Mounting without a press?

[Ironage]

I am fiddling with wet mounting prints using white glue, having read about it in the old Time Life series of books. I tried it using Elmers foam board and found that mounting on one side resulted in warp when dried. Mounting another print on the back side helped. I am also concerned about the thickness of the foam. Anyone else using this technique and have suggestions for materials?

[Greg]

Tried this a few times but always resulted in that warp when dried. Having the white glue dry with the print and board under a flat board with a weight on it solved the warping problem, but it took forever (days) for the glue to completely dry.

[Tin Can]

Tried this https://www.dickblick.com/products/crescent-perfect-mount-self-adhesive-mounting-board/

I prefer Hot Press

[Graeme Hamilton]

White glue shrink as it dries, might try wood glue which does not. However I am not sure about the "archival qualities" of it. 3M PMA would be a good solution, but you will need a roller or a squeegee to apply the adhesive backing to the print. If you go that route it would be a good idea to place a protective sheet over the print and squeegee/roll from the adhesive side (print face down).

[Drew Wiley]

Wrong glues. Daige has an excellent wet mount glue called Rollataq. Order directly from them. Seal Vacumount was also excellent, though the brand name has no doubt changed. You don't need a vacuum press, but both surfaces need to be somewhat absorbent (works for FB prints, not RC). The best board for this is called Mighty Core; you won't find it at art stores, and need to order it in case quantity from a specialty supplier. Apply with a closed cell high quality smooth foam mini "hot dog" paint roller like Whizz brand. Be very careful not to get the glue anywhere except on the back of the print. Then put the sandwich under a flat weight in a low humidity environment till the glue dries. Larger boards will need to be counter-mounted on the back with something analogous to prevent them from warping. "Cold mounting" is a completely different category than wet mounting, and is difficult to do well without a dedicated roller machine. Daige sells application machines for both methods if you want to make operation more efficient. But either require quite a bit of practice. You'll ruin a number of prints in the learning curve, so save up some of your scrap ones, and when learning wet mounting, you can practice on lower quality art store paper-faced fomeboards.

[Drew Wiley]

PS - drymounting with heat is far easier if FB prints are involved.

[jp]

If it was an old time life article, it might be referencing old thin singleweight paper. New photo paper is heavy duty art material. Old single weight paper was that era's equivalent of drugstore prints, but thinner and lighter.


If you can get it flat and staying flat, hinge mounting is an option... Use some good tape like filmoplast p90 and it's totally reversible.

A lesser option is mounting spray... Spray glue that gets on everything and go everywhere. Ideally glue only goes between the two surfaces being bonded.

Back in the days before desktop publishing, prepress people would use a hot wax roller to attach photographs, ads, text columns, etc to a mounting surface.

[Bill Burk]

I recommend Yes! A Stick Flat glue. I keep this paste in my finishing box.

Takes a bit of practice but is quite good fo an occasional mounting

[Joe O'Hara]

Another method, which I used before I started dry-mounting, is to use self-adhesive acrylic mounting corners. They are available from Archival Methods and others. You will need to leave some margin around the image so that the corners will be hidden by the overmat. You will need to "somehow" get the print perfectly flat (a slight curl is OK but not any waviness) for it to look good. Ironically the easiest way to get prints flat is with... a dry mount press. But you could probably use a clothing iron as well for that if you keep the temperature below 200 F.

Corners are nice because there are no concerns about them causing degradation to the image over time, and you can remove the print if the mount becomes soiled or if you rethink how you've printed it.

BTW foam board to my knowledge is not considered an "archival" mounting substrate for photographic prints, but of course not everyone is worried about that.

[Drew Wiley]

I once too tried Yes glue. But looking at some of those old prints very recently, there was strong discoloration not only under the print, but visibly creeping past the margins into the adjacent museum board. Thought about why - It's a dextrin glue, so a potential microbe food source.

[Drew Wiley]

DO NOT USE SPRAY ADHESIVES unless you want a short life !!!!! They're known to have severe health effects, and were once the leading cause of premature death in the picture frame trade.

[Ironage]

Joe, you comment about using a laundry iron dusted off some cobwebs in my mind. I remembered using Kodak mounting tissue with an iron when I was in my teens. Then I grabbed a Cibachrome off my living room wall from 1982, and took apart the frame. Hand ironed tissue still holding the print was revealed. Also noticed that the print was starting to fade a bit. 50 years on display in variable light. Not bad for a print made by hand. Isn’t Cibachrome considered RC?

[Ironage]

Tin Can, I think you win the prize. Self adhesive pressure sensitive should do the trick nicely for my needs. I will have to get some to test it though. I have a roller that should work.

[Drew Wiley]

The famous glossy Ciba was not RC, but coated on polyester. They did make a less popular "Pearl" non-shiny RC product. I don't recommend drymounting either. Look up static mounting; classic high gloss Ciba will hold a static charge for a number of years, and it can be redone. Works well up to 20X24 print size. Sheets of cold-mount acrylic adhesive sheets come in two broad categories. The amateur kind is the low-tack 3M PMA product, allegedly repositionable, but so is continental drift if you have enough patience. It works up to 16x20 print size; but you need to cover the print margins with a window mat because the corners tend to lift over time. The other category consists of the many high-tack permanent professional versions which are utterly unforgiving in application; but you can mount even very large print sizes this way, that is, if you have the right expensive equipment.

[interneg]

Sheets of cold-mount acrylic adhesive sheets come in two broad categories. The amateur kind is the low-tack 3M PMA product, allegedly repositionable, but so is continental drift if you have enough patience. It works up to 16x20 print size; but you need to cover the print margins with a window mat because the corners tend to lift over time. The other category consists of the many high-tack permanent professional versions which are utterly unforgiving in application; but you can mount even very large print sizes this way, that is, if you have the right expensive equipment.

Even the powerful high-tack stuff can struggle to hold a determined FB print in place. It'll also quite happily strip all the hair from your skin if you lean on the exposed adhesive material - and it's irksomely fussy about cleanliness, perfection of substrate surface etc - and if it goes wrong, it's reprint time.

[Drew Wiley]

Hi tack adhesive foils are best for large color prints. There are much easier choices for FB prints.

[Greg Y]

There are much easier choices for FB prints.

At the price/box of 16x20" and 20x24" the cost of the inevitable drymount press is not so daunting anymore.

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50907567083_f43e926dd7_c.jpg
Flickr

[Luis-F-S]

Make your life easier and get a press! A lot of times they’re almost giveaways.

[jp]

Yes... I got my 16x20 dry mount press for $100 in a craigslist parking lot cash transaction. Widely used in graphics arts not just photography. Tons of good complete used ones out there. Just have a good back. Mine probably weight 50+ pounds.
Great for final flattening FB prints as well as drymount work.

[Tin Can]

Yes, I know that

but I will be gone and forgotten

my now 22 year Hot Press FB prints seem unchanged


I agree with all of the above.

I was acquainted with the photo curator of the AGO years ago, and she told me in no uncertain terms that you should not mount a photograph you care about to any support in a permanent manner. The choice of mounting should be reversible for future restoration purposes. Dry mount adhesive sheets may be benign, but the odds are the board the photograph is mounted to will not be archival, so mating a photograph to a non-archival support is counterproductive. A tape hinge applied to the top margin of the photograph, using archival linen tape is preferred. The photo is taped to the rear (archival) mat board and the window mat hinged to attach to the rear board. The photo floats in the mat, allowing for seasonal expansion and contraction.

[Drew Wiley]

There is abundant evidence that, correctly-done, drymounting does not in any manner diminish the archival properties of FB silver gelatin prints, but actually adds protection by sealing off the backside and providing a handling border. For certain historic collections, mounted prints simply take up more space, or they might be dealing withe old improperly fixed prints needing re-treatment. But that "don't permanently mount any print" myth has been debunked many times. Certain hand-coated media on watercolor paper look better deckle-edged and hinged, but who the heck would want to buy a sizable glossy silver gelatin print all wavy, and without decent presentation. Show me a single well-known photographer whose prints were devalued due to proper drymounting - you can't ! Yes, there was a time long ago when people didn't know about proper substrates and so forth, whose ignorance now causes conservators and restorationists headaches. But that fact need not apply anymore.

[eli]

Use Acrylic medium, paste type, together with a barrier layer or two, on the mounting board, which will stop and gases from penetrate the heavier paste medium and the print.

I recommend Golden Acrylics, two or three liquid GAC 100 medium to seal the board from any out gassing on the side the print will be 'pasted to' and Golden Matt Heavy Medium, painted on the support, as the glue, or print , which has much less water to buckle the print or board, which I recommend should be 100 cotton rag, archival, 4 ply, if you want a museum quality piece to sell.

High quality 'hot' in natural 100% Cotton rag (which is made of new, purpose made rags) Water Colour papers, like Arches hot press, a smooth board at 300 lb. thickness will also do as an excellent mounting board, when also coated with the barrier GAC 100 and Heavy mat gel from Golden Acrylics.

Otherwise, use a regular type of mounting board and still use the mediums I suggest, for a better than expected mounting surface.

Do give the backing board 100 percent coatings.over the entire backing side of any board or paper being used, including all four sides, and, test if the mat window board can be safely treated, without buckling, before the window is cut, so the print does no touch any board at all.


Good Luck,
Eli

[John Jarosz]

I have some of my dry mounted prints done at school in 1969 and 70. They are exactly in the same condition as the day I made them. That nonsense about not dry mounting prints has been foisted on photographers by the same types that keep illumination level so low at photo exhibitions that you need flashlights to see the prints.

[Maris Rusis]

There is abundant evidence that, correctly-done, drymounting does not in any manner diminish the archival properties of FB silver gelatin prints, but actually adds protection by sealing off the backside and providing a handling border. ........
Listen to Drew, absolutely true! I have dry mounted photographs from nearly 50 years ago when I was young, broke, and desperate to get stuff into frames and onto a wall. The cheap mount board I used is now badly foxed, brown spots all over it, but the gelatin-silver photographs on it are as pristine as the day they were made.

[interneg]

Hi tack adhesive foils are best for large color prints. There are much easier choices for FB prints.

Oh, very much so - unless there's a good reason not to, into the dry mount press it goes. Must say though that the vacuum presses don't seem quite as consistent as the smaller more traditional ones.

[Drew Wiley]

Vac blanket presses are nice for wet glue laminations, whether artwork or woodworking plys. Just before I retired, I sold several high end German systems to cabinet shops, who had in-house ability to fabricate certain major components themselves. But my regular 500T drymount press is plenty big for me. I've done wet mounting, but it's not very practical in this foggy climate unless you do have a heated vac press. They're less common in framing shops now that large cold mounting roller machines have caught on for big color prints. I have one of those too.

[Ben Calwell]

I bought an old dry mount press years ago, and it is one of the best investments I ever made. I think it’s an old Seal press, the one with the big green and red lights that make it look like a giant frog. I forget what I paid for it. It’s quite heavy.

[Paul Ron]

spray adhesive for photos.

https://www.amazon.com/3M-Photo-Mount-Ounce-Adhesive/dp/B001680QHW/ref=sr_1_4?dchild=1&keywords=photo+spray+adhesive&qid=1617131454&sr=8-4


.

[Bernice Loui]

This would be a "Penny Wise, Pound Foolish" question. Later 1980's decided to get a Seal 210M dry mount press, found a good used one for not too much $. Been using that same dry mount press to this day with zero problems. What has changed are the materials and suppliers related to dry mounting.

IMO, properly done dry mounting with high quality materials remains proven good for longevity and print display. While some archival museum folks frown on dry mounted prints, they have proven to be very stable, durable and appears to aid in print longevity. The prints that were dry mounted in the 80's look much the same today as they did when initially dry mounted.

Highly suggest to spend the $ for a working dry mount press, spend the $ needed for the proper dry mounting supplies then learn how to dry mount. In the long run, this will prove to be the correct choice instead of seeking lower cost solution that could be far more costly with the passage of time.

Posted this some time ago:
https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?155462-What-Happened-to-Dry-Mounting-Prints&highlight=dry+mount



Bernice

[Tin Can]

and that link produced a link to 8X10 adhesive magnets

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B013IVATJY/ref=sspa_dk_hqp_detail_aax_0?psc=1&spLa=ZW5jcnlwdGVkUXVhbGlmaWVyPUExVlMxOE1BWEYxNlpYJmVuY3J5cHRlZElkPUEwNDM2MDM1RFVFWkozU1hJWDA2JmVuY3J5cHRlZEFkSWQ9QTA1MDM2ODgzT0VPRENTRVFBVlBLJndpZGdldE5hbWU9c3BfaHFwX3NoYXJlZCZhY3Rpb249Y2xpY2tSZWRpcmVjdCZkb05vdExvZ0NsaWNrPXRydWU=


spray adhesive for photos.

https://www.amazon.com/3M-Photo-Mount-Ounce-Adhesive/dp/B001680QHW/ref=sr_1_4?dchild=1&keywords=photo+spray+adhesive&qid=1617131454&sr=8-4


.

[Tin Can]

If I did not have a VGC exactly like this, I would buy one new

D&K 210M Commercial Dry Mounting Press - 18.5 x 23" (https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/46583-REG/Seal_Bienfang_SE_1403_210M_Commercial_Dry_Mounting.html/reviews)



This would be a "Penny Wise, Pound Foolish" question. Later 1980's decided to get a Seal 210M dry mount press, found a good used one for not too much $. Been using that same dry mount press to this day with zero problems. What has changed are the materials and suppliers related to dry mounting.

IMO, properly done dry mounting with high quality materials remains proven good for longevity and print display. While some archival museum folks frown on dry mounted prints, they have proven to be very stable, durable and appears to aid in print longevity. The prints that were dry mounted in the 80's look much the same today as they did when initially dry mounted.

Highly suggest to spend the $ for a working dry mount press, spend the $ needed for the proper dry mounting supplies then learn how to dry mount. In the long run, this will prove to be the correct choice instead of seeking lower cost solution that could be far more costly with the passage of time.

Posted this some time ago:
https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?155462-What-Happened-to-Dry-Mounting-Prints&highlight=dry+mount



Bernice

[Paul Ron]

and that link produced a link to 8X10 adhesive magnets

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B013IVATJY/ref=sspa_dk_hqp_detail_aax_0?psc=1&spLa=ZW5jcnlwdGVkUXVhbGlmaWVyPUExVlMxOE1BWEYxNlpYJmVuY3J5cHRlZElkPUEwNDM2MDM1RFVFWkozU1hJWDA2JmVuY3J5cHRlZEFkSWQ9QTA1MDM2ODgzT0VPRENTRVFBVlBLJndpZGdldE5hbWU9c3BfaHFwX3NoYXJlZCZhY3Rpb249Y2xpY2tSZWRpcmVjdCZkb05vdExvZ0NsaWNrPXRydWU=

thats great! now you can put your pix on the refrigerator.

[Tin Can]

I need a bigger fridge!

not


thats great! now you can put your pix on the refrigerator.

[R.K]

Rice starch working good on FB and RC papers. Not difficult gluing process and preparation of the glue.
https://www.talasonline.com/Rice-Starch
The glue preparation instruction also on that side.

[Tin Can]

Wow!


Rice starch working good on FB and RC papers. Not difficult gluing process and preparation of the glue.
https://www.talasonline.com/Rice-Starch
The glue preparation instruction also on that side.

[neil poulsen]

The Seal sized 201 dry mount press is a good way to go. I had one for years, and they last for years. There are ways to mount up to 16x20 or larger prints on even larger sized matte boards through multiple pressings.

A few years ago, that sold for about $200 each. Not sure what they are not, but it's probably somewhat less.