Question Museum glass

[rubytuesday]

A job has recently reappeared in my workshop that was framed with museum glass back in 1995. It is a cheap tourist postcard - but none the less the customer obviously wanted it preserved....well the complaint is that the postcard has now turned pink and blue obviously from UV damage.
Now I wasn't working here in '95 so I couldn't tell you if the card was like that in the first place, but I am assuming it wasn't, judging by the colours of what seems to be fully preserved matt boards (they look suspiciously like TruVue)
So, no obvious fading or UV damage of the mattboards, and a completely UV damaged postcard - do you think that back in 95 when museum glass only offered 97 - 98 % protection that 2-3% UV got in and was enough to affect the postcard and not the mattboard?

Weird!

 

[Joe B]

If there was no problems with fading with the mat board then the glass did it's job. I would say that it must be one or all of the post card's paper, ink, and/or quality - we all know that a tourist post card is generally made as cheap as possible so the quality would be of question.

 

[rubytuesday]

Absolutely, but maybe in my naivety, I thought that is the actual job of museum glass!!
It was probably sold to the customer on the premise that her cheap postcard would not fade with the use of museum glass, and she was sold on that point and paid the extra for that insurance...but in fact it has offered little or no protection..now I am left wondering what other jobs framed then will raise their ugly heads again.
I have personally sold museum or conservation clear on most jobs that come through our doors....this includes newspaper clippings, book plates and the like that actually DO have value, but not in the printing or support they are on - saving grace POSSIBLY being that the glass sold in recent times offers closer to 99% protection.

 

[Rick Granick]

I agree that if the mats do not appear to be faded (judging by the edge that was under the frame rabbet vs. the visible area), then the fault is with the quality of the card itself.
This is why it is advisable not to tell people that UV-filtering glass will prevent fading, but rather that it will help keep the art looking its best for as long as possible. In this case, due to factors beyond the framer's control, it was not possible for it to look its best any longer than it did.
Rick

 

[ERIC]

I have always explained any UV protection as "slowing the process down, so what would be seen in 5 to 10 years would take much longer to happen".

This case you have on your hands is still worse that I would expect.

Maybe the customer became cavalier about putting it in direct sunlight because the MG was oversold on its protection?

 

[ERIC]

Rick, I am honored to have said the same thing at the same time as you!

 

[rubytuesday]

I have always explained any UV protection as "slowing the process down, so what would be seen in 5 to 10 years would take much longer to happen".

This case you have on your hands is still worse that I would expect.

Maybe the customer became cavalier about putting it in direct sunlight because the MG was oversold on its protection?

Possibly!
In fact probably!
Thanks for that - we will include that in our sales pitch from now on...

We haven't had any problems before with MG so maybe it's a freak occurence...OR the harsh New Zealand sunlight from our lack of ozone (I'm looking at YOU citizens of USA ha ha)

She mentioned it was not in direct sunlight..meh - we are replacing the glass and she is putting another cheap postcard in replacing the last one - we'll see her in another 13 years...

 

[MarkyW]

...but in fact it has offered little or no protection..

Yes it has offered protection...from UV light. But visible light also fades, and as others here have said, it could also be caused by the acid in the cheap postcard paper and the cheap postcard ink. (I wouldn't explain it quite like that to the customer, though)

There was just recently an article in one of the magazines about prints made on regular consumer grade inkjet printers. The prints were kept in total dark for a year, I think, and when examined after, some of them had faded or color shifted. It certainly wasn't UV light that caused that.

 

[wpfay]

I've seen LE prints produced so cheaply that they would fade in a lock box in a vault. Claims of UV fading, and protection from same are dependent on susceptibility to UV. We cannot protect everything from everything. The Museum Glass did its job, the postcard was done in by different means.

 

[PaulSF]

This was in New Zealand, right? Are you sure those pesky hobbits aren't responsible?

 

[Jim Miller]

...I thought that is the actual job of museum glass!!...but in fact it has offered little or no protection.

UV light in the range of 300 to 380 nanometers is the most damaging light, and 98% of it is blocked. However, all light is damaging, including all of the visible range (400 to 700 nanometers) and on into the infrared frequencies.

UV filtering has never been promoted as a way to stop light damage. The best it can do is slow the rate of damage. How long? Nobody can say, because the damage depends on the intensity of the light and the time of exposure.

It is a safe bet that the UV blocking did provide the protection promised by its maker. Perhaps if ordinary glass had been used, the same amount of damage might have occurred in 5 years instead of 14 years, but there is no way to be certain about the timing.

 

[Framar]

I always compare conservation glass to sunscreen - just because you have slathered on a high SPF on your skin you still wouldn't want to try and cross the Sahara and not expect to get burned to a crisp.

 

[Paul N]

I always compare conservation glass to sunscreen - just because you have slathered on a high SPF on your skin you still wouldn't want to try and cross the Sahara and not expect to get burned to a crisp.

Exactly.

With sun screen / UV glass the process is delayed / takes longer but it doesn't mean it's not happening.

 

[Jim Miller]

The sunscreen analogy works, but it helps to add a couple of details. Otherwise, a customer might get the wrong idea about the intensity of light that can be damaging, and surmise that 2 hours of sunlight through the living room window, which would never cause sunburn, would be OK for the art. Not so. Most of us get a sunburn only when we have more
-than-moderate exposure, but sunlight exposure that would not cause a sunburn could destroy some artworks over time.

A customer once responded, "I always use sunscreen after I begin to tan, so I'll get the more expensive glass if I see it start to fade." I suggested that she would not do that later. First, she wouldn't remember the conversation. Second, she wouldn't notice the light damage on the art until it's too late.

Also, sunburn heals. Light-damaged art does not. The damage is cumulative and very permanent.

 

[Beveled]

I'm afraid I may have to edit how we sell Museum glass now. I've not heard of things fading even with museum glass. This is scary.

We've always used the tags on the back for care and cleaning which say "do not hang in direct sunlight", but now should we be warning against hanging in strong daylight?

 

[Joe B]

Beveled, I sell a lot of MG and have always warned my customers that the only way to prevent fading light damage is by locking the print in a climate controled dark room. I explain that fading/light damage is going to occure no matter what precautions is taken but with the proper precautions we can delay that damage.

 

[preservator]

To add to the cautions that have been detailed, above, UV filteration protects ligneous portions of paper and other impurities, but may not prevent the photo oxidative fading of the dyes that are common to mechanical printing. Clients should understand, that display in a frame entails thousands of hours a year, unlike human solar exposure.



Hugh

 

[Beveled]

Beveled, I sell a lot of MG and have always warned my customers that the only way to prevent fading light damage is by locking the print in a climate controled dark room. I explain that fading/light damage is going to occure no matter what precautions is taken but with the proper precautions we can delay that damage.

So how do you justify to them the price of museum glass if it isn't fade-proof?

 

[Pat Murphey]

So how do you justify to them the price of museum glass if it isn't fade-proof?

The extra price for the Museum glass UV protection over AR glass (as for Conservation glass over clear) is a small amount. The expensive feature of Museum/AR glass is in the optical anti-reflective coating. Don't confuse the two in your marketing.

 

[BILL WARD]

"how do you justify to them the price of museum glass if it isn't fade-proof"

as has been stated above.........nothing, but absolutely nothing, is fade "proof"!!!!!!!!!(unless its locked away in your safe deposit box and there is NO guarentee that even that will prevent a cheap print job from further degredation---just that UV deterioration will not take place in the dark)
what you must do is explain all their options then look 'em straight in the eye(with all sincerity) and say "nothing will keep this piece in stasis(we havent invented that, yet!). using the best we have to offer--acid free matting/mounting materials AND our best UV products, like this MG here, will only succeed in prolonging the enjoyable life of the piece....NOTHING will STOP universe's entropic process---we can only do the best we can do with the best materials we have to use." [and dont forget to throw in that 'even WITH UV glass it is encumbant upon them to protect the piece from sun(remember that light bounces around corners & thru the house?)/electric lights as much as possible'.
if they value the piece(and if not why are we having this discussion???) they will do the best they can to enjoy it as long as they can. education of the client is YOUR job(along with the framing, of course)

 

[Beveled]

The extra price for the Museum glass UV protection over AR glass (as for Conservation glass over clear) is a small amount. The expensive feature of Museum/AR glass is in the optical anti-reflective coating. Don't confuse the two in your marketing.

We sell alot of both AR and Museum, however, we've always sold the museum based on the EXTRA UV protection you get over AR.

I'm going to have to type up a little informational speech or something with some information in these posts to present museum glass in a way that still seems very valuable to the customer with no guarantee against fading.

 

[rubytuesday]

This was in New Zealand, right? Are you sure those pesky hobbits aren't responsible?

Nah I think they left the country with Orlando and Viggio worse luck!!

Nothing left here but a movie set in a paddock that costs $60 to go and see (I know thats only $1.50 in your currency, but it takes me a few hours to earn it!)

Thanks everyone for the info on MG, very very interesting - we definitely sell it more on its surface rather than its UV, as CC offers the same and is WAY cheaper.

We have decided to produce a brochure on such things so we don't get stung... I am certainly not keen and can't afford the "good will" of replacing the museum glass every time.

 

[Rick Granick]

...present museum glass in a way that still seems very valuable to the customer with no guarantee against fading.

You couldn't possibly guarantee against fading because viewing a piece on display requires some light exposure, and you have no control over the conditions under which the piece is displayed. All you can do is explain that, while the UV filtration blocks most of the most harmful part of the spectrum, and therefore is the best a framer can offer to help slow down the processes that occur in nature, that ALL light exposure is harmful to some extent because of the energy it contains, and make suggestions that will help the customer control light exposure to the extent possible while enjoying the benefit of having the piece displayed on a wall.
:kaffeetrinker_2: Rick

 

[Beveled]

is the best a framer can offer to help slow down the processes that occur in nature,
:kaffeetrinker_2: Rick

I like that explanation.

 

[janetj1968]

TrueVue conservation glass has the same UV qualities as their museum glass (its at 99% now, I think it was 97-98% before). There are differences in how it is made, but the biggest difference (to consumers) is just in the reflective qualities.

Don't sell museum glass thinking it offers better protection--it doesn't.

 

[Joe B]

Beveled, I justify MG over the others because of the overall quality and clarity of the MG compared to the CC & AR glass. I show the TruVue display and the MG generally sells itself. Like Bill said, "nothing will keep this piece in stasis(we havent invented that, yet!). using the best we have to offer--acid free matting/mounting materials AND our best UV products, like this MG here, will only succeed in prolonging the enjoyable life of the piece....NOTHING will STOP universe's entropic process---we can only do the best we can do with the best materials we have to use." I sell the package, acid free material, proper mounting, etc . Granted, some framing doesn't warrant all of the options but I do make my customers aware that the options are available and how they will help to preserve their art, photos, or whatever. I never warrant the piece of art, I only warrant my workmanship & framing materials.

 

[Rick Granick]

With all due respect, unless your customer is a scientist you probably want to explain the benefits and limitations of specialty framing products in non-scientific terms that relate to the customer's everyday experiences, like the sunblock analogy. I would avoid using words like stasis and entropy that the average customer might interpret as an attempt to bamboozle them into buying something they don't need.
Rick

 

[janetj1968]

With all due respect, unless your customer is a scientist you probably want to explain the benefits and limitations of specialty framing products in non-scientific terms that relate to the customer's everyday experiences, like the sunblock analogy. I would avoid using words like stasis and entropy that the average customer might interpret as an attempt to bamboozle them into buying something they don't need.
Rick

Simplified. I like that! I agree.

Sometimes museum glass sells itself. I do encourage it when it benefits the piece. I show my wall sample and say "The UV protection is exactly the same. The difference is in the reflective qualities". They decide by how it looks. That's the easiest way. But I always stress that the protection is the same no matter which they opt for.

I'm finding LOTS of people are now going for the Conservation Reflection control. (More than I've ever had.) It's a bit unusual for here.

 

[Dave]

..."The difference is in the reflective qualities". They decide by how it looks. That's the easiest way. But I always stress that the protection is the same no matter which they opt for.

.

Three basic qualities of glass used for framing:

#1 ~ UV protection

#2 ~ Reflection control

#3 ~ Clarity

Museum glass also affords the highest visible light transmission. IMHO that is also a big selling factor. Especially apparent in shadow box designs.

 

[janetj1968]

Three basic qualities of glass used for framing:

#1 ~ UV protection

#2 ~ Reflection control

#3 ~ Clarity

Museum glass also afford the highest visible light transmission. IMHO that is also a big selling factor. Especially apparent in shadow box designs.

I agree, and better said. Visually when customers are looking at the differences in the samples, the clarity of MG is very obvious so I normally don't have to explain it. If they ask 'why' (and sometimes they do) then I explain the different processes used for making the types of glass and its effect on clarity.

 

[Doug Gemmell]

Does anyone know when Museum glass was introduced? Was it a hit right away? I know they lowered the price a few years ago. Is that the only significant price change it's had?

I would avoid using words like stasis and entropy that the average customer might interpret as an attempt to bamboozle them into buying something they don't need.
Rick

By selling MG, their wallet will be less in stasis. Is MG is like the "wallet vac" that the Car Talk guys mentioned when someone called about their mechanic recommending an "engine vacuum" procedure.