of paper on the back was necessary, do you mean that you glued a blank sheet to the back too?

[domenico Foschi]

Archival glue?
I am afraid there is no such thing.

[MacGregor Anderson]

Enrique,

I'm afraid you will never truly understand "blind dedication to the craft" until you've stubbed your unshod toe on a dry mount press in the dark. And spilled your drink.

Others may approach the problem with sushi wrappers or dilute childhood glues. "Borrowed" manhole covers, their wive's irons, window panes, duct tape, public restroom hand dryers, dart boards, billboards facing South, the hoods of Lincoln town cars. You name it.

But in the end, you must bloody your toe on a press, stored in the hallway by the coat rack.

It's either that, or go with RC.

Mac

[John Cook]

Brian:

The key advantage of this technique is that the print is mounted wet, while still soft, before it has a chance to dry and develop permanent stiff curls. Pasting down a stubborn dry curly print probably won't work.

Because prints tend to stretch when wet and shrink back during drying, you get a nice tight job with this method. However, our murals were perhaps three to six feet long and the masonite was very flexible. Thus, the shrinking print caused the whole board to become slightly concave. The solution was to fix and wash an unexposed piece of mural paper and attach it, wet, to the reverse side to neutralize (or equalize) the pressure.

This may not be necessary with a smaller print on a good stout sheet of gatorfoam.

Domenico:

I believe the definition of "archival" is open to interpretation.

The product I use is touted as such, not because it is likely to last forever. Rather, it is unlikely to cause any permanent damage. The ph is neutral, it is reversible with a simple water bath and it does not become so brittle with age as typical school glues.

You are certainly welcome to another definition.

[Gene Crumpler]

Here is the easy answer. After you air dry your prints, take damp, not a wet cloth/sponge, and dampen the back of the print just until it starts to be a bit limp. Place between clean mat boards and place several large books or other weights on top. 12-24 hours your 16x20's will be almost flat. Then you should be able to mount then.

[Ed K.]

Here are a couple of late additions for this page.

If you look at http://www.trueart.info/adhesives.htm , you can read a nice set of comments regarding adhesives for mounting. The Methylcellulose adhesive sounds most interesting for potential wet mounting. PVA doesn't sound too good, however I can offer no experience with any of the wet mounts.

The watercolor artist masking tape method, suggested above by George Hart, sounds interesting. It also seems to match what people say about slowing down the dry time for the edges. I have some fiber prints taped right now to try it out, next to some other prints that are clipped back-to-back, and one hanging stretched by clips. If the print is not too crinkly or wavy, dry mount or weight work. Some people say that screens have problems unless kept absolutely clean from any residues between use or accumulated during storage. In a way similar to John's rubber band frame, I might try some strips to squeeze the edges and hold things flat during drydown to save on masking tape if that works ( just trim the print a tad later). If methlycellulose is compatible with John Cook's mural technique some some extent, it could be a very interesting way to go. Damp soft fiber print, methylcellulose and alluminum or other perhaps more inert material? It would be great to get a good quality mount without a huge dry mount press and the related cost.

[John Cook]

Ed, the article’s statement that PVA glues are not water-soluble after fully dry goes contrary to my experience. Perhaps the disparity has something to do with the exact definition of “fully dry”.

As discussed elsewhere, I once worked for a studio which made large murals on Kodak mural paper and wet-mounted them onto double-tempered Masonite with Elmer’s white glue from the hardware store.

In essence, the technique was to apply slightly diluted glue (about 1 cup of water in 1 gallon of glue) to the Masonite with a paint roller and allow it to dry overnight. Then a very light sanding to knock down any large peaks left from the texture of the roller.

Within a week, a sopping-wet mural was laid on the Masonite and squeegeed dry with an old black hard rubber Kodak squeegee. The water on the print re-wet and re-activated the Elmer’s glue, causing the print to bond.

The mounted prints/boards were left to dry on the studio floor overnight. As the paper dried, it shrunk enough to form a nice, tight mount job.

Sometimes we would pre-glue both sides of the Masonite, so that an oversized wet print could be wrapped around the edges of the Masonite and glued onto the back. A nice, neat way to treat the raw edges when the murals were not to be framed.

But to the original question: I have not tried to re-wet and remove an old wet-mounted mural after several years. Perhaps this is the time line to which your cited article is referring.

[Ed K.]

First Test Done

Using Kentmere fiber paper, 11x14 size, so far the following results in my environment:

1. Back to back with 4 clips hanging - 2 inch depth to curl, paper slightly distorted from rectagular shape. Not back to back but with clips, similar but worse results. Edges not too wavy in either, but overall print flatness marginal.

2. Hanging until nearly dry, then flattening under pressure - fair results, pretty flat, might at least dry mount without wrinkles or dings. Confirms Gene Crumpler's suggestion.

3. George Hart's watercolor taping method - masking tape around damp print, allow to dry face up, taped down - edges of print razor straight. Overall flatness very good especially in middle. Small amount of masking tape residue around edges that could be trimmed. Unfortunately, a small amount of wave near edges because tape did not allow edges to shrink as much as the nearby interior area of print. Overall, looks very mountable. Perhaps with a little more humidity, or some kind of pressure slightly less than the adhesive of masking tape, this might produce a perfect print suitable for hanging under a mat. This is a very promising method overall, and very worth trying again. Seems like whatever process has to keep edges drying near the same rate as the rest while also allowing the print to shrink while drying.

4. John Cook's method - about to try a couple of variants. So far, John is right about one thing, Lineco apparently makes a "reversable" version of their PVA which is labled "archival". There are also a number of articles regarding mixing methylcellulose glues with starches to control adhesion. Apparently not all PVA glues or methylcellulose glues are created equal. Glues, starches and "archival" adhesives seem to be sold by book binding concerns for the most part.

I just received an email from a Sintra supplier that says PVA glues work "OK" with Sintra, although bettter if the Sintra is lightly sanded and cleaned first. Double tempered Masonite is not so easy to get these days, at least for me, and it does absorb mosture over time plus weigh alot. 10mm Sintra would weigh less, not change with moisture, and ( we'll see ) probably not warp. Gator seems like it has a bit too much tooth underneath, which might affect the print surface.

Some people do it as John descrbes by precoating the board then using a very wet print. Others use a damp print and then apply the adhesive just before fitting the print to the board. I'm hoping for the second method - damp print on board with adhesive applied at that time to the board then roller/squeegee the print with optional wrapped sides.

These are not endorsements, however worth looking at are:

http://www.paperbookintensive.org/2whit.html - great article regarding mounting adhesives.

http://www.bookmakerscatalog.com/catalog/adhesives/adhesives.htm - sells most of the adhesives. Some of the starches seem potentially useful.

http://www.misterart.com/store/view/001/group_id/1718/Lineco-Methyl-Cellulose-Adhesive.htm - another "archival" adhesive, one that may or may not create a strong enough bond or bond to Sintra, however likely to work with masonite.

http://www.tri-dee.com - sells Sintra and will cut the sheets up into smaller sizes for a reasonable fee. If a decent quantity is purchased, the Sintra would cost less, be thicker, store beter and ( hopefully ) warp less than Masonite or not at all. Obviously, there must be others who offer simlilar pricing and services. Got a quick response to my email.

John - for murals, your method sounds great, it is a classic, no argument. I'm looking for ways to get the costs down while hoping to improve the "archival" chances of things. It seems that a lot of places want something removable in case the backing goes bad later on. Who knows about Sintra in this regard, there has not been enough time. Again, no argument with your method, just looking to see if there is a "modern" alternative. It would also be great to avoid using another piece of paper on the back, as the ideal paper would be the same as the front, which means wasting an expensive piece of nice fiber paper, right? I do know that 1/8th Sintra does warp badly over time even with a Chromogenic RC print on the front. 10mm is just over 3/8ths inch, which seems like enough for prints up to 16x20.

The prospect of actually mounting while wet or damp, skipping the warping and flattening part as well as dry mount press with heat sounds really good. If one of the next round of tests works out well, I'll let you know.

[John Cook]

Ed, I'm hanging on every word. On behalf of the rest of the troops, thanks so much for your efforts.

I agree that with the demise of Kodak Mural R paper, my methods described above are obsolete. I had hoped someone could update the technique with modern archival materials, saving the dry mount headaches.

A major problem with fiber paper (which I never noticed until I tried wet mounting) is the extent to which wet paper stretches. My three to four foot murals were an inch longer when wet. One had to take care when exposing on dry paper not to get anything important too near the edge or it might get cropped in mounting.

I now understand that this wet/dry size difference, together with uneven drying, is what causes unflat fiber prints.

We have used gatorfoam for dry-mounting color C prints for years. It won't squash in the big Seal vacuum press. The surface on our board is extremely smooth. We get it by the full 4x8 carton, truck freighted on an oak pallet. Comes in white with a white core, black with a black core and kraft paper brown. Thickness ranges from less than 1/4 to well over an inch.

If you got hold of some rough-surfaced board, could it have been from a competitor?

Thanks again for your work. I shall be checking back often for the next installment.

John

[Patrik Roseen]

I was thinking of starting a new thread when I came across this one...

I have this friend ;-) who accidently rushed the drying of fiberbased paper in such away that the edges got all curled up (from probably including more water than the middle part of the paper and therefor drying/shrinking slower).
Is it possible to wet the paper again and let it dry according to the methods above or could this make the curl even worse?
If it's possible to re-dry the paper...should it soak for a long time or a short time before drying it again?