Mounting Movie Posters

ctc

True Grumbler
Joined
Apr 8, 2002
Posts
58
Loc
Ia.
Customer wants signed movie posters mounted ( drymounted ) Question will the heat from my Vacuseal press harm the signatures, they are done in what looks to be black magic marker and some with a gold pen? Should I drymount or maybe use the 3m Remount Adhesive spray?
 
Hmmmmm?

Less would not hesitate.

Archival mount to 4ply - letter rip.

Less would first recommend against dry mounting.

Don't spray.

If the signature disappears, blame it on Cornel.
 
After testing the signatures and if I personally felt good about the results....

I wouldn't have a problem mounting them using ArtCare Restore @ 150 deg for 30 seconds using release paper (not board) AND cooling under weight. Overall vaccuum press time will increase over my mechanical press.
 
The ink from metallic pens will transfer to your slip sheet. Just a heads up to change it before you mount anything else.

Signed by whom? Does that enter into consideration of whether or not to mount the posters?

Kit

PS: Around here we call them 'evergreen slugs', not 'movie posters'. Explaining why would take too long so you'll just have to trust me on this.
 
How come Kit can remember that when I have trouble remembering my own name?

My overly simplistic rule-of-thumb: If they can be easily and affordably replaced, dry-mount them. If not, don't.

I think the 3M Remount spray is is Post-It Note stuff - not a suitable option regardless.
 
Originally posted by Kit:
The ink from metallic pens will transfer to your slip sheet.
Listen to Kit (and to me from a very painful experience which I cannot get into without being sued),

<font size=4>The ink from metallic pens <u>will</u> transfer to your slip sheet!!! </font>
 
I'm assuming this is on a ripply or folded of paper? But why do you need to dry mount them at all?

If a very 3D folded parchment document can look good (just a question of bending one's preconceived ideas a bit), why can't a movie poster look ok if it's not 100% flat? I don't go to movies often, but as I recall from my childhood, the movie posters displayed at the theatre were't totally flat.

Just an icoloclastic question here, but if there is risk to to value and media in mounting it, why not suggest another route to the owner? It may be that they just haven't thought of the potential risks or safer alternatives.

Rebecca
 
Hey, I thought tese thing were to be refered to as "Giant Evergreen Slugs"
If this dosent make since check out Giant Evergreen Slugs

This does sound like the perfect use of the restore foam board though.
 
As an old Evergreen Slug collector, I agree with those who say not to mount if it has, or is likely to accrue any value at all - and being signed, one would assume it may well be of value as well as difficult to replace.

Actually, the movie posters are fine - it's the collectors who approach caterpillar class, being almost as rabid as doll collectors!

Movie poster collectors will happily accept their posters being paper-backed with conservation-type paper, or being linenbacked - both techniques being said to be reversible where starch paste is used. (They have been sold on these techniques by the auction industry over the last 15-20 years - because linen-backing allows posters to be rolled and mailed easily, whereas most conservators would probably only agree with backing if the piece was fragile and in need of support - and then only if it was to be stored flat).

I don't wish to shunt the topic on to a sidetrack, but the original enquiry does raise an interesting question and I would love to hear everyone's solutions to this...

A customer wants to hang a movie poster which is -
(a) old, appealling and somewhat worn with the passing of time - in fact, it is ready to start splitting along the foldlines, so is in need of support, but...
(b) even though it would be quite difficult to replace, it is not valuable enough to send to a conservator, its market value being under $100.00.

So - what would you suggest to the customer? -

(i) refuse the task... or, after proper explanation and armed with the appropriate customer release, would you back it -
(ii) with starch paste to say, barrier paper or perhaps to 1-ply rag, in a vacuum press, or -
(iii) by another method?

To sum up - it's an old non-glossy poster, not terribly valuable, may or may not be signed (if so, let's say with biro or Sharpie) and it's becoming a little fragile. However, the owner loves it, wants to display his pride and joy and doesn't mind a reasonable cost to mount and frame it, but a conservator's fee alone would exceed its value.

NOTE - One of the most highly regarded US linenbackers uses starch paste and a vacuum press.

Go to it Grumblers - what say you?

Rod
 
The cost of even simple, non-archival framing would also exceed the value of the poster, if that's a criteria. 2/3 of the items I frame cost less than the framing.

I'd be looking at the new Bainbridge mount board to see if that might be the answer in this situation.

BTW, a year of insurance (state-mandated minimum required) on my son's car costs more than the Blue Book value of the car.
 
Originally posted by legends213:
A customer wants to hang a movie poster which is -
(a) old, appealling and somewhat worn with the passing of time - in fact, it is ready to start splitting along the foldlines, so is in need of support, but...
(b) even though it would be quite difficult to replace, it is not valuable enough to send to a conservator, its market value being under $100.00.

So - what would you suggest to the customer? -

(i) refuse the task... or, after proper explanation and armed with the appropriate customer release, would you back it -
(ii) with starch paste to say, barrier paper or perhaps to 1-ply rag, in a vacuum press, or -
(iii) by another method?
Rod
(iii) … but I won't elaborate until you tell me what an "Evergreen Slug" is.
 
Bill, it's a code-word for movie poster, especially the collectible kind.

A while ago, the whole notion of dealing with movie posters, and certain collectors in particular, became so devisive on The Grumble that some Grumbler suggested we never use the term 'movie poster' again. We should say, 'evergreen slug' instead.

While the intention was in the interest of peace-keeping, I believe the Grumbler who coined the term was drinking heavily at the time - possibly brandy Manhattans on the rocks with olives. He must be pleased and flattered that Kit would remember.
 
Oh, okay … thanks!

(iii) Because it has a matte finish, I would simply sandwich it between Rag Foam Board and glass (no adhesives), then use a moulding for which I have a corner sample I didn't have to purchaise!
 
Oh, man, pretty soon we're gonna have to have a secret handshake to get into the Grumble!
 
Not to pile on: do not on any case heat dry mount the thing with the gold metallic pen. Unless you want to think: "dang--why don't I listen to them?" when you remove it from the press and see the release paper.
 
MM, especially if you do dry mount it regardless and don't happen to notice the gold ink on the release paper and proceed to dry mount your next item. "I'm not sure why you are upset that "Placido Domingo's" autograph appears on your wedding portrait Mrs. Smith. If you hold it up to a mirror you can even verify it. We have actually increased the value of your portrait and we didn't even charge you extra!"

Sorry, old Michael's battle story. Those kids.
 
Kathy, Placido's autograph would be reversed on the release paper and then un-reversed on the next mounting project. No mirror will be needed. I'm sure that's the pricipal behind some obscure printing process I don't know the name of.

In this case, two wrongs make a right.
 
......Oh yeah, you jogged my memory Ron, I had to hold the release paper up in a mirror to prove to the twit that it was indeed Placido's signature that had transferred on to the nice wedding portrait. I think the wedding bouquet partially obscured Placido's complete name and I had a full denial on my hands. Once we spelled out p-l-a-c-i-d-o in the mirror I was able to ridicule the twit to the fullest extent. Ahhh, good times.
thumbsup.gif
 
Thanks for all the replies, I am somewhat new, what is Brainbridge mount board and restore foam board? What about the 3m vac-u-mount adhesive. The posters are wavy, they also have a gloss finish. If I mount the posters against the glass (sandwich between foam board and glass)could they eventually stick to the glass?
 
Are the evergreen slugs (Ron, please pass the brandy) wavy from being rolled or because they were in a humid environment? If the problem was caused by rolling, the paper fibers may eventually relax; if the fibers are swollen with moisture, try putting the piece between two sheets of rag board and weighting it down for a few days.

Normally, popping the thing in the dry mount press with no adhesive would solve either problem but that metallic signature makes heat a bad idea.

I would suggest using plexi rather than glass for your sandwich. Plexi adjusts to ambient temperature more quickly than glass does so you don't have the same problems with moisture collecting on the inside of it and sticking itself to the poster.

However, if the surface is very shiny, you may have a problem with Newton rings.

Kit
 
Oh dear, the slugs... I saw the title of the thread and knew instantly that Kit would recall the evergreen slugs...

There was a mention about using 3M Pro-Spray somewhere amongst the replies, I would avoid this as the pressure while adhering with a "brayer" may cause the gold pen signitures to break away from the surface. Personally I recommend the use of a reasonably deep package with the poster float mounted, beside being fairly respective to the poster it also looks cool.
 
Back
Top