Glassless framing...

[timeless]

Hello again

Yet another newbie question that I should probably be embarrassed about asking... in fact, several of them!

I have a bunch of fossil fish slabs that I've been framing up with a driftwood moulding from Lion. They just seem to work better without glass, so I didn't put any in. For example:



I'm beginning to wonder, though, if it's very sensible. Will the mount board warp, or go brown (or something) without a protective layer of glass? Should I tell the customer (when I finally get one) that they shouldn't hang it in the kitchen or bathroom? Or should I not worry about it?

On a similar note...

I have a number of 9th-10th century Viking bearded axes that I'd like to frame up. They're quite small (generally around five or six inches in length) and look like this:



I was thinking of doing the same thing (framing without glass) and mounting them in such away that the owner can just take them out of the frame and handle them (as they are tactile objects), then put them back again. So just sitting on little hooks or something.

I was wondering if this is common practice in the framing world, and whether you would have any pointers/advice on how to do it. Or is it a daft idea?

Thanks for any help

Jon

[Keadyart]

Depending on size.the mount may or may not bow,but without glass it is open to dust ,splashes etc.and the mount would get grubby.If you like the no glass look,you could always frame using a wooden 'slip' instead of mount,or use a tray frame(google).
Looks well by the way.
All the best
Brian

[Framemaker Richard]

I think the mountboard will just get dusty and eventually not look very nice... and the fossil itself will also get dusty.. why not use a glass like Tru Vue Ultravue or Artglass? which often looks virtually invisible.

[prospero]

The fossil itself should be OK. Just a light dusting every now and then. The mountboard on the other hand will
soon become tatty. It's just not up to long-term exposure to the outside world. As already mentioned, AR glass is
the thing. It's quite cunning stuff. From most angles it's practically invisible.

The axeheads would normally be mounted with something like mylar straps. Making them removable is a bit of a tall ask.
I suppose you could perch them on custom-made wire hooks. Lot of faffing about though so make sure you charge for it.
A museum would probably fabricate clear acrylic fittings to hold them in place, but in that situation they would more likely be
display on a horizontal position in a big display case. Holding them on a vertical surface is a bit more tricky. Having said that,
they are reasonably tough so if they did fall it would not damage them a lot.

[poliopete]

It would be a pity to see nice framing like that deteriorate for the sake of a piece of glass

I would definitely be glazing the fossils with AR glass That will save someone a lot of dusting and trying to remove fly dirt's from the mount and fossil at the end of summer.

If cutting glass is the problem then pop over anytime for a demo' and a cup of tea

Peter.

[grahamdown]

why not a good quality non-reflective glass - then it will look as if there isnt any?

[timeless]

Thanks for all the suggesstions - it looks like low refelctive glass is the way forward! It might make it an expensive frame, though (as it's about 80cm wide).

Also - thanks for the tips on tray frames and mylar straps (both of which now googled)

Cheers

Jon

[Not your average framer]

Mylar can be a little reflective in a well lit location, so this may not always be the most ideal option. It is true that Mylar is a good conservation option and is also fully reversible, but leaving such a wide exposed area beteen the fossil and the aperture in the mount, leaves less scope for reducing the angle from which light can strike the Mylar and produce noticeable reflections.

This may be too late, for you to want to change anything on this job, but if you must use Mylar in a case such as this, setting the job further back behind a smaller mount aperture does tend to minimise both the visablity of the mylar and also the angle from which light can be reflected off of the Mylar.

Another option is to squeeze the fossil into a cutout in so plasizote foam and to space the front of the fossil only a little back from the glass, so that the glass will retain the fossil, in the unlikely event of the frame getting a big enough knock as to displace the fossil in the plastizote.

Framing difficult objects like this is a real art and is worth developing as something which you as a framer will become known for. Word of mouth will do all the rest for you and extra business can result from customers becoming aware that you can produce an impressive job framing with difficult items such as this.

[timeless]

Thanks Mark - plastizote... another thing to google! It sounds like the sort of thing I'll need to get familiar with, though, as I only frame 3D things.

The handyman on the little industrial estate where my workshop is turned up last week with two pictures of motorbikes he wanted framing. I just stuck them to some mountboard with double sided tape - literally no idea if that's what you're meant to do, as I've never framed a picture before! Seemed to work OK though.

[Not your average framer]

Be particularly careful when you use any form of self adhesive materials for and do your research on the properties of any self adhesive materials that you use. There are not many permanent self adhesive materials about and those that are permanent may not be safe for conservation framing use.

This is a generalisation, but in most cases it is true. There are a few very expensive aerospace materials which are exceptions by they are not normally obtainable by normal people like you and I. In general almost all self adhesive tapes have a limited shelf life after which full performance when using these tapes is considered to be not reliable. This is follwed by the service life, which is the useable life after application. At the end of the service life, some sort of degrading of the adhesive bond is expected to occur.

In many cases where the self adhesive on the tape is of the synthetic rubber solution variety, the main thing that you can say that is permanent about the tape, will be the mess that it leaves behind. The other type of adhesive commonly used on self adhesive tapes is an acrylic based adhesive, which is cassified in two methods of application to the tape during manufacture. These are either solvent based, or hot melt. I only mention this, because the hot melt types often have more grab, due to a higher coat weight, but there are higher coat weight solvent based acrylic adhesives around as well.

Items with any weight may prove problematic at some point in time, if you are relying only upon self adhesive double sided tape. I'm not saying that self adhesive tapes are no good, as they can provide an easy means of locating an item exactly where you want it with minimum effort, or fuss, but an additional means of retaining the item in place beyond the life of the self adhesive is a prudent thing to use at the same time. For example, using a double sided tape to hold an item in place, while a suitable adhesive, or glue sets, provides easy of initial fixing and the benefit of a longer acting adhesive, or glue to retain the item in place beyond the usable life of the self adhesive.

[timeless]

Thanks again Mark, very interesting!

I haven't used self-adhesive tape to mount any 3D objects (just the motorbike pictures, which were cheap, glossy prints), but it's good to know all that.

Cheers

Jon