Black Artcare foam board spacers and AF mount board

Evanka

Grumbler in Training
Joined
Feb 7, 2022
Posts
6
Loc
Asheville
Business
Photographer
I am a photographer putting my own frames together (I'm closing them). I am relatively new to framing. I'm also doing my own mounting with a 34" Coda cold roll laminator, mounting mostly Platine Rag Epson prints using Drytac MultiTac adhesive. I am trying to apply good conservation practices wherever possible.

I have done some small (5x6 & 10x12") pieces that I mount to black Gatorboard. I then cut them out with a reverse bevel and float them on a black backing board using PVA glue and AF foam core strips to raise the mounted print off of the backing board. Then I put the assembly into a 6x7" or 12x14" frame which has museum glass and 1/2" spacers that I make out of black matte board glued with PVA to AF foam core. The end effect is a print floating in the frame, behind glass, almost like a shadowbox. The print is very close to the glass, but not touching, and I sign and title the print on the backing board, just under the floating print, so the signature is in the background which I find less distracting.

I am wondering if black Artcare foam board would be a good material to make my spacers and backing board from? It would save me some trouble if I didn't have to glue black rag matte board to AF foam board. These pieces do not come into contact with the art work directly, but they are in the same air space inside the frame.

I'm also looking for suggestions for what to mount the prints too. It has to be black, and thick enough that I can cut a reverse bevel into, or thin enough (but rigid) where the edges would mostly disappear. The way I do it now, on Gatorboard with a reverse bevel cut, you really don't see the edges at all, not even the white of the paper. But I don't think Gatorboard is the greatest from a conservation standpoint. I have done some to a black rag 8ply matte board but it's almost $60 a board (wholesale). Maybe the Black Art Care foam board? In reading the description of the Art Care foam board, it says the cells are designed to absorb the off gassing. I wonder if that feature still works when the edges are exposed and enclosed inside the frame as they would be in this use. Another issue I currently have with using gatorboard, or potentially any of these materials, is that the core of the mount material continues to release some dust particles into the frame.

Another thing I'm considering are wood spacers. But I don't know if they are ok for conservation? The Frametek FrameSpace plastic ones but they are hard to use and don't look as nice (mostly because they are glossy). Their econospace are not thick enough (and also glossy).

I am also doing a lot of Oval prints that I am mounting to Crescent's AF3X acid free mount board. I have to be able to cut these mounted prints into an oval by hand. I am having trouble getting this board from my supplier right now. I also have used a white rag matte board but that's $40. I don't really need matte board, I'd love to use a Mount board, but I'd like it to be firm and thick, like a 6 or 8 ply.

I'd love to hear any thoughts on wood spacers, Black ArtCare foam board (which is not as easy to come by as white), mount board alternatives, or any other part of my process. Please be kind, I am well aware I have stepped into a world I know little about.
 
Welcome to the G, Evanka

What you are describing, is not considered conservation framing. Mostly the drymounting part. Do I read correctly that you sometimes glue the photo to the background? Either are big no-no's in true conservation framing. Look up 'hedgehog mounting' for how to float art without any drymounting or glue.

Are these photos replaceable? If so, I would not worry too much about conservation at all.

Acid free foam core is something we all use sometimes, but does not have a place in true conservation either. Cotton rag mat boards do, with the right mounting techniques.

You could get 8-ply conservation boards that are not cotton rag, they are slightly less expensive. I don't know where you get your supplies from?

Never be afraid to ask questions!

Use the search function of this forum as well, there is a lot of valuable information, which will give you a lot of reading to do :)
 
Hi Evanka, Na welcome to the G!

Wow, quite a first post.

Just some basics to think about.
The inherent evil in all foam centered board is the expanded styrene foam center that continues to off gas and degrade over time.
Gator Board has a laminated hard surface that has formaldehyde in it.
The dyes in both Gator Board and all foam centered boards to get black tend to fade easily.
I know nothing about Drytac MultiTac adhesive, but if you were to go to their web site, you could probably get a specification sheet on just what is in it and the general life expectancy. I am by nature leery of pressure sensitive mounts.

That said, and a nod to Ylva, I wouldn't worry too much about the overall archival nature of the framing, especially if you can replace the images easily. The upgrade to full preservation framing might exceed the cost of replacement.
 
Welcome to the G, Evanka

What you are describing, is not considered conservation framing. Mostly the drymounting part. Do I read correctly that you sometimes glue the photo to the background? Either are big no-no's in true conservation framing. Look up 'hedgehog mounting' for how to float art without any drymounting or glue.

Are these photos replaceable? If so, I would not worry too much about conservation at all.

Acid free foam core is something we all use sometimes, but does not have a place in true conservation either. Cotton rag mat boards do, with the right mounting techniques.

You could get 8-ply conservation boards that are not cotton rag, they are slightly less expensive. I don't know where you get your supplies from?

Never be afraid to ask questions!

Use the search function of this forum as well, there is a lot of valuable information, which will give you a lot of reading to do :)
Thank you Yiva! I am adhering the prints to Gatorfoam using pressure mount adhesive, Drytac's MultiTac. I am using glue to make my spacers and backing board, comprised of black rag mount board and AF foamcore. The photos are replaceable by me, so long as I exist, but I'm selling them in galleries so I would like them to last longer than I do, so I don't have to worry about it. I understand that by the simple act of adhering the print to a board, pretty much irreversibly, is in and of itself not archival. But I would like the process I'm using to be as free from potential damage as possible.

Do you have any specific conservation boards in mind?

I appreciate your help.
 
I am unfamiliar with Drytac Multitac, but my experience with pressure sensitive adhesives is that they are not as long lasting as heat based adhesives.
Traditionally Drymounting uses a heat based adhesive.

The color in foam board is not very color fast.
For the backer and spacer, I would recommend using matboard, either 4 ply over foamboard, or 8 ply by itself.
For spacers, we tend to drymount 4 ply matboard to 1/8" foamboard.

For the small sizes you are doing, you should not need the rigidity of Gatorboard.

Brian
 
Which suppliers do you have access to?

I would not use anything pressure sensitive in a framing package. The hedgehog mount is easy, and completely reversible.

Any potential damage will most likely come from mounting issues. So that is what I would address first.

I would use the hedgehog mount on any 8-ply matboard you have access to. Artique, Peterboro, Crescent or Bainbridge all have superior products. 8-ply cotton rag might still be your best option.

What kind of glazing do you use? That is another big one in conservation.

I would not use wood spacers. Left-over scraps from your mounting boards, either cotton rag or 8-ply mat board, should serve well as spacers.

Yes, it will be more expensive probably, but you have to make a choice. Use the right (but more expensive) materials and techniques, or consider it as replaceable and don't worry about conservation.

Doing a mix of both will not serve any purpose.

I have seen more damage because of mounting methods used, than I have seen in using the not quite conservation materials.
 
I watched a video on the hedgehog mount. That’s a great solution and makes total sense. That will totally work for my 5x6 prints, maybe the 12x14s too. I’m not sure how well it would work on larger prints. I’m afraid it wouldn’t keep the prints flat, say at 20x24 or even larger. What’s the best method to mount larger prints? I don’t have to float them at that size. I have been pressure mounting to dibond. Then I just put them in the frame with econospace.

I was told that cold lamination was better that dry mount because there’s no heat.

I’m not sure if 8-ply would be thick enough to use as spacers as there is often 1/8” of play in the glazing.

I use museum glass. I’ve recently learned how to cut it with confidence, even as an oval (getting pretty good).

I have accounts with international moulding, and omega moulding.

Thanks for your help. Definitely going to use the hedgehog mount.
 
For what it's worth, everyone here is replying as picture framers. Evanka is an artist and as such, anything she does will be considered part of the art. Photographers often value flatness over reversibility. Ansel Adams drymounted his photos and the boards they are mounted to are considered part of the art in the same way a paper border around a signed print is. If it were me, I'd mount the photos and make it so the mounted photo is able to be removed from the backer.

That said, unless your photo process is particularly heat-sensitive, I would recommend using a heat-activated tissue (such as Bienfang RagMount) instead of a pressure-sensitive adhesive. You can mount onto a smooth rag matboard. Use 4-ply or 8-ply depending on the size. You can then raise the mounted photos with additional 8-ply matboard.

I also agree about the light-fastness of black foamboard. I would definitely use a matboard for your spacers and behind the art.

James
 
Framespace is very easy if you watch the video on the FrameTek web page or read the instructions . You can get rid off the gloss with mat spray or steel wool. EconoSpace is glossy on one side and satin on the other. Are you sure you got EconoSpace brand?. There are copies out there that are glossy both sides.
 
True that we are replying as picture framers. Evanka is worried about conservation techniques. Ansel Adams maybe never was.

I have used the hedgehog mount on a piece that was 30x40 inches, heavy watercolor paper. It didn't need to be perfectly flat. In fact, if you desire perfectly flat, you will have to make a choice.

Make it flat but not with true conservation technique or use conservation techniques and accept it will not be perfectly flat.

If you don't have to float them, how about a sandwich between backboard and plexi glass (don't use glass in that case).

It is good to think about all the options. I still believe you might not need all the conservation techniques, as you can replace the photos.
 
Thank you for all the great advice. I am definitely excited to try the hedge hog technique. I wonder what tape he is using? I will look into the Bienfang RagMount heat activated adhesive. I just bought a 34" Coda cold roll laminator though, which you guys are bumming me out about. I like it very much but it does not have heat. I work next door to a printer who somehow warned me away from heat. I will have another conversation with him.

Lafontsee is correct, I do value flatness over conservation. But, I am trying to do the best I can with that in mind. When I go to galleries in Chelsea and see huge photographs in frames, I know they are mounted, probably to ACM (DiBond). I just want to know what they are doing and if they can sleep at night. My prints are 1/4 the price of theirs anyway. I am also working on mounting coated canvas prints to ACM and framing them without glazing. So there's that.

Here's another thing I am probably doing wrong- I don't like using ATG tape and backing paper so I am running framer's tape around the backing and the frame.

I did not realize the econospace had a matte and glossy side. That's good to know.

Yiva is probably right I don't need all of the conservation concerns. I just want to do the best I can.

Does anyone know a good source for Oval frames besides InLine Ovals, Crones and Presto? Should I post a new thread?

Thanks!
 
The way you describe doing the back, sounds like a lot of UK framers have or have been doing it.

I like the clean look of a dustcover. I use LJ's grey dustcover (which is a conservation quality paper). That is all I ever use. I still have some brown paper, but that only goes on some extremely low value items, and rarely. I might use it on a job where I need to use an existing frame that is not of very high quality.
I do use ATG but there is a special dustcover glue that a lot of framers are using.

The hedgehog method should be used with Japanese paper hinges to be considered conservation quality. There are a few hayaku gummed 'tapes' that are not too bad. I just heard from Lineco that they have improved theirs (the last few years the quality was not really great) and all previous issues should be gone.
I use a similar paper tape on some things.
 
Does anyone know a good source for Oval frames besides InLine Ovals, Crones and Presto? Should I post a new thread?
This?
 
I agree that besides its functionality, a paper dust cover also gives a more professional appearance to the back.
It may seem silly to care about what the back looks like, but paying attention to details like that gives the impression of more care and higher quality work (in my opinion).
However, that does come at an increase in the cost of materials and time to perform the task.
 
This?
OOPS! I just noticed you already found that thread.
Doh! 🙄
 
I appreciate the responses. Here’s what I don’t like about paper dust covers:

-The ATG makes the back of the frame sticky, seemingly forever. I guess it’s not a big deal if you are just going to redo it. I notice this because I’ve been using a lot of “vintage” frames and it’s so hard to get the old adhesive and paper off.

- if the frame has a deep rabbit and it’s not used up, then the hook and wire have room too recess inside the piece. In other words the hook does make the piece stand off the wall, or even worse, poke through the backing paper.

- I sign a lot my work on the back (if I’m not floating it like in my OP). I’ve tried cutting a window in the dust jacket paper around the signature but then I have to put atg around that window. I don’t know how to show the signature (&logo & tittle, edition, date) with a dust cover.

Thanks
 
Either put your provenance on the dustcover before fixing it on, or use the backing board/tape method - which, IMHO is far more effective but not as cosmetically pleasing, but white backing board and tape can look OK. It's a shame purpose-made tapes and boards don't come in different colours.

Most photographers sign the mat/mount and most framers don't like that as frame components become part of the artwork and framne components may need changing out over time; many are the times I have had to cut these signatures/titles etc out and show them in a reveal under the photo in a new mat.

Your work is the photo, that is ideally what should be signed, either in the image area or in paper margins.
 
-or even worse, poke through the backing paper.
This can be prevented by filling the void space with extra layers of AF foamboard.
That prevents the "puncture" problem.
BUT, again comes at an additional cost of materials.
(I didn't mention cardboard as a void filler. If you are going for "best practices", cardboard is not that.)
 
- I sign a lot my work on the back (if I’m not floating it like in my OP). I’ve tried cutting a window in the dust jacket paper around the signature but then I have to put atg around that window. I don’t know how to show the signature (&logo & tittle, edition, date) with a dust cover.
Many artists make a "Certificate of Authenticity" or other such paper document containing all the information you listed.
Still, sign your work as you usually do, but also provide a piece of paper that can be attached to the back of the frame package.
Framers are used to this, it is a very common practice.
 
Mat(s), mounting board then backing board - which is actually a puncture resistant dust cover, pinned and sealed - far quicker, nothing to fill (unless you want to …. usually to use up scraps), easier to remove …. and usually re-useable so let’s add more eco friendly :-)

I’ve taken so much from TFG and across the pond in general but dust covers is one thing I’ve left. They look fab and I have done them on many posh jobs - but always with the uk board/tape method underneath.
 
John, for sealing did you use the moistened brown paper gummed tape that we often see on European framing?
:cool: Rick
 
John, for sealing did you use the moistened brown paper gummed tape that we often see on European framing?
:cool: Rick
Yes, gummed brown tape - or white if using foam board as a backing. Many uk framers use self adhesive stuff, which is fine, but the FATG recommends gummed, in fact I believe it is compulsory to pass the GCF test.
 
Framespace is very easy if you watch the video on the FrameTek web page or read the instructions . You can get rid off the gloss with mat spray or steel wool. EconoSpace is glossy on one side and satin on the other. Are you sure you got EconoSpace brand?. There are copies out there that are glossy both sides.
I just got a new order of black EconoSpace spacers, and they're glossy both sides. The pack has the EconoSpace label on it. I really liked the matte side.
 
Were they 1/4" or deeper? Those are the ones that have different finishes on each side. 1/8" or less depth, you don't see enough for it to make a difference.
:cool: Rick
 
Were they 1/4" or deeper? Those are the ones that have different finishes on each side. 1/8" or less depth, you don't see enough for it to make a difference.
:cool: Rick
They are the 1/4" strips. My last order did have the matte side, this one I just got doesn't.
 
Back
Top