Ad blocker detected: Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors. Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker on our website.
I have been given a largish ( 960mm x 750mm ) limited edition print, where the customer wants it in a box frame 20mm deep, right up to the edges of the print.
On completion I am finding that the print is bowing/waving in the centre of the print.
Is there any way round this or should I sell the idea of having a mount in place to flatten the artwork, or dry-mounting the print to board.
Dry mounting will fix it. But this would not be framing to conservation standards. The print would effectively 'altered', or to a collector - 'mutilated'. So any intrinsic value the print might have would be wiped out. The only way to maintain the value and accommodate the customers whims would be to float mount it leaving a small margin for expansion. And then you would have to hinge it very carefully and no guarantee that it would lay flat in the frame.
There are no two ways about it - The only way to treat a print such as this is to use a mount.
I'm sure some people think that a wide mount is just a sneaky framer's way of selling a bigger frame. If they want a smaller frame, they should have bought a smaller picture.
btw. A mount won't flatten the artwork. It serves only to stop it going wappy in the first place.
Thanks for your promt response prospero, I think I will show the customer the frame, finished, as we agreed. Point out the shortfalls (bowing), which, maybe ok with her, ( I may be being a little fussy), and discuss the possibility of putting a 75mm wide 2mm thick mount to help hold the print in place. There is quite a lot of white area around the actual printed area.
why not also show them an image that has been drymounted on one half & not on the other half. This is always an effective way to demonstrate the benefits of drymounting - over hinging & the customer can "see the difference"...
What are the top three reasons a customer buys a limited edition print???
1 - they like the subject - no one ever bought a picture they hated
2 - the colour scheme - remember all those punters with cushion covers & wallpaper samples
3 - the size of the piece - out goes the cry across the gallery "darling - I measured it & I think this one will be fit perfectly"
You will notice something here - there nothing to do with "possible resale vaule" - just human nature & people wanting their art to look good in it's surroundings - so ask them why they bought it - never ASSUME why they bought it...#
Otherwise you make an ASS out of U & ME - ASSUME - get it???
Your too late I'm afraid - I retired in April 2024
WelshFramer wrote:Why not have the best of both worlds and bond it down to Artcare Restore?
Interesting thought Mike,
We have had a few dodgy batches of Artcare Restore and don't trust it anymore.
If we were (on the very rare occasion) drymounting anything now a days we would do it ourselves and use an acid free DM Tissue onto 5mm fomecore
in this case I would err on the side of caution and phone up the customer explain the options and explain the best case option, then get them to sign some sort of waiver.
take a copy of said waiver and put one inside and one on the back of the artwork
YOu can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink
So far I've had no problems with Artcare Restore. I've had to remove a few pieces of artwork when the customer has decided to have it reframed in a larger frame or where it's been for sale as mounted without a frame and has been damaged through rough handling.
One artist customer yesterday decided she would have all of her work bonded to Artcare. She never conditions the paper for her watercolours and the Artcare bond is normally strong enough to hold those flat. However, she has now decided to standardise on frame sizes so that she can swap her artwork between being framed or just mounted. I will bond everything to Artcare and stick the window mount to it. I'm currently framing a collection that she think won't sell but we good to have in an exhibition (not sure why). Once the exhibition is over she will remove those pics from their frames and stick in some that I've prepared as mounted items.
The hope is that doing it this way will be safer than handling hinged items (that she frequently reinforces with Selloptape) and will save the normal pig's ear she makes when reusing old frames.
The only question is how to best finish off the backs. Glass+windowmount+Artcare+backingboard might be rather deep for the rebate of many mouldings and framing without the backing board wouldn't look so good. She will want me to use flexipoints and won't want the backs taped. Any ideas?
mitretight wrote:I have been given a largish ( 960mm x 750mm ) limited edition print, where the customer wants it in a box frame 20mm deep, right up to the edges of the print.
MT,
Customers, in most cases don't have as much knowledge as the framer, so best plan is to educate them as much as possible so they know the consequences of their decision.
There are occasions where customers want something that is not practical or adviseable. If you can't persuade the customer to do what's best for the art (if it's valuable to them) you have to decide whether to accomodate their wishes or use the word "NO" and let someone else frame it.
That's a very good point Nigel Nobody, and I completly understand that it is my problem, in the fact that I knew that the job would be problematic, but would deal with it when I came to do the work.
The customer did come in with 3 other jobs though, and, while the 3 other jobs are fine I think I need to buy a little more time on this one. The immortal words " He did't think it through" spring to mind!!
If you were a doctor and some person came hobbling into your office with a broken leg (their own, one hopes....) and said they didn't want to be lugging a huge plaster cast round for weeks and can't you just wrap some duct tape round it..... Well you would either do it properly or tell them the walk. (or limp)
Bagpuss wrote:Has anyone ever had occassion to actually release the Artwork after dry mounting onto Artcare Restore ?
Yes. Sometimes it isn't even necessary to heat the board first - just slide a piece of mountboard underneath.
The bond is very weak and when broken the adhesive stays on the board rather than the artwork. It is, however, generally strong enough to hold artwork flat when using a window mount. I wouldn't use it for float mounting and I have had a few rippled watercolours on very thick paper that wouldn't stay perfectly flat - they were, however, much flatter than if I had only hinged them.
If you look at the surface of Artcare Restore it doesn't seem to have a solid coating of adhesive. It's as if the adhesive has been applied by flicking a brush at it - i.e. spots of adhesive over the surface.
One problem is that they may have bought it for the size, the colour and the way it looks, but, if they decide to sell it in a few years and the guy they sell it to knocks the price offered right own due to it being dry mounted, they will have forgotten what you said and be knocking on your door for compo.
I have seen over the years quite a few example of prints that were bought for a few pounds and are now worth a fortune. That is, they would have been worth a fortune if they were not dry-mounted. In particular, an small early Robert Taylor print signed by Douglas Bader and Adolf Galland. This was not even a limited edition. One I saw was close-framed and stuck to hardboard with wallpaper paste. I doubt if any mint copies actually exist. Same with David Shepherd's Winter of '43: Somewhere in England. These were big prints and therefore a lot got trimmed down and framed without a mount.
People who are serious collectors and pay serious money will expect a print to be off-the-press condition.
Having said that, these are different times. Most limited edition prints of today are not going to increase in value. The thought occurs that framing practices have improved over the years to such an extent that less prints get knackered and therefore they aren't so rare. Ergo they are less valuable.
John,
That theory may have some validity with 'printed' media. Maybe not so much with original art.
However, I think we should do the best we can to protect each piece of art that is important to the customer.
