Mounting without glass

[coops]

I recently saw some great looking prints mounted in a frame without glass. Don't know if the paper is treated or a special paper is used to print to. Hoping someone here can point me in the right direction.
Thanks

[Bruce Watson]

I recently saw some great looking prints mounted in a frame without glass. Don't know if the paper is treated or a special paper is used to print to. Hoping someone here can point me in the right direction.
Thanks

Most all silver gelatin darkroom prints have a protective clear coating of gelatin over the silver carrying emulsion already. They can be displayed without glazing if you are willing to do it. Alternative processes like platinum prints may or may not have a protective over coat depending on how they were made. If they aren't protected you run the risk of the next sticky little hand touch ruining the print. So if they aren't already protected, you might want to coat them with an acrylic similar to the way you'd protect an inkjet print.

You can coat inkjet prints on paper with a fixative like PremierArt Print Shield. (http://www.inkjetart.com/cart/protective-coatings-premierart-print-shield-c-823_824_825.html)

A better alternative for display without glazing IMHO is to print inkjet prints to canvas. Use a liquid laminate (roll, spray, machines, whatever) like Clearstar ClearShield type C. (http://www.clearstarcorp.com/clearshield.asp) If you print to canvas and leave room for a gallery wrap, you can go a step farther and display without a frame. When done well a gallery warped canvas print can rival a fully framed print, again IMHO. Clearly this is a matter of what you like so YMMV.

[Frank Petronio]

Probably location and placement matter as to whether you do it. I certainly would avoid high traffic areas and places where children and drunken louts frequent.

Considering that nearly all paintings and sculpture -- usually worth multiple times more than photography -- are displayed "naked" then maybe it is vanity and conceit that photographers must protect their precious works under glass?

[Darren Kruger]

Considering that nearly all paintings and sculpture -- usually worth multiple times more than photography -- are displayed "naked" then maybe it is vanity and conceit that photographers must protect their precious works under glass?

Sculpture is pretty hardy. It can stand being out in the rain or under water for a long while. Oil based painting can be cleaned gently. The glass helps protect against airborne contaminants as well. The Wilhelm Institute has a section on framing and display of color and black and white photos.

I've also heard displaying under glass is a cultural thing. I've talked to a photographer who displayed in Norway (maybe Sweden?) and the practice was for the framed prints not to be under glass.

-Darren

[Curtis Miller]

Oil paintings are incredibly tough once dry. There must be 1000 times as much pigment as the delicate spray on an inkjet print. And they're usually protected with a varnish that's designed to be removed and replaced periodically. So, no vanity in protecting a delicate photograph. They won't last long without the protection. An oil painting could last 1,000 years without much trouble.

[Michael Gordon]

I just had a 50" print mounted on Sintra and laminated with Lexan UV-resistant laminate. Virtually anything is possible these days.

Prints are subject to ALL atmospheric contaminants, so I would never recommend hanging a naked print unless you do not care about its longevity. I hang framed AND glazed work in a nice salon, and in under one year the prints are damaged from hair treatment chemicals. Smoke of any sort is very damaging.