DRYMOUNTING NEWSPAPER

Create a Post
J

Jason

CGF, Certified Grumble Framer
Joined
Dec 3, 2004
Posts
198
Location
Iowa
I have a customer that has one piece of newspaper she wants drymounted. The piece is autographed by a soccer player. It is not worth a lot of money, but it is more of a sentimental thing. I was planning to drymount this on black foamcore. I would not want the piece to "yellow" as a result of doing this. Would it be better to mylar it instead of drymounting, or will drymounting preserve this as well as anything else would?
 
jason, sometimes i use fusion mount on black rag board for this, i always feel a little better with rag. just be sure to use uv glass and remind customer not to hang in direct sun. aside from that i don't know what else to do to prevent yellowing.... anyone else?
 
Hi Jason,
You need to get some deacidification spray. Two brands that I have used in past are Archival Mist and Wei To spray. After you have saturated the piece let it dry and drymount onto your black foam center board. Hint: the wei To is a bit easier to use, but also a little pricier.
Lori
 
The piece is autographed by a soccer player.
Click to expand...
I would be very cautious about saturating the piece with deacidification spray. I can just picture the autograph after you're done.
party.gif


If it's not a valuable piece, I would probably drymount it on black foam core and leave it at that. If it's a famous soccer player and the autograph may become valuable, I would not drymount it. It will yellow in either case. It's newspaper, we're not magicians.
 
I have uses Krylons Deacidifcation spray on an autographed newspaper before, and the ink did not run, mainly because you don't "Saturate" the piece. That's the route I would go
 
I know somebody will come along and shoot me down and start screaming about copyright issues, but here goes......

I would offer to make a color copy of the newspaper article and then I would frame the color copy. I would then suggest the customer store the original away for safe keeping......so, that then if the athlete becomes a big deal you will have it safely stored away and preserved, and then he can sell it on Ebay for a kajillion dollars.

Those deacidifiers aren't all they are cracked up to be, not to mention, customers always think that spraying the paper is a permanent fix. In reality all it does is slow down the yellowing process. Newspaper is made to be read and thrown away. Life would be so much simpler if the newspaper industry would just start using rag quality paper and the finest of pigment based inks. Course the paper would cost ten bucks a day to read. But, I wouldn't care because it would make my job easier and I don't read the paper anyway........
 
The value of the autograph shouldn't be effected by mounting the piece. An autograph is an autograph regardles of where it is. I wouldn't drymount the piece for reasons listed above. Black foamcre won't matter if you have a white mounting sheet behind it. You can mount it with an archival paste. The ink shouldn't run from it if you do it right.
 
Any collectible thing keeps its best value if it is in pristine condition. Whatever happens to change its original condition reduces its value. Therefore, any change is considered to be damage. I think the value would be affected by drymounting.

I wouldn't drymount if it were thought to be (or become) valuable. When I was thinking of the signature running, I was thinking that athletics often use markers to sign, not a ball point pen. I would be concerned about the marker running when it was 'saturated'.
 
I wouldn't dry mount the newspaper, but would suggest putting the object in a piece of mylar. Newspaper sized mylar can be purchased from University Products. It could be sealed with tape and then mounted over a piece of black matboard.

Jack Cee
 
I would not want the piece to "yellow" as a result of doing this.
Click to expand...
It won't yellow as a result of mounting. Nor will it keeps it's lovely newsprint color if you don't mount it.

Newsprint yellows. You can slow the process with UV glass. You can try the deacidification sprays, but I DO believe you have to saturate the paper to have any hope of uniform coverage. Without uniform coverage, you'll get uneven yellowing, which is really ugly. The solvents in most of these sprays could certainly affect some inks.

I've scanned lots of newspaper articles, cleaned them up with Photoshop and printed them on good paper for framing. So far, I've eluded the copyright police, but probably only 'cause I keep moving my business every few years.

I don't know how I'd feel about framing a copy of an autograph, though.

If you DO mount it, clear Fusion 4000 on black f/c or black matboard will minimize the bleed-through of the printing from the back.

If you encapsulate it, you could place THAT on black f/c and, perhaps, sleep better at night.
 
Just an icoloclastic thought, but where does this obsession with complete flatness come from anyway???

If you want to use the original, why not just mat as per usual with Artcare? It will have some 3D quality, and not look like a copy. It will look like newspaper, which it is for heaven's sake.

If it's gotta be flat as a pancake, make a copy and mount it. The original can be tucked in the back of the framing package. If kept cool, dry, and dark newspaper will age suprisingly well without sprays etc.

Jack's idea is a good one too, though the newspaper will age better if there is a sheet of alkaline tissue or Artcare in the package too, to deal with volatile acids etc. created as the paper breaks down.

I'm with Maryanne - I think mounting would affect the value of the signature - I've certainly had to undo enough mouintings at request of owners, dealers etc. But an appraiser specializing in these things could give a definative answer.

Rebecca
 
Originally posted by Maryann:
Any collectible thing keeps its best value if it is in pristine condition. Whatever happens to change its original condition reduces its value. Therefore, any change is considered to be damage. I think the value would be affected by drymounting.
Click to expand...
The autograph would be the same on a flat mounted sheet or on a loose sheet. I have an autograph that was given to me after the print it was signed on was mounted. It is the same autograph regardless. the value of this item is the autograph not the newsprint it is on. The fact that the newsprint will be half gone by the time the autograph has any value would be enough reason for me to at least back the newsprint with some type of non-acidic paper to stabalize it.
 
Originally posted by briank:
The autograph would be the same on a flat mounted sheet or on a loose sheet...at least back the newsprint with some type of non-acidic paper to stabalize it.
Click to expand...
Newsprint is a problem. Deacidification is temporary, at best. When the discoloratrion happens years later, it may be blotchy. That is, darker in some areas and lighter in other areas, depending on the density of paper fibers and their absorption of the buffer.

I disagree that the autograph would have the same value regardless of the substrate. I once framed a George Washington signature, which came on a small, irregularly-cut piece of paper. The customer said it was originally on an envelope, but a previous owner had trimmed away the rest of the paper, believing that only the signature had value. He told me that several appraisers informed him that if the envelope had been left intact, that it would be worth thlousands of dollars more.

I agree that the newsprint will deteriorate, and that proper mounting would prolong the useful life of the sheet by giving it a stable substrate. But if it is to be done, a conservator should do it. I would not. I doubt that the value would be enhanced by mounting, and it could be reduced.

The larger question is: How far should we take the "mounted is better" idea? If it's OK for newsprint, then what about art on fine paper? What about a wadded-up or torn concert poster, signed by a celebrity?

Maryann's words are my words, and still true of any collectible thing. Anything that changes the condition reduces the value.
 
Boy I love the GRUMBLE. Thanks to all of you for your valuable opinions. You have no idea how much people like me learn from a site like this. My customer's son had the newspaper signed at a soccer function last year. Of course her son was not thinking "this may be worth something someday." The signature, Freddie Adu's, is signed right on a newspaper bio sheet. My customer says spray it with archival spray and mount it. If it yellows, "oh well." I, however, do not want to be responsible for ruining it, so I am going to STRONGLY suggest mylar and advise her of what will happen to the paper over time. Thanks again for all of the great advice.
 
Food for thought. It may have no value, but if you go to mount it and it gets damaged, what then? Even a simple mistake can cause a lot of grief in this situation. We always stress to the customer that when doing something that can't be reversed, the possibility exists that damage will occur and the possibility should be thought through carefully before proceeding. That being said, fusion to black rag or FC should work well.
 
Good thought.

I think I calculated at one time that my failure rate - the percentage of items somehow ruined during the mounting process - was something like .3%.

That still means that, out of about 10,000 items I've mounted, 30 were damaged or destroyed. If any one of those thirty was irreplaceable, I'd be screwed.

I don't mount anything that's irreplaceable or would be extraordinarily expense or inconvenient to replace.

Also, please don't spray it with anything. For sprays to spray, they normally have solvents. Solvents dissolve ink.
 
Drymount with fusion on black foam core, then laminate. Then frame away.
 
All this talk about "should or shouldn't mount" still leaves out the inherent problem of this whole thread...If this piece may gain value and is a material that will deteriorate over time, why would we frame it in the first place? Shouldn't it be kept safe away from harm? I think that the reality is that we are doing something bad for this piece to start. Newsprint as we all know will breakdown over time. Faster if exposed to light. All I'm suggesting is that something be done to stabalize this piece. As far as value goes. If the paper doesn't exist because nothing was done to preserve it, there is no value. If we are truely concerned about the lifespan and value of this piece the only true advice is to not frame it in the first place.

Oh...and don't laminate it.
 
Other important food for thought on the autograph. Being an avid baseball fan I collect many autographs of local baseball players. Some of my early autographs on a baseball i had signed just 4 or 5 years ago have faded. I realised that I was not using lightfast ink.

What kind of ink was used on this particular autograph? If it was a common ballpoint pen then the autograph isn't going to last very long if it is framed up and hung on a wall. Just another reason not to frame something like this in the first place. I personaly keep all my autographed memorabelia in a cool dark place and bring it out for my friends when I want to show off. hopefuly it will be something I can pass down thanks to proper storage.
 
If you listen to some suggestions then nothing should ever be framed , just left in a dark place til the end of time unless company drops by for a peak.

A duck is still just a duck. If the person likes it and wants to see it on their wall then frame it. Take REASONABLE care to preserve it then make it look great.

Many customers don't want to spend a fortune on preserving something through the ages, they just want it to look nice.

You wanted advice and you got it. From leave it hidden to drymount it.

Don't let this thread paralyze you from doing anything, give the customer what they want. Their newspaper framed and flat.
 
Preservation framing for is all about making appropriate choices. For consumers, that usually comes down to a matter of "lesser evils". Which method/material will give the best protection for the dollars spent?

As JbNormandog suggests, some items truly should not be framed, but they are rare. A valuable item may be better preserved if it hangs on a wall in a climate-controlled living area, than if it is in a box in the basement & accidentally gets thrown out with last year's yard-sale rejects. Or if it's under the bed, being chewed by the cat, or if it is suffering slow destruction from expansion/contraction cycles due to daily, extreme temperature/humidity changes in the attic. Framers have seen the results of all those scenarios.

Most of the time, those valuables should be framed with suitable materials and methods, and properly displayed. The value of possessing them is greater if they can be enjoyed, too.
 
I have a newspaper page from 1961 that has a picture of my dad on it hanging up in my workroom. I dry mounted it on black ragboard and framed it with a taupe Alphamat with UV glass. It looks just as good today as when I hung it up nine years ago.
Maybe they used a "beter grade of wood pulp paper" back in the early 60's. ;)

kaffeetrinker_2.gif
Rick
 
Bravo Jim Miller, I agree totally.

For the record I didn't suggest not to frame it.
I like paying the rent.

When you said,"Most of the time, those valuables should be framed with suitable materials and methods, and properly displayed. The value of possessing them is greater if they can be enjoyed, too."

That summed it up perfectly.
 
Originally posted by Rick Granick:
I have a newspaper page from 1961...It looks just as good today as when I hung it up nine years ago. Maybe they used a "beter grade of wood pulp paper" back in the early 60's. ;)
kaffeetrinker_2.gif
Rick
Click to expand...
Most of the discoloration probably occurred in the newspaper's first 30 years of existence. That, plus the fact that you have placed it in a protective environment, could explain why there's been no noticeable change in the past nine years.

Newsprint manufacturing has evolved over the years. Yes, it used to be better quality paper, especially prior to the 1950s. Since then, makers have used technological advances to progressively reduce cost, while still satisfying the paper's main purposes: 1. run smoothly in high-speed web presses (consistency of thickness & fiber strength); 2. accept printing inks well (sizing, surface texture, fiber density); 3. have consistent color when new (bleaching).
 
Create a Post
Back
Top