Prints On Wood

Create a Post
Shayla

Shayla

WOW Framer
Forum Donor
Joined
Apr 5, 2008
Posts
35,915
Loc
Washington State
Just got a request from a customer to mount a few dozen shiny metallic photo prints to wood backings, so called to ask why they wanted that treatment. (Along with a description of why mounting a shiny print to raw wood isn't a good idea). Turns out, they've been looking at wood printed photos online and are trying to do the same with locally produced prints. I explained that the places selling such items print directly onto the wood, and that the wood acids, dye quality and lack of glazing can hasten yellowing and fading. My guess is, they'll decide to just go with an online printer who prints directly on wood, which has me thinking about the balance between short term use and conservation treatment. If someone wants to do that with their own art, a certain amount of responsibility is assumed for the relative length of it's usefulness, but an artist selling to folks who want keepers would seem to need to meet a higher standard. When I mentioned this, he said that he does want them to last.

The site in this link is probably what they found online, and while they do print with UV curable dyes, no matter how long those last, won't the wood still do it's nasty thing? The issue of what to do if they opt to ditch wood and mount the metallic prints to another substrate is a separate one, and I told him that no matter the substrate, ink jet prints will fade faster than those made with pigments. But this here is a conversation starter. Any thoughts you have on the subject, feel free to share.
 
These prints are done directly onto the wood.
"Canvas" is just descriptive.
It's perfectly fine to have photos printed this way, as long as inks are appropriate.
If your customer already has photos printed, then you can use wood as a decorative surface behind mounted photos.
 
Oops! Forgot the link to the site: http://www.gallerydirect.com/about-us/media-wood

I think that must be what they first found (and similar to what Ylva posted). I told the guy that if they had it done, they likely won't last well, and that if we were to use his own metallic prints, we'd need to mount it to a different substrate. I think he's liking the idea of a simple, frameless display, so wood might be easily replaced by a different back.
 
Aren't some oils painted directly on wood from a couple/few hundred years ago? I'm sure it also depends on the ink/media.

As to mounting a metallic substrate directly to wood, no - that's not a good idea. The wood will expand and contract with humidity changes and the metal will not. This will result in warping of the panel, or delamination of the print.
 
If he wants to mount the prints on wood thats just block mounting, thats different to Printing on the wood

the main issue will be that shiny Metallic prints will look not the best on wood because the wood is not smooth. will be worse than even normal orange peel
 
To be clear, I think it's a bad idea, and I don't want to do it. It just got me to thinking about the balance between doing what people ask for and steering them clear of pitfalls, as well as the range of treatments from temporary to conservation. In this case, they saw something online that they're wanting to MacGyver themselves with a different process, but even the online product has some serious time and quality limitations. I've asked for a list of the materials they want to use if they make metallic prints on their own, so that we could explore possible treatments. Mainly, I try to educate people as to what they're having done; too, as both a gallery and frame shop, it's vital that I've clarified this beforehand. One reason being that there's work I might end up doing at a customer's request and which is really only a temporary display option, but which I wouldn't want to offer for sale in the shop.
 
shayla said:
Just got a request from a customer to mount a few dozen shiny metallic photo prints to wood backings, so called to ask why they wanted that treatment. .
Click to expand...

From what I saw on one site, part of the appeal might be that the wood grain is still visible. If they want that, they need to print on the wood. If they want the effect of a solid piece of material to hang on the wall (and no surprise here, "not have to have a frame") there may be other options.

Conservation quality? Well, if the prints are digital, who cares? Printing on wood is no different than getting a photo coffee mug that doesn't survive the dishwasher - you still have the digital file. As for his "locally sourced prints", same deal. Unless he has a trunk full of Ansel Adams' original prints, do whatever decorative thing you want. I think we worry about conservation when most of this stuff is just yard sale fodder anyway.
 
there are products you can use to coat a piece of veneer to be inkjet receptive, i have sone it with a small amount of success. i then bonded the print to a block of birch ply


its was waaaaaay to much work though to make any money out of it


the way those ones linked above are dont though is on a flatbed solvent or latex based printer. the quality will be ok, but wont last to long, its not pigment based inks
 
Create a Post
Back
Top