In light of the reply I made about how useful HH could be, and due to the fact that i am not sure if Paul Storch is a member of TFG, I thought I'd pirate one of his CONSERVATION post from HH.
This is especially relevant in light of a couple of threads Baer's "Silly-cone " thread and the repeated mentioning of "Framer's Myths".
By myths I don't mean deliberate misinformation but things that have come to be accepted over the years as Framing Gospel simply because no oe dares to contradict them reguardless of how much we doubt their validity.
This post By Paul IMHO proves that even Informed Conservators fall victims ,in some degree, to the same sort of thing. But at any rate this information does dispute some age old C/P truisms which should make all of us think when we encounter those who state categorically there is no chance that another better method exists. So that said and hoping Paul doesn't mind my pirating his HH post here it is;
Date: Fri, 5 May 2006 11:38:22 -0500
From: "Storch, Paul" <paul.storch@mnhs.org>
Subject: News from the conservation world
I don't want to upset anyone with information that contradicts long-standing
beliefs, but I thought that it's important to let people know what conservators
are being told. The response on storing photographs is from a recent post on
the Conservation DistList on Conservation Online. It is the opinion of a
graduate fellow at RIT. I wouldn't suggest changing any framing practices, but
it is a good example of the continuing evolution within the conservation field.
The second item is from the Tru-Vue website describing their Optimum acrylic
sheet product. I just saw an ad by them in the current AIC News about their
Optimum product. It recommends Optimum acrylic for pastels and charcoals, which
goes against standard conservation recommendations. I searched both the Tru-Vue
and Cyro websites and couldn't find much more information on the anti-static
properties of this product or how well it holds up, other than Cyro's general
maintenance recommendations for anti-static coated acrylic sheets.
Just a couple of things to think about on a Friday.
Paul Storch
Objects Conservator
St. Paul,MN
Date: 30 Apr 2006
From: Gawain Weaver <gawain.weaver [at] gmail__com>
Subject: Storing photographs
Ian Marsh <ian [at] tlframing__co__uk> writes
>We generally use an unbuffered museum board for photographs. Does
>anybody know if there is a definitive list of which processes are
>most suited to this environment, and which processes would benefit
>from being in standard buffered museum boards, if any?
There is no definitive list of which photographic processes are most
suited to unbuffered enclosure materials because there is no
evidence that buffered enclosures are harmful. The "list" often
includes cyanotypes, chromogenic prints, dye transfer prints, and
albumen prints. The issue of alkaline materials affecting albumen
prints was first raised in the early 1980s by James Reilly based on
his research at RIT. By 1984, and after further testing, Reilly
retracted his initial statement that alkaline buffering in enclosure
materials is deleterious to albumen prints. There has been no
research since then to suggest otherwise. The other processes have
made it on the list based on theoretical speculation. For example,
it is well-known that a cyanotype will undergo fading by alkaline
hydrolysis when placed in an alkaline solution. Dye transfer and
chromogenic prints can also be negatively affected by such
treatment. However, it has not been demonstrated that the alkali
reserve used in buffered enclosures has any negative effect upon any
of the photographic processes.
There is some concern that in a disaster involving water, the alkali
reserve from the enclosure could raise the pH of the water in which
a print is immersed. Based on such considerations, some have chosen
to "play it safe" and use unbuffered enclosure materials for
cyanotypes, and less frequently, for other processes as well.
Gawain Weaver
Andrew W. Mellon Fellow
Advanced Residency Program in Photograph Conservation
George Eastman House
For maximum anti-reflection and optimal security for museum quality artwork, Tru
Vue offers Optium(Tm) Acrylic and Optium(tm) Museum Acrylic. Both products are
lightweight, abrasion resistant and anti-static. In addition, Optium Museum
Acrylic provides protection from harmful UV light rays. They are ideal for
pastels, charcoal and shadowbox presentations. PREMIUM ACRYLIC:
Anti-Reflective Acrylic: Optium Acrylic(tm) The very best acrylic choice for
museum and original artwork or valued prints. Provides maximum anti-reflection.
Ideal for use with pastels, charcoal, shadowboxes and other valued works of art.
This should also be proof that good people post valuable information on HH just as they do on TFG especially if ( despite my ignorance of his participation) Paul is a TFG member as well as a HH.It is the person not the form that dictates how good the information is and how politely they share their information.
We need to encourage polite ,informed, people to participate on all forms and not think of ourselves as an Island of Information.IMHO
That is what was so wrong with the comment I got on HH.
Buddy take form HH post of Paul Storch
This is especially relevant in light of a couple of threads Baer's "Silly-cone " thread and the repeated mentioning of "Framer's Myths".
By myths I don't mean deliberate misinformation but things that have come to be accepted over the years as Framing Gospel simply because no oe dares to contradict them reguardless of how much we doubt their validity.
This post By Paul IMHO proves that even Informed Conservators fall victims ,in some degree, to the same sort of thing. But at any rate this information does dispute some age old C/P truisms which should make all of us think when we encounter those who state categorically there is no chance that another better method exists. So that said and hoping Paul doesn't mind my pirating his HH post here it is;
Date: Fri, 5 May 2006 11:38:22 -0500
From: "Storch, Paul" <paul.storch@mnhs.org>
Subject: News from the conservation world
I don't want to upset anyone with information that contradicts long-standing
beliefs, but I thought that it's important to let people know what conservators
are being told. The response on storing photographs is from a recent post on
the Conservation DistList on Conservation Online. It is the opinion of a
graduate fellow at RIT. I wouldn't suggest changing any framing practices, but
it is a good example of the continuing evolution within the conservation field.
The second item is from the Tru-Vue website describing their Optimum acrylic
sheet product. I just saw an ad by them in the current AIC News about their
Optimum product. It recommends Optimum acrylic for pastels and charcoals, which
goes against standard conservation recommendations. I searched both the Tru-Vue
and Cyro websites and couldn't find much more information on the anti-static
properties of this product or how well it holds up, other than Cyro's general
maintenance recommendations for anti-static coated acrylic sheets.
Just a couple of things to think about on a Friday.
Paul Storch
Objects Conservator
St. Paul,MN
Date: 30 Apr 2006
From: Gawain Weaver <gawain.weaver [at] gmail__com>
Subject: Storing photographs
Ian Marsh <ian [at] tlframing__co__uk> writes
>We generally use an unbuffered museum board for photographs. Does
>anybody know if there is a definitive list of which processes are
>most suited to this environment, and which processes would benefit
>from being in standard buffered museum boards, if any?
There is no definitive list of which photographic processes are most
suited to unbuffered enclosure materials because there is no
evidence that buffered enclosures are harmful. The "list" often
includes cyanotypes, chromogenic prints, dye transfer prints, and
albumen prints. The issue of alkaline materials affecting albumen
prints was first raised in the early 1980s by James Reilly based on
his research at RIT. By 1984, and after further testing, Reilly
retracted his initial statement that alkaline buffering in enclosure
materials is deleterious to albumen prints. There has been no
research since then to suggest otherwise. The other processes have
made it on the list based on theoretical speculation. For example,
it is well-known that a cyanotype will undergo fading by alkaline
hydrolysis when placed in an alkaline solution. Dye transfer and
chromogenic prints can also be negatively affected by such
treatment. However, it has not been demonstrated that the alkali
reserve used in buffered enclosures has any negative effect upon any
of the photographic processes.
There is some concern that in a disaster involving water, the alkali
reserve from the enclosure could raise the pH of the water in which
a print is immersed. Based on such considerations, some have chosen
to "play it safe" and use unbuffered enclosure materials for
cyanotypes, and less frequently, for other processes as well.
Gawain Weaver
Andrew W. Mellon Fellow
Advanced Residency Program in Photograph Conservation
George Eastman House
For maximum anti-reflection and optimal security for museum quality artwork, Tru
Vue offers Optium(Tm) Acrylic and Optium(tm) Museum Acrylic. Both products are
lightweight, abrasion resistant and anti-static. In addition, Optium Museum
Acrylic provides protection from harmful UV light rays. They are ideal for
pastels, charcoal and shadowbox presentations. PREMIUM ACRYLIC:
Anti-Reflective Acrylic: Optium Acrylic(tm) The very best acrylic choice for
museum and original artwork or valued prints. Provides maximum anti-reflection.
Ideal for use with pastels, charcoal, shadowboxes and other valued works of art.
This should also be proof that good people post valuable information on HH just as they do on TFG especially if ( despite my ignorance of his participation) Paul is a TFG member as well as a HH.It is the person not the form that dictates how good the information is and how politely they share their information.
We need to encourage polite ,informed, people to participate on all forms and not think of ourselves as an Island of Information.IMHO
That is what was so wrong with the comment I got on HH.
Buddy take form HH post of Paul Storch