Print touching glass question

Jedimagic3

Grumbler
Thread starter
Joined
Dec 5, 2020
Posts
15
Loc
Oxford uk
Business
Unemployed
Hello there guys,I have a few questions I hope you can help with.
I just got back some framed prints from a local framers,I sent them to have the glass changed to u.v. glass.
When i got them home and looked at them it seems the prints are flush with glass.
Every other print I have had framed in the past has always had a small air gap between the print and the glass.
I asked the framer about this today and he said it was fine for the print to be touching the glass as it was u.v. glass and the coating on the glass would prevent it sticking.
Is this correct?.Should I get him to redo the job and use spacers to create a small gap between the print and glass?.
They are valuable prints so need to have it done right.Hoping you guys can advise me on this as this seems the place to ask.

Regards
 
Welcome to the G!

There should be an air space between the art and glass for several reasons. The interface can provide a point for condensation and fungal growth, it can cause contact damage, burnishing and scuffing, and in the event of certain types of art, it can indeed stick.
We usually reserve this kind of framing for inexpensive and replaceable poster art that has been dry mounted, not the kind of treatment you would want for expensive prints.
There should also be matting (mount in the UK) to provide space around the print so it can react to changes in its environment without being restricted. Paper expands with humidity increase, and if not allowed to, it can cockle (ripple).
 
Welcome to the G!

There should be an air space between the art and glass for several reasons. The interface can provide a point for condensation and fungal growth, it can cause contact damage, burnishing and scuffing, and in the event of certain types of art, it can indeed stick.
We usually reserve this kind of framing for inexpensive and replaceable poster art that has been dry mounted, not the kind of treatment you would want for expensive prints.
There should also be matting (mount in the UK) to provide space around the print so it can react to changes in its environment without being restricted. Paper expands with humidity increase, and if not allowed to, it can cockle (ripple).
Thanks so much for the reply.
 
Thanks for your reply.Just to clarify though,it makes no difference if the glass is u.v or not?.
As I said this was the reason he gave that it was ok for the print to be touching.

Regards to you both for answering
 
I asked the framer about this today and he said it was fine for the print to be touching the glass as it was u.v. glass and the coating on the glass would prevent it sticking.

That's a good one! I have never heard THAT one before!

Completely false, but.. points for originality.
 
I asked the framer about this today and he said it was fine for the print to be touching the glass as it was u.v. glass and the coating on the glass would prevent it sticking.

That's a good one! I have never heard THAT one before!

Completely false, but.. points for originality.
Thanks for the reply framah
 
I ditto the need for mats. Even with a spacer, if these prints are valuable, you want to protect them as best as you can. 8-ply mats, cotton rag would be my personal recommendation. The 8 ply, or a double 4-ply, would create a very generous amount of space between glass and the print.
Without the mat, biggest concern will be a rippling effect of the print.
 
I ditto the need for mats. Even with a spacer, if these prints are valuable, you want to protect them as best as you can. 8-ply mats, cotton rag would be my personal recommendation. The 8 ply, or a double 4-ply, would create a very generous amount of space between glass and the print.
Without the mat, biggest concern will be a rippling effect of the print.
Thanks for the reply Ylva
 
Yep to all of the above.

If this guy has just jammed the prints between the glazing material and a backing with no support or air space he definitely does not know diddley squat about preserving artwork and needs educating.

Maybe print up these replies and show them to him - you may set his feet on the path towards education and improvement.
 
Yep to all of the above.

If this guy has just jammed the prints between the glazing material and a backing with no support or air space he definitely does not know diddley squat about preserving artwork and needs educating.

Maybe print up these replies and show them to him - you may set his feet on the path towards education and improvement.
Thanks for the reply artfolio.
 
I agree with above replies. UV coating only
blocks UV, it does not prevent condensation in glass. If this is valuable art, it really should be matted.

If you prefer no matting for design reasons, you could have the art pressed up against UV acrylic with no spacers, and it will be flatter. Acrylic doesn't condensate like glass and is considered conservation. But acrylic does cost more than glass.

I'm not a big fan of glass spacer against art, because it is a hard plastic and over time it could leave indentation in the art. And spacers don't let the art expand and contract very well. I much prefer matting. Usually my customer chose the glass and spacer option because it is cheaper.
 
I agree with above replies. UV coating only
blocks UV, it does not prevent condensation in glass. If this is valuable art, it really should be matted.

If you prefer no matting for design reasons, you could have the art pressed up against UV acrylic with no spacers, and it will be flatter. Acrylic doesn't condensate like glass and is considered conservation. But acrylic does cost more than glass.

I'm not a big fan of glass spacer against art, because it is a hard plastic and over time it could leave indentation in the art. And spacers don't let the art expand and contract very well. I much prefer matting. Usually my customer chose the glass and spacer option because it is cheaper.
Thanks for the reply monkey
 
Squishing an art work right up against glazing is just asking for trouble; either the media or the support may well get stuck to the glazing, & sometimes the two aren’t going to get separated without damage.

As an aside, it’s best to hand framed works on paper on a wall that is not exposed to the weather on the other side (an ‘outside wall’), as there will be more temperature & humidity fluctuations. Hang it on an ‘inside wall’, and there will be light problems -the best UV glazing only does so much. It’s a conundrum, but entropy and gravity always win.
 
Squishing an art work right up against glazing is just asking for trouble; either the media or the support may well get stuck to the glazing, & sometimes the two aren’t going to get separated without damage.

As an aside, it’s best to hand framed works on paper on a wall that is not exposed to the weather on the other side (an ‘outside wall’), as there will be more temperature & humidity fluctuations. Hang it on an ‘inside wall’, and there will be light problems -the best UV glazing only does so much. It’s a conundrum, but entropy and gravity always win.
Thanks for the reply 05
 
Thanks again for replying.I will refer the framer I used to your reply.Hoping it can all be sorted out without much hassle.
Any framer that believes what you have been told, cannot be trusted to use conservation quality materials or methods.

I'd just put this down to experience and take it to a framer who knows what s/he is talking about and start again; maybe this frame could be used for something smaller with a mount (mat).

Was there a sticker on the back of the frame saying which glass was used?

It does however, read (here and in the similar topic you started on a UK forum) that you already knew that there should be space between art and glass, so why was this not established? Was there no written order form detailing what was to be done? Spacers etc would be there as they need to be paid for; lack of that info tells you they are not being done.
 
Any framer that believes what you have been told, cannot be trusted to use conservation quality materials or methods.

I'd just put this down to experience and take it to a framer who knows what s/he is talking about and start again; maybe this frame could be used for something smaller with a mount (mat).

Was there a sticker on the back of the frame saying which glass was used?

It does however, read (here and in the similar topic you started on a UK forum) that you already knew that there should be space between art and glass, so why was this not established? Was there no written order form detailing what was to be done? Spacers etc would be there as they need to be paid for; lack of that info tells you they are not being done.
Thanks for the reply Roboframer.i am afraid I just assumed that there would be space as it had been like this on everything I had got framed before.
 
Hi, Jedi. Are the prints mounted to foam core board, or loose?
 
Thanks for the reply Shayla.I think it’s foamcore board.
If they're mounted to foam core, it might work to add plastic spacers. We usually give the mat/glass, etc... a 1/8" bit of wiggle room in the frame. When using spacers, we make it 1/16". It would be great if there was just a wee bit of room, because it should be an easy fix. (Provided that your frame is deep enough to add them.) If not, then switching to acrylic might be your best bet. As mentioned earlier, it doesn't have the moisture problems of glass, so if the art is going to be against the glazing, that's best. You just need to know going in that most acrylic is easily scratched. It also has static issues. (Not a big deal, but if your posters are black, it could be.)

If the paper was loose, spacers wouldn't be a good idea. Paper is a bit of a shape-shifter, and it responds to changes in temp/humidity with a bit of movement. When it's pinned down on all four sides, the only place it has to adjust is in the middle, hence warping. In the late 90's, I did this on an oversized vintage advertising poster, and it hasn't come back yet. But since learning of the risk, we avoid that. I'll add a note that you might encourage your framer to join some online framing groups. Whether this one, or one of several on Facebook. I've learned so much over the years, and framers are so generous with their help. A bit of friendly encouragement could bring them (and you) rewards. I hope your project ends well. :)
 
If they're mounted to foam core, it might work to add plastic spacers. We usually give the mat/glass, etc... a 1/8" bit of wiggle room in the frame. When using spacers, we make it 1/16". It would be great if there was just a wee bit of room, because it should be an easy fix. (Provided that your frame is deep enough to add them.) If not, then switching to acrylic might be your best bet. As mentioned earlier, it doesn't have the moisture problems of glass, so if the art is going to be against the glazing, that's best. You just need to know going in that most acrylic is easily scratched. It also has static issues. (Not a big deal, but if your posters are black, it could be.)

If the paper was loose, spacers wouldn't be a good idea. Paper is a bit of a shape-shifter, and it responds to changes in temp/humidity with a bit of movement. When it's pinned down on all four sides, the only place it has to adjust is in the middle, hence warping. In the late 90's, I did this on an oversized vintage advertising poster, and it hasn't come back yet. But since learning of the risk, we avoid that. I'll add a note that you might encourage your framer to join some online framing groups. Whether this one, or one of several on Facebook. I've learned so much over the years, and framers are so generous with their help. A bit of friendly encouragement could bring them (and you) rewards. I hope your project ends well. :)
Thanks for that really helpful reply Shayla.
 
Thanks for the reply Roboframer.i am afraid I just assumed that there would be space as it had been like this on everything I had got framed before

OK, I'm just trying to understand. You say you took some frames in to have the glass changed over and that's exactly what the framer did. If there were already spacers there he should have re-used them. If there were not then unless you specified you wanted them added, he's done no wrong really, apart from maybe not suggesting it when you brought them in and giving some duff information after they were collected.
 
Thanks for the reply again Robofarmer,I asked the framer to do anything he could do to preserve the prints.
As many have stated on the thread having no gap is not doing this?.
I am sure the prints previously had a gap so I can’t explain why there is no gap now other than the reason the framer stated,which was that as it’s u.v. glass there is no need for a gap.
 
Welcome, Jedimagic3.
...I asked the framer to do anything he could do to preserve the prints.
As many have stated on the thread having no gap is not doing this?.
Preservation framing includes an air gap when using glass, regardless of whether it is coated for ultraviolet filtering, or anti-reflection, or both. There are several potential problems:

1. Dew point condensation - Google it for a complete explanation. This is probably the most common and most destructive of the hazards when art is pressed against glass. Essentially, moisture condenses on a surface, such as the inside of the frame glass, when the surrounding air is about 20 degrees-F warmer than the surface, but condensation occurs faster when humidity is high and slower when humidity is low. FYI, the interior of a typical picture acclimates to ambient conditions constantly, including fluctuations of temperature and humidity, but a tightly-closed frame slows the rate of change inside the frame. The best way to avoid dew point is to slow the rate of temperature change when humidity is present.

An extreme example of dew point condensation, a phenomenon of natural physics, would be the condensed water dripping on the outside of a glass of icy cold beverage. That happens because the air is warmer than the glass surface. Note that when the ice melts and the contents of the glass warm up to the ambient temperature over time, the condensation stops and evaporation begins. Eventually, the moisture would evaporate and the outside of the glass would become dry.

2. Abrasion - Normal expansion/contraction cycles can impose a slight scrubbing action between the art surface and the glass. This is more problematic when the frame is subjected to rapid or radical changes of temperature, and less an issue when the ambient temperature is constant.

3. Sticking - Some art media, including some inks, can stick to the glass, especially when moisture gets into the frame. Aside from ambient humidity, moisture can enter when liquid glass cleaner drips down & under the frame lip, then wicks back up into the porous framing materials. The most common symptom is a tideline along the bottom edge of the art or mat.

Exception: When it is beneficial to press the art against the glazing, such as in Direct Contact Overlay (DCO) framing, acrylic is much better than glass. Glass is never recommended for direct contact . Here are three reasons why acrylic is a safer choice:

A. Plastic is a much better thermal insulator than glass, so it slows the rate of internal changes and avoids dew point conditions in all but the most extreme ambient changes.

B. The plastic sheet is normally thicker than glass, further slowing the penetration of temperature changes.

C. The plastic sheet's surface is softer than glass, so the abrasion hazard is reduced (does not apply to anti-reflection-coated acrylic).

[Your screen name hints that you are a Star Wars enthusiast. My financial adviser is, too. He has several accurate reproductions of the costumes, and has actually built a nearly-exact, working replica of R2D2, with remote-controlled movements and voice-activated actions. Here is a short video demonstrating some of this designer's mechanical wizardry. And here's a picture of him setting it up for a public demonstration, which he does a lot:
1607283285531.png
 
Last edited:
If this is a "wall decor print/poster" glass of any kind can be placed on the print/poster as it isn't considered "of value"
If this is a fine art print/collectable/heirloom/photo, then using a spacer is the go to method.
Mats and spacers, or stacked frames with the glazing between the two frames, are methods to provide a gap between the print and the common go to preferred methods
 
If this is a "wall decor print/poster" glass of any kind can be placed on the print/poster as it isn't considered "of value"
I'm sorry but I do disagree. There may not be value in the print but if someone is spending the money to do custom framing spacers should be installed. Just a small bit of humidity can cause damage to the "no value" print/poster making it undisplayable. That humidity could be as quick as the same day it is displayed and therefor making the custom framing a complete waste of money. The cost of installing spacers is minimal so why not do it?
 
Joe, part of my "Custom Framing" business caters to the lower end of the market with poster specials. It is an all inclusive package at 24X36 or smaller. Spacers are an option and their efficacy is discussed, but they are not included in the base price. The customer has given their informed consent. They understand they should consider the art disposable.
 
The customer has given their informed consent. They understand they should consider the art disposable.
And I agree - if the customer gives their informed consent. Like you I do give as much information as I can, hopefully my customers understand the damage that can be done. Definitely, without that "informed consent" there should be a spacer. The plastic spacer, both Econo or FrameSpace is so inexpensive that it is usually an easy sale to add it to most/any frame that has glass. I have never had a customer say no to the spacer when I give them the price and explain what could happen if they don't install spacers. I have found that the value/cost of the art and cost of the framing has never had anything to do with installing spacers. I guess I must push it a little more because I have seen the damage that can be done if the spacers are not installed. I worked basically with antique art for many years and saw beautiful art and sentimental photos ruined because in the days they were originally framed it was acceptable to lay the glass right onto the item being framed. I'm a firm believer that if someone is paying for custom framing the spacer should be considered a necessary component. With that said, we all have our ways of conducting business and our choices has to work for each of us, I believe in spacers for that separation of art and glass but I too allow the customer to make the final choice. Yes, each and every one of my invoices has the waiver for when a customer doesn't want to follow conservation framing standards.
 
This thread is a great example of the range of approaches to framing. If these are poster prints, my guess is that most here would mount them to foam core and frame with plastic spacers. It's also true that a zillion are being sold framed without spacers, right up against the glass. And a zillion people are happy to buy them. They might or might not care about the possibility of moisture damage. Some custom framers do this, but many wouldn't. Partly because, if someone cares enough about their art to put a custom design on it, they often also want to protect it. But then, we get to glass, and the same thing happens. A zillion are being sold (via stores, internet, etc...) with regular glass, which deflects just over 40% of UV light. This art will fade more quickly, but the buyers either don't know, don't care, or both. Many custom framers offer this glass, for customers who value spending less over protecting their art. Enter conservation quality glass, which deflects 99% of UV, and which many custom framing customers buy. It's not really that one way is 'wrong'; it just depends on what the art owner prioritizes as best fitting their needs.

Hard for me to write that last sentence, because I sell 95% conservation quality glass. The little art princess in me is yelling, 'Save their art!' But the truth is, the choice is theirs. What I do is offer good quality products and give the customer as much accurate info. as I can, so they can make an informed decision.

And then there are conservators. About anything. They've spent years, often decades, treating art with the utmost of care, with the least invasive methods, to preserve it as well as possible. They've also spent a good portion of those years trying to fix the problems caused by treatments that damaged the art. So, they generally suggest the uttermost in protective treatments. The best methods and materials, and they're right. For what they do, they're right. It's up to the customer to decide if this fits what they want.

In your case, there's a mismatch between levels. You're expecting one level of treatment, and your framer gave another. Which likely means that most of their customers are fine with it. And if their customers are happy, and they're happy, then it works. But that's key, and right now, you're not happy. The fact that you've let them know is a gift. They have the choice of how to treat it, but if they're wise, they'll learn as much as they can. If so, they might be happy to add spacers. If not, you might be happy to find a framer who better fits your needs. Man, this note is long. Thanks for taking time to wade through it. I hope you get extra chocolate sprinkles on your next cupcake. :)
 
P.S. I was getting ready for work, and my head said, 'But these are prints'. So, if they're posters, mounted with spacers. If they're art prints (which are often signed and numbered), then most of us here would probably either mat them before framing, or float over a mat backing and frame with spacers holding the glass/acrylic away. Okay, back to getting ready.....
 
An anecdotal story. A friend brought a framed original Star Wars Movie poster in to be reframed. It was framed against glass, When I took it apart the text on the bottom of the poster remained with the glass. What was originally viewed as commodity not worth conservation was now a ruined collectible.
 
What was originally viewed as commodity not worth conservation was now a ruined collectible.
Yes, that happens all the time. Preservation framing is appropriate for anything that could possibly become more valuable in the future.

Was the sticking to the glass due to moisture in the frame, which could have come from dew point condensation, or maybe from liquid glass cleaner dripping down under the frame lip?
 
Last edited:
When dry mounting came out, Ansel Adams used it on a bunch of his photos. To him, it was no biggie. To everyone since, it matters.
 
When dry mounting came out, Ansel Adams used it on a bunch of his photos. To him, it was no biggie. To everyone since, it matters.
Artists can do stuff like that. Framers shouldn't without the artist's instructions to do so. I have dry mounted or had cold mounted fine art photography, usually to ACM, following the instruction of the artist or their gallery.
Many face mount their photography leaving the last line of defense as part of the art. I have framed face mounted photos and added an extra layer of acrylic (properly spaced, of course) so the original would be less likely to be damaged.
Adams also adapted to technology and used a microwave to speed up the drying process. I saw this in a film of him working in his studio back in the 70's. The B&W tones change with the wetness of the photographic print. He just didn't want to wait to see the results. These were subsequently destroyed once he was happy with his darkroom magic. He used more passive methods of drying for the work he intended to be sold.
 
I've got an Ansel Adams silver bromide from the 20's and it's mounted. It ain't touchin' the glass tho!
 
Artists can do stuff like that. Framers shouldn't without the artist's instructions to do so. I have dry mounted or had cold mounted fine art photography, usually to ACM, following the instruction of the artist or their gallery.
Many face mount their photography leaving the last line of defense as part of the art. I have framed face mounted photos and added an extra layer of acrylic (properly spaced, of course) so the original would be less likely to be damaged.
Adams also adapted to technology and used a microwave to speed up the drying process. I saw this in a film of him working in his studio back in the 70's. The B&W tones change with the wetness of the photographic print. He just didn't want to wait to see the results. These were subsequently destroyed once he was happy with his darkroom magic. He used more passive methods of drying for the work he intended to be sold.
Have you read his autobiography? Great read/listen.
 
Yes, that happens all the time. Preservation framing is appropriate for anything that could possibly become more valuable in the future.

Was the sticking to the glass due to moisture in the frame, which could have come from dew point condensation, or maybe from liquid glass cleaner dripping down under the frame lip?

The partial transfer took place in the lower 25% of the print. There was no warping of the paper from moisture, just ink coming off.
 
The main reason to why artists or framers try to detour away from mating is mainly for aesthetics. Many see it as a "traditional look". i personally love a quality mat but i also see things both ways.

I'm hoping to perhaps get some critiquing from you all in regard to a technique I've been trying out with framing art flush to the frame since there are many respected framers involved in this thread and this may be one possible solution to accomplishing this presentation.

We all know why not to frame flush to the frame Ex: Spacers touching art. Or using glass for DCO

The technique i've been trying out is what i suppose we can call "hidden mating" and is installed in same way as a shadow box presentation

I'm attaching some sketches for everyone to take a look as well as some photos.

Basically, what i did here was top mat the artwork with a 5/8" boarder in which The art is hinged to foam core backing.
Along the edge of the backing, two strips of linen tape is applied on top of one another to create a shim so that when the package is fitted, the glass and rebate will not crimp the edge to prevent expansion.

One thing I'll add is that rather than cutting a straight cut mat board what i did instead was cut 5/8" strips pf 8 ply and inserted them into the frame the same way we install spacers with chasing corners. I applied tape tabs to hold in place.

when doing this, it's important to note that you cannot turn the frame over during this time. When ready to fit, The hinged art backing is inserted into the frame while the frame is vertical As if installing a backing into a shadow box frame.

When the backing is fitted, i then insert a few driving points with minimal pressure. From there a wood strainer is installed again with minimal pressure

attached is some photos of the finished frame.

The downfalls to doing this is that you need to he able to cut larger rebates with your table saw. Because i mill frames from raw wood i don't have to worry about scratching finishes as you would with prefab moulding.
Also, the frame must be 3/4" minimum so that your able to accommodate a 5/8" rebate and wood strainers are needed

Ithis is something i would perhaps only do on smaller peices.

I've tried this technique twice so far and told my cleints about this expiriment and to inform me if they notice cockling. So far so good.

Any thoughts?

-Manny
 

Attachments

  • 20210118_133735.jpg
    20210118_133735.jpg
    1.2 MB · Views: 102
  • 20210118_124348.jpg
    20210118_124348.jpg
    1.1 MB · Views: 76
  • 20210221_133939.jpg
    20210221_133939.jpg
    685.1 KB · Views: 93
  • 20210221_133931.jpg
    20210221_133931.jpg
    626.2 KB · Views: 77
Manny, that seems to check all the boxes, and is very much akin to a platform mount in theory. My only concern is the proximity of the art to the frame, with 1" being the minimum recommended for preservation grade framing. That might be able to be resolved by lining the rabbet with metalized frame sealing tape.
I think you are right to work with smaller pieces. The expansion/contraction ratios are directly proportionate with size, and a large piece might not do as well with this kind of treatment.
Only time will tell. You might want to do a little experimenting with different weight art and print papers and expose them to some extreme-ish environmental conditions. For instance, put the paper in a freezer, remove it, measure it, expose it to a hot humid day (do you have those?), and remeasure the paper to see how much it has expanded.
I'm sure you will get some additional responses. Best of luck on your research.

Edit: I just noticed you are using foam board and Coroplast. Both are considered support boards, not preservation grade mounts boards. Why not eliminate the foam board and use 4-ply rag or alpha-cellulose board instead?
 
The downfalls to doing this is that you need to he able to cut larger rebates with your table saw. Because i mill frames from raw wood i don't have to worry about scratching finishes as you would with prefab moulding.
Also, the frame must be 3/4" minimum so that your able to accommodate a 5/8" rebate and wood strainers are needed
I have been in the business of milling solid hardwood mouldings for nearly 40 years. I would NEVER consider trying to mill a 5/8 wide rabbet (rebate) in a 3/4 face profile.

All wood has stress/tension to one degree or another; if you take 5/8 out of a 3/4 wide profile it is going to bow out so bad that you will be hard pressed to make a 5x7 with decent miters. On a 3/4 profile we will not put more than a 5/16 rabbet, and to do that we massage our blanks/setup to remove as much material from the outside of the moulding to counteract the material removed from the rabbet.

We have a couple custom profiles that have a 3/8 rabbet on a 7/8 face, and we deliberately prepare the moulding blanks so they're warped in the opposite direction before going through the moulder. Additionally, we are constantly fine-tuning the amount of material removed at the first bottom head, which is the outside of a cap moulding such as this, to compensate for the amount of stress in the particular batch of lumber.

Making moulding is at least as much art as it is science. At least, if your goal is to produce the best quality at the highest level of efficiency. I have visited shops where it's "gang-rip, stuff it in the moulder and ship it out". That's about as far away from what we do as you can get.
 
The main reason to why artists or framers try to detour away from mating is mainly for aesthetics....

...Any thoughts?

-Manny
Please forgive, Manny. But, this is now on my list of favorite Grumble typos.

Thank you for an unintentional day brightener! Now, I'll go back and read your post. Hopefully, I'll learn something. :)
 
Okay, now I've read it.

Question: How do you attach your strainer to your cap frame? If it's only 1/8" wide, do you use an angled Kreg jig and screws? Or do you just use the driving points? Do you add silicone or something, afterward? Your method has me curious.
 
Please forgive, Manny. But, this is now on my list of favorite Grumble typos.

Thank you for an unintentional day brightener! Now, I'll go back and read your post. Hopefully, I'll learn something. :)
Haha good eye @Shayla That made me chuckle Once i realized the mispell. *Matting!

For entertainment purposes I'll refrain from editing that...
i see the errorA
 
On a 3/4 profile we will not put more than a 5/16 rabbet, and to do that we massage our blanks/setup to remove as much material from the outside of the moulding to counteract the material removed from the rabbet.
Would you please share more details about your milling process with me, especially how you describe setting up the blanks?

My mainstay is an ~3"x 13/16" shadowbox, with a rabbet 5/16" deep. My substrate is African Mahogany with veneer pressed to the backside and lip and then another trim profile added to the cap, which is done so after milling the rabbet.

I had been milling the substrate with the gangrip and 5 head molder in the past but you know about how well that works plus the complications of setup; I mill only a few hundred LF at a time. I am now setting up blanks by jointer/planer/thickness sander and then removing the rabbet with the shaper. This keeps my proceess much more nimble than fussing with the moulder and I'm having very good results, but I'm still striving for the truest stock possible.
 
Okay, now I've read it.

Question: How do you attach your strainer to your cap frame? If it's only 1/8" wide, do you use an angled Kreg jig and screws? Or do you just use the driving points? Do you add silicone or something, afterward? Your method has me curious.
Similar method to the kreg machine except i created a jig on my drill press which holds the strainer on a 45 ° angle. first I cut the lengths to size and mark out the positions and drill the holes prior to joining. I use a 1/8'' bit with a countersink attached.

This photo is from another project.
 

Attachments

  • 20210213_174623.jpg
    20210213_174623.jpg
    1.1 MB · Views: 56
Similar method to the kreg machine except i created a jig on my drill press which holds the strainer on a 45 ° angle. first I cut the lengths to size and mark out the positions and drill the holes prior to joining. I use a 1/8'' bit with a countersink attached.

This photo is from another project.
Another thing i do from time to time is fix the wood strainer in place with screws on the sides of the frame with more elegant hardware.
 

Attachments

  • 20200807_075124.jpg
    20200807_075124.jpg
    1.3 MB · Views: 68
Back
Top