Can a loose print be flush and still survive?

[buffalolisa]

Hello!
I have a beautiful b+w print from a Czech photographer to frame, and I am in need of some advice from the experts here, as my local frame shop is not so great.
The print is about 16x20, inkjet on thick rag. The artist typically shows the prints flush to the edge of the frame, and I'd like to respect his presentation style and skip the mat, but I'm wary of potential damage. The natural idea would be to have it mounted to an acid-free backing, but in this case, the artist has penciled in his signature, the edition information, and a personal letter to me (!) all on the back on the print.

If I were to frame it with museum grade plexiglass, would it be acceptable to make a print, plexiglass, backing board sandwich?
Or will I eventually regret this? Is there another way, or should I concede and add a mat for longterm preservation?

 

[tedh]

I’d photograph the back, print it, and sleeve it on the back of the job. And I’d use mats.

 

[Bruce Papier]

You could also hinge mount the print to a slightly larger backboard if you want to see all of the paper. A good art supply store should have mulberry paper hinging material with a water activated adhesive (don't get self adhesive). This material isn't as good as what a framer would use, but it's not bad in a pinch. You would be well advised to put some sort of spacer between the print and the glazing. A thin strip of rag matboard (8 ply or a double layer of 4 ply) should work fine.

Ditto the idea of photocopying the back.

 

[Shayla]

Like Bruce said, you an float hinge it, with just enough of the float backing extending out past, that hidden side spacers can
hold glazing away from paper, while staying hidden under the frame rabbet. To do this, we either choose a frame with a 3/8" or larger
rabbet, rip out a moulding, to create a larger rabbet, or add a frame fillet. Then, make sure the spacers hold the glazing off the art.

 

[Jleschak]

I am starting to use what I call a micro mat with a very narrow edge (1/4”) platform mount, showing about 1/8” to 3/16”I feel better about this than spacers and clients really like it. Sometimes a black on black core if needs to be more discrete. A sliver of 4-ply at bottom of rabbet usually canters it nicely.

 

[artfolio]

You have to remember that most artists, regardless of their media prioritise "cheap" over "preservation" so I would not place too much value on ther framing ideas. As others have already said if you want to enjoy this artwork for the long term have it matted and framed in appropriate conservation grade materials and display it the way you want to display it.

 

[JFeig]

I am starting to use what I call a micro mat with a very narrow edge (1/4”) platform mount, showing about 1/8” to 3/16”.

I see a major problem with this design. The basics of picture framing is to allow for expansion and contraction of the "art package" that incudes the bordering bats and backing boards with an allowance spacing around it. As it moves the alignment will not be consistent. Thus the 1/8"-3/16" will visibly change in the eyes of the viewer. If the "top mat" were physically attached into the rabbit such as a thin wood fillet moulding to control the movement, that would be another story. The rest of the "frame package" would then be allowed to move without visual observation of the viewer.

 

[Jim Miller]

I see a major problem with this design. The basics of picture framing is to allow for expansion and contraction of the "art package" that incudes the bordering bats and backing boards with an allowance spacing around it. As it moves the alignment will not be consistent. Thus the 1/8"-3/16" will visibly change in the eyes of the viewer. If the "top mat" were physically attached into the rabbit such as a thin wood fillet moulding to control the movement, that would be another story. The rest of the "frame package" would then be allowed to move without visual observation of the viewer.

Yes, the suggested top mat width of 1/4" would be unworkable in my shop. How would you securely glue the Platform mat to the back of the window mat? However, I have successfully assembled Platform Mounts with 1/2" margins, but precision is important.

Mat overlap of 1/8" to 3/16" is a bit thin, especially for a 16"x20" artwork. The recommendation for Platform Mounting is 1/4" minimum mat overlap on the edges of the paper.

The published Platform mounting instructions specify a contraction/expansion allowance of 0.5% minimum (dimensions x 1.005). So, the Platform window for a 16"x20" paper artwork should be at least 16.08" x 20.1", which is enough to allow normal expansion. A slightly larger Platform window is OK (for example, 16-3/32" x 20-1/8" in this case), but when the mat overlap is less than the recommended 1/4", a too-large Platform window might allow too much movement in the mount.

Also, the platform is to be attached to the back of the Platform mat with a thin spacer at the hinge to avoid too much pressure on the art from behind, which could also hinder expansion/contraction. The art should fit with very little pressure, resting on the bottom edge of the mount, so if it shifts to show uneven margins, it can be gently bumped to realign the art in the mount. That's seldom needed, though.

Various framing materials, including paper art, 4-ply mats, 8-ply mats, foam board, etc., expand and contract at different rates, so the potential for the art to shift under a mat exists in any framing design, especially designs involving a mat.

A video and complete illustrated instructions are available, but this drawing might help: