photographic lacquer

[AnneL]

I know there have been some discussions on this, but I came up with out what I was looking for when I searched the archives. For the past 15 to 20 years, since color RC photos became the norm, many photographers have been spraying their work with lacquer "for protection". Today we got a notice from one of our labs that due to enviromental concerns and other factors, they would no longer be offering this service. What are some of the problems that framers and the art conservators have encountered with this practice? Some of the claims made in the photographic industry are:

1. It will proctect it from scratches.
2. It inhibits UV.
3. You can frame the picture without glass.
4. It will keep the glass from sticking.

I would like to hear the opinions even though I know some of the answers already. I want to have something I can refer photographers to in this on going debate.

 

[Ted]

Hi Anne,

Working as a Custom Framer for a chain of photography studios, I can tell you that I have alot of experience with Photographers. This product that you're talking about is popular (at least here) with professional photographers and many of them believe the claims that the product makes; a special non-nitrocellulose resin system providing archival quality, clarity to the photo, neutral pH, etc, etc...

Having been a framer first and a photographer second, I tend to be skeptical. I don't doubt that the product will enhance the archival qulaities of the photo, but I doubt it's protective qualities. I still encourage all Photograpers to properly frame photos whether they use the product or not. I have some in my studio with a mat finish. The best use that it has, as far as I'm concerned, is that it can give a mat finish to a glossy photo, which is sometimes perfered and it doesn't seem to discolour the print.

Ted

 

[Susan May]

I don't like to use any spray on top of artwork... Photographic, or anyother. (Including chalk pastels.) I don't know what the long term damage might be, and I do know what proper framing will do.

Having grown up in a craft store, I have had the opportunity to see artwork turn yellow because of the spray that was used. I have also seen pastels change color when sprayed with Workable Fixative. If some damage can been seen as soon as it is sprayed, what will it look like in ten years?

When framing photo's, I recomend at least two mats, and UV glass. (As well as telling the customer to not hang the picture right next to light source, ar in direct sun light.) After that it is up to the customer to choose.

As for the sprays inhibiting the UV light, so does keeping the photo in a dark place. But you want to enjoy the photo, so frame it properly, and store the negative safely.

As for the glass not sticking... That all depends on the moisture in the area it will hang. I have seen construction paper adhear to the glass. (Please don't try to tell me that construction paper is glossy.) If the artwork gets moist enough, it will adhear to the glass.

 

[AnneL]

Thanks for the answers Sue and Ted.I'm looking for specific information about the truth or falseness of the claims I listed that are made about lacquer. Being in both the photographic industry and framing, I've heard conflicting reports, but I tend to find the information in the framing industry to be more accurate. We haven't used lacquer on our photos for years. There is a growing movement against it, but we need facts to refute the claims that it will protect a photo from anything and everything.

 

[Jim Miller]

On the product's label, read the part about "inhibits UV" more carefully. You may find that the chemically-added UV inhibitors are intended to protect the coating *itself* from deterioration, and there may be no claims about the coating's ability to reducing fading of the image.

And be skeptical about scratch resistance. A painted coating might resist scratches from a feather duster. but all bets are off when the 2-year-old throws a spoon at it...or when one of 50 partying teenagers splashes beer on it while mom & dad are away on vacation.

 

[jvandy57]

Anne,
Can you give me a list of the ingredients on the can or by chance do you have an MSDS on it?
Part of my prior life was with Courtaulds Coatings North America Analytical Services. Might be able to hunt down a scientific answer for ya.

The Not as Cute as a Troll

 

[Framar]

I know for a fact that at least some photo lacquers are waterproof. A friend of mine brought in a 25 year old picture of Mr. Moog and his first synthesizer that had been mounted on 8ply chipboard and sprayed with texture spray. This had warped in the frame and had been on the wall in the band's practice room all these years with everyone smoking like mad.

I went through about thirty cotton balls of the enzyme cleaner I use for glass, removed scads of brown stuff, got down to the lacquer, no problemo! This heavy finish did not protect the photo from gouges and scratches however (it was a band room) and the photo was retouched before going under glass (don't worry, it is bowed AWAY from the glazing) and back into the original frame (except I cleaned it and painted it for my friend.).

My partner is a retoucher and over the years has gone through cases of photo sprays. Mostly retouching spray by Mc Donald. If these sprayed photos are in for framing they always get glassed, if I have anything to say. Unless it is for one of those blessedly stubborn glass hating photographers.

Luckily for our lungs, more and more retouching is done by computer now and we have less and less spray to contend with. Unfortunately, a lot of retouching techniques will only stick to the "tooth" of retouch spray.

 

[AnneL]

Thanks Jerry, but it might be difficult to find out the ingredients as there are several different brands and formulas on the market. I don't have any cans of it myself, I have always used only retouching methods that do not invloving using lacquer.

Mar, tell your partner to be careful, it is absorbed through the skin as well as the lungs!