Paper Mats

Create a Post
JackBingham CPF

JackBingham CPF

MGF, Master Grumble Framer
Joined
Jan 2, 2001
Posts
528
Loc
Lititz PA
Does anyone know of any matboard company that makes standard paper matboard that meets the following statements?

a. Meets preservation standards.
b. Meets conservation standards.
c. Meets museum standards.

Thanks, Jack
 
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by JackBingham,CPF:
Does anyone know of any matboard company that makes standard paper matboard that meets the following statements?

a. Meets preservation standards.
b. Meets conservation standards.
c. Meets museum standards.

Thanks, Jack<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

If by standard paper you mean matboard made from wood pulp and buffered with calcium carbonate to make them "acid free" then no, there is no such animal.
There are probably others out there who can give more detail but I'll try to explain the difference in a nutshell. Paper mats are made from wood fiber. When it was a tree, these fibers were held together by a "glue" called lignin. This lignin will remain in the fiber after it becomes paper. The problem comes when this lignin begins breaking down, releasing acidic compounds which will cause the matboard to become brittle, brown along the cut edges, and this acid will destroy the artwork. That's why the brown stains on art are called "acid burn."
Now, the calcium carbonate, which is alkaline, is added during the manufacture of the matboard. This alkaline buffer, which makes the matboard begin life on the alkaline side of the ph scale, will offset some of the acidity as the lignin breaks down. BUT this is only a short-term solution. That matboard will become acidic in a short period of time. You can see the effect at the cut bevel within a year or less.
Matboard made with cotton fibers (ragmat, museum mat, preservation-quality mat, whatever you want to call it) is conservation/preservation quality. Cotton fiber never had any lignin to begin with, so it will not turn acidic, and the long, strong fibers will not break down and become weak. For a demonstration of the difference, look at a piece of paper made in the early 19th century, compared to a piece of newspaper from 3 months ago. The old piece of paper will be in better shape and stronger than the newspaper, which is made from very cheap wood pulp paper.
Just to confuse the issue a little, Alphamats from Bainbridge start life as wood pulp too. The difference comes from the fact that in their manufacturing process, all the lignin is removed from the wood fiber. If I'm not mistaken, the Library of Congress, the de facto arbiter of such things, does approve of them. Die-hard conservatives will say no, only cotton fiber will do, but that's the subject for another heated discussion. Personally, I thing they're fine and great for the vast majority of art we're likely to encounter, but if I were framing something like a first draft of the Gettysburg Address, I'd go with %100 cotton, just to be on the safe side.
IMHO, dump your papermat samples. I mean, you pay maybe 3-4 dollars for a sheet of paper matboard, and maybe 7-8 dollars for rag/Alphamat. Charge fairly, and if you never even consider papermats as an option, it's not a price issue for your customers, because they won't consider it.
I hope this helped and was at least slightly clearer than mud.



------------------
Have nothing in your houses that you do not know to be useful or believe to be beautiful." William Morris (1834-0896)
 
Paper mats are in the same arena as Home-based framers in bringing out the less attractive side of our opinions.

We often hear the "dump the paper" mantra from well-meaning framers. It's hard to argue with doing the best possible framing; doing absolutely no harm to art is admirable. But does everything we do really need this level of care? If so, are you willing to "dump" all products that don't meet the strictest standards for preservation. Does anybody suggest we no longer carry conventional glass, or how about mounting tissue? ATG? How far does the list go on?

I think this type of thinking fosters an elitist position in our trade. Not every client will appreciate (or care) that your standards exceed their expectation. Once again, common sense should prevail. Just be careful and don't price yourself out of the game because you no longer offer perfectly satisfactory products for the project.

I know there will be some strong dissent. No problem; But before you drag me over the coals, look in your shop and see if you stock in regular glass. My opinion is that there is significantly more damage done by light than from all the other components of framing combined.

Just use the common sense approach of knowing which items should be framed archivally. Inform your clients accordingly and you'll be fine.
 
Frank,

As much as I have followed the trend, and "dumped" regular / paper / pulp matboard, Bob Carter is absolutely correct, in that there probably is a place for regular mats.

We unloaded all of our regular mats about 8 years ago, and it is a trend that has been strong throughout the US and Canada. I've seen a few custom framers follow this lead in the UK and AU/NZ as well.

Keep in mind however, that the manufacturers have carefully improved the quality of regular matboard, by bleaching and whitening the core. (For Old timers, do you notice that the core doesn't start out as yellow/brown?) They also buffer the **** out of it, and many of them share the same fade resisitant surface papers. Overall, it's become a far superior product than it used to be.

Is it of conservation/preservation quality? No......could I use it on most of the photography, needlework and reproductions that we frame truthfully, Yes Do I? No

It now has become a decision of inventory and marketing positioning. As a better custom framer, we have elected to stock only board of conservation quality and we promote that part of our identity.

Understanding the nature/history and qualities of the product we sell, makes us better framers. Check the PPFA bookstore for further reading:

"Guidlines for framing works of Art on Paper"

Regards,

John

------------------

The Frame Workshop of Appleton, Inc.
www.theframeworkshop.com
Appleton, Wisconsin
jerserwi@aol.com
--------------------
 
I agree with Bob Carter.

My personal preference in mat boards is almost always the rag and alpha mats. I try to pass this enthusiasm on to customers. I demonstrate the differences between archival and regular boards by tearing them and comparing the insides (a picture is worth thousand words!). Also, I let the customers feel the difference. The rags and alphas are softer. The regulars feel brittle. And the archivals are so much whiter, and the color on the surface paper is richer.


This approach has been very successful, but I still feel there are occasions when regular mats are all that are required.

We would lose customers if we got rid of less expensive alternatives, so we offer a full spectrum of materials. We are trying to increase our customer base, not decrease it.
 
John-We are in complete agreement, but do you sell regular glass? I think that has to be the next logical conclusion
 
Amen to that Jana and Bob. Let's not become snobs about framing. Educated and honest with our customers yes. But really, sometimes the best color to compliment the artwork is only available in paper mats. If the customer doesn't care and it isn't a valuable piece I say use em. They will be happier in the long run because they got what they wanted, not what some framer talked them in to.
 
I really appreciate everyone's input. The reason I asked this question is because on Thursday, our local newspaper had an article on conservation framing. In the article the following statement was made.

“Paper mats, the cheaper alternative, caused problems until about 20 years ago. These mats left burns on the canvases and prints that are coming into frame shops for cleaning and restoration today.
But in the early 1980’s, researchers came up with a buffering agent to add to paper mats to change their pH from acidic to slightly alkaline. The new buffered boards do not discolor art objects and are considered preservation-friendly. They are also stronger than the old paper mats and available in a wide assortment of colors.”

I agree that paper mats are better today than ever, but do not agree that they are preservation-friendly. We mostly use Cresent Rag Mat and Bainbridge Alpha Mat in our shop. When requested we will use standard mat board, but only on items not of great value. We also use UV-filtering glass as our first choice for all items.

Thanks,
Jack
 
After reading all the threads regarding matboard, we recently contacted Bainbridge and added their full line of mats to our Crescent line. I'm really impressed with the unique colors and finishes on the Bainbridge mats. So are my customers. I do keep the Crescent paper mats in racks under a bench in my showroom that is next to my design table. I briefly explain the difference to my customers and have been amazed that 95% of my sales have been for the alpha artcare or cotton mats. I have had a few customers that wanted the BriteCore mats for some fun projects, but even they have upgraded for UV glass. I never want to intimidate a customer by allowing my preference to influence their purchase. But it's just like going to a doctor. If you ask, "What would you do if this medical situation was your own?", the doctor will level with you and you will normally follow his advice. That's the same way I answer my customers about matting and glass when they ask what I would do if it were my piece of art/item, etc.

Having upgraded the quality and selection of matboard and glass (except we've learned about Sandel and have switched to TruVue), May began a little on the slow side. I've experienced much more repeat business from my customers that just dropped work off in the past couple of weeks. They have not even gotten their other framed projects back. But repeatedly, they thanked me for discussing the difference in matting and glass with them. Business has been great for the past 10 days. Lots of multiple pieces brought in by customers.

This next part of my post should probably be another thread, but...I'm too lazy to leave this posting so...

One thing that I've made sure to stress during my conversation with my customers, I've NEVER "put down" another framer that did a poor job of framing, selling of materials or poor design. I always point out that many framers know only one way to frame a picture. That a framer is limited to their own search for upgraded knowledge. I use the "laying out in the sun" theory. Back when I was a teenager and young adult, no one was warning us to stay out of the sun and protect ourselves with sunscreen. So, I enjoyed seeing what a dark tan I could get. This is a wonderful selling tool of conversation when trying to explain the glass and mat upgrades to male or female customers. Compare the UV blocking to Sunscreen lotions with different numbers on the bottles.

I try to insure that my customer understands that frame jobs done in the past by me or any other framer are only as good as the products and knowledge we had available to us. What we all know today about framing may be obsolete in two years.

Janet
 
Jack-

The newspaper article is wrong, and you are right to question it. FramerDave's explanation (above) about the character of buffered paper mats is right on the mark. They are in no way "preservation friendly", and the better alternatives are affordable.

Since this thread has evolved into a discussion about whether to keep or dump paper mats, it might be useful to note that only four lines of FramerDave's post had anything to do with that issue. The rest of it is information that every framer should understand, but precious few do.

As Jack's newspaper quote indicates, buffered paper mats are commonly misunderstood to be suitable for preservation framing. Not so.

Yes, paper mats are the cheapest alternative, and OK for decorative-only framing. Whether to keep or dump paper mats is a decision for each frame shop,individually. In my shop, we have it all -- including ordinary glass and paper mats. But ArtCare mats and Tru-Guard glass are the default selections in our framing program.

What's important is that framers use appropriate methods and materials for each project, and understand the differences among the choices. There's no harm in using materials of better quality than needed, but there *is* harm in using materials of inadequate quality.

[This message has been edited by Jim Miller (edited May 19, 2001).]
 
Jim-You are absolutely on target. An informed decision is always the best avenue. FramerDave's excellent post is info that all professionals should know, but still warrants repetition.

The decision (informed) whether a sale can be saved without sacrificing acceptable standards is one every sales person should be able to execute. My suggestion was to not eliminate that option. But nothing replaces the knowledge of what to use when, and still meet the acceptable standard. It's just good business-sense to offer a wider range of acceptable products.

A while ago, a District-type manager from AAron Bros was in my store and we were telling each other how smart we each were. You know the speech; everyone has all the answers and can't wait to tell anyone who will listen. anyway,when I asked him about their decision of selling only UV glass and Alpha board, his reply was telling. He said they made the decision out of safety. He also indicated the reduction of SKU's and the additional gross profit dollars on each sale(he had me going for a minute, I thought they were on to something), but he kept coming back to safety. I thought how admirable, taking that much consideration for their clients art. The he dropped the bombshell-They weren't as concerned about using the right product as they were afraid of one of his part-timers using the wrong product. I guess it just goes back to knowing what to use when.

But I still saluted their decision as better than their previous.

For us, we prefer to keep our options open.
 
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by JackBingham,CPF:
I really appreciate everyone's input. The reason I asked this question is because on Thursday, our local newspaper had an article on conservation framing. In the article the following statement was made.

“Paper mats, the cheaper alternative, caused problems until about 20 years ago. These mats left burns on the canvases and prints that are coming into frame shops for cleaning and restoration today.
But in the early 1980’s, researchers came up with a buffering agent to add to paper mats to change their pH from acidic to slightly alkaline. The new buffered boards do not discolor art objects and are considered preservation-friendly. They are also stronger than the old paper mats and available in a wide assortment of colors.”

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Jack,

This would be a great opportunity to set the record straight with the newspaper and get yourself and business some great free publicity. Why not get in touch with the author of the article and offer your expertise? I'm guessing this was probably in a home decor and improvement section, and they're always looking for material to fill space. Maybe offer your help on a "what to look for in custom framing" article.
This reminds me of a thread on another forum which degenerated into nasty name-calling and an endless, tedious discussion of copyright law. Ugh.




------------------
Have nothing in your houses that you do not know to be useful or believe to be beautiful." William Morris (1834-0896)

[This message has been edited by FramerDave (edited May 21, 2001).]

[This message has been edited by FramerDave (edited May 21, 2001).]
 
FramerDave-You may have just given the single, best advice I've seen on the forum. To call the NP to set the record straight and get a little free publicity is simply brilliant!
 
FramerDave, I have already contacted the author and advised her of the mistakes in the article. (see the thread about presealed rabbets, another framer suggested that today’s wood mouldings are all presealed from the factory). It should be interesting as I was one of about 8 framers interview for the article.
I recommended that paper mats should not be used for conservation matting (including the terms preservation and museum) and even pointed out what is printed on the back of the paper mat samples in regards to buffering etc. Needless to say I was very surprised when I read the article and saw a fellow CPF state that the new buffered boards do not discolor art objects and are considered preservation-friendly. I have also checked with the PPFA and several mat board companies, along with this thread to prove my point. I’ll keep this up to date as I hear more.
 
Jack:
If you're researching the quality differences and authoritative recommendations between paper mats and rag/alphacellulose mats, then I suggest you contact FACTS, the Fine Art Care & Treatment Standards Institute.

The FACTS Maximum Preservation Framing Guideline recommends the specific mat types that are acceptable for preservation framing.

FACTS has recently updated their web site and I don't have the new address here. You might still be able to email them at facts@wenet.net If not, call 415-472-0800.

I doubt you'll get much definitive information from the mat makers, unless you contact one who does not make boards containing lignin (the eeeevil ingredient). The rest of them chicken out when it comes to dissing their own lignin-laden products.

You are to be commended for taking a serious look at the issue. Personally, I wish more framers would show that much concern for doing their jobs right.
 
It would be a good plan to advise on the mistake, you may even be able to scrounge a press release from them. Be aware that entering the public focus in such a way can attract some fairly bias and unjustified criticism from others who may brand you as an "elitist" creating a negative vibe, get facts from good sources such as FACTS and CCI.
 
Lance- The "elitist" comment is exactly what prompted me to make my original post on this. i think your words apply to our trade and the way we handle our customers as well as the newspaper.Well said
 
Create a Post
Back
Top