Box board suitable as barrier paper? To good to be true?

Roboframer · Post by **Roboframer** » Tue 04 Apr, 2006 5:24 pm

Mark,

I am not a FATG fan, I was once - to me membership was an expensive magazine subscription. I still get the mag - it's useful.

This should be another topic really, but, in a nutshell, IMHO the FATG is run by people who want to sell me things, any trade body I am going to be a member of needs to be impartial, the FATG never can be.

It's heart is in the right place but that is not good enough for me.

I set my standards LONG before the FATG did theirs and theirs are not good enough for me - I 'meet or Exceed' They do not set a separate level for active (artcare) conservation, and I think they should - why wont't they? Because it would upset that supplier's competitors - forget the fact that this is information that we NEED TO KNOW.

Nielsen are miffed at the guild and have voted with their feet, so it's not just small potatoes like me.

Having said all that - if I lived nearer to a local branch i would join just to be able to meet up with other framers regularly, but I would still always have the same opinion of the guild.

We need a new trade body - it could maybe be called the

Framing &
Art
Retail
Trade
Society

(Nice abbreviation - eh)

Not your average framer · Tue 04 Apr, 2006 8:22 pm

Roboframer - I think this is becoming a very useful and informative thread. Your way of defining your framing standards gets right to the objective in mind in a way that is immediately obvious and needs little explaination to customers. I wonder if you would be so kind as to give a little more detail on what you consider as the differences between active and passive conservation measures.

Also I've been checking up on the various prices and varieties of foam core board and I suspect there must be some significant differences between difference types and makes. My main thought being the density or robustness of different boards.

My own stock is white both sides and was the best deal for a box at the time, but if I'm gonna use it for backing board I'd better be sure it's up to the job. My present stock dosn't seem to be particularly solid and easily dents. I also suspect customers might query the use of a white backing board, so I guess I might need to go for the brown version.
Any thoughts,
Thanks,
Mark

Roboframer · Post by **Roboframer** » Tue 04 Apr, 2006 9:10 pm

Mark

Passive conservation - 'normal' conservation boards protect art work by not deteriorating, or should I say, taking a long time before deteriorating, the better the quality, the longer they take. In other words, it could be said they do nothing!

Active Conservation - 'Artcare' boards, from Nielsen/Bainbridge ACTIVELY protect by trapping airborne pollutants and turning them into harmless salts - in a nutshell.

There are varying opinions on this but mine is this - these boards meet or better the standards of the competition WITHOUT that technology and are very keenly priced.

They are fade and bleed resistant, cut very well and there is an excellent choice of colour and texture.

I found the company a little bit difficult to deal with at first, but now I find them difficult to beat.

My opinion, and that of many others is that an artcare board, made from trees, outperforms a competitor's board made from cotton.

As for foamboard as a backing - I've thrown darts at corricor and other fluted boards as well as foamboard, with the same results. But piercing of the board should not be an issue.

I use artcare foamboard as I have said, on MOST things. But where it would be wasted - non conservation jobs - see above - I either use the brown fluted stuff - forget what it's called, I think the non-waterproof version of 'artbak' - I get it from Glass & Mirror anyway, or again from Glass & Mirror - 'Artfoam' (I think that is what it's called) - acid free foam centre board at a very good price (do not have all the info here at home)

Regards colour - I changed overnight with no problems and will soon be adding a Tyvek dustcover - also white - or opaque/white.

I stamp the back of my frames - much better than labels, stamps do not peel off - looks great against the white.

One thing I like about these levels/standards is that they simplify things, I don't have to worry about 'Is this worth protecting' or asking silly questions like 'Do you want this preserved for future generations' I just DO it!

Simplifies stock as well - it's all artcare, bar one corner where I keep my fluted boards and artfoam.

If they ever develope an U.V glass that does not scratch - well - only as much as you would expect normal glass to - I'll take that on as standard too - leaving Joe's framers up the road in my wake - again!

Not your average framer · Tue 04 Apr, 2006 9:33 pm

Thanks Roboframer,

I'm already with you on Bainbridge, I use their whitecore and artcare ranges as my stock range. Their range of colours and finishes are just fantastic and the price is very competitive even against inferior brands too!

I had a little suprise though the other day - my mount cutter is set-up for Bainbridge which I always understood to be 1.4mm thick, but for one customer order I got in some Arqadia (again 1.4mm). However when I when to cut it the cuts did not come close to meeting at the corner. Out came the micrometer and I found although Bainbridge publications say 1.4mm thick it's only 1.3mm (I checked a few other colours from rack - all 1.3mm). Not that I'm likely to change - just a suprise.

By the way, Bainbridge cuts much easier that Arqadia in my experience.
Cheers,
Mark

osgood · Post by **osgood** » Tue 04 Apr, 2006 9:41 pm

Roboframer wrote: If they ever develope an U.V glass that does not scratch - well - only as much as you would expect normal glass to - I'll take that on as standard too - leaving Joe's framers up the road in my wake - again!

John,
What type of UV glass have you used that scratches more than normal glass???

Roboframer · Post by **Roboframer** » Tue 04 Apr, 2006 11:04 pm

Only two types so far - Tru Vu and a product from a UK Supplier (Glass & Mirror) that has no name (THey call it G&M UV) - better UV protection Than tru Vu - no ripple effect like Tru Vu and a bit cheaper.

Never looked further than this supplier - no - not true - but anyone else I have looked at here sells Tru Vu or other coated products that scratch.

I can clean marks from normal glass with 0000 grade steel wool - that is what I want from UV before I take it on as standard.

osgood · Post by **osgood** » Tue 04 Apr, 2006 11:15 pm

John,
Wow! Are you pulling my leg?
That's a pretty radical cleaning method. Is this practise normal in UK?

I hope you are not holding your breath til that happens! There's no way you could use steel wool to clean glass available down here in Oz, nor would you have to.

I have been using Tru Vue for about 15 years and have never found any mark that requires any more than Tru Vue liquid glass cleaner.

Roboframer · Post by **Roboframer** » Tue 04 Apr, 2006 11:41 pm

Er, normal glass - clear 2mm paper float - you can clean it with 0000 grade steel wool as standard if you like, it won't scratch it. Just only necessary for stubborn marks, sometimes self-inflicted, well, actually MAYBE not necessary, but bloody quick and effective!

Offcut storage of UV glass is the problem - NO WAY am I going to interleave each precious piece with paper.

It scratches too easy otherwise - on the coated side anyway. Why can't they put the coating in the middle?

Do you use Liberon 0000 grade steel wool for other things? It won't mark normal glass at all. Very useful for the old pieces that come in and the customer insists on keeping the old horticultural glass - rippled, flawed and MINGING. Extra fine steel wool gets rid of the old nicotine and bugs no probs!

Come to think of it we stock a scratchproof acrylic - 'Artshield' you can clean THAT with 0000 grade steel wool too - not a mark.

So I'd say it's about time technology caught up.

Scratches on Tru Vu are such a problem that I have to sign a disclaimer on receipt. Like I'm going to check every sheet. I ALWAYS find marks and scratches on the stuff - from new out of the box.

I can make them go away if I take my glasses off though!

Your eyes OK Ormond - or you getting better stuff than us?

osgood · Post by **osgood** » Wed 05 Apr, 2006 8:52 am

Roboframer wrote: Offcut storage of UV glass is the problem - NO WAY am I going to interleave each precious piece with paper.

Scratches on Tru Vu are such a problem that I have to sign a disclaimer on receipt. Like I'm going to check every sheet. I ALWAYS find marks and scratches on the stuff - from new out of the box.

Your eyes OK Ormond - or you getting better stuff than us?

I always keep my UV and Anti-reflection and Museum glass in the box it came in. Lift one flap of the box up like a hatch and slide it back in from the top, between the sheets of brown paper.

Can't say that I've ever had scratches on UV glass out of the box. An occassional little speck in the coating, but nothing more than that.

My eyes are OK as long as I have my glasses on. I can spot a 3 micron speck of crap at a hundred paces! We must be getting better stuff or something tragic is happening to yours on the way there!

I handle coated glass with white gloves and place a clean sheet of matboard on my Fletcher glass cutter so as to not mark the coated side.