Why is Filmoplast Called the F Word?

Create a Post
S

scurran

True Grumbler
Joined
Apr 25, 2006
Posts
96
Loc
PA
I just pulled a box of filmoplast out of long term storage-I had an employee pack it all away years ago after taking a class where I learned that filmoplast is bad, bad, bad-specifically, "they" said that they call Filmoplast the F-Word. The box says: archival quality * water removable * solvent free * water based adhesive * buffered with CaCO3 * acid free. Those all sound like good things to me except maybe the buffered part? Can someone jog my memory on this?
PS. The filmoplast I have is Filmoplast P90.
 
Thanks for the link. After reading the article it sounds to me that when used in moderation on appropriate projects Filmoplast would be a decent, low cost (for our customers) adhesive for hinging?

For anyone who might be glancing through this post, here are some excerpts- with a few notes from me-indicated by ()- from the above artfacts.org link:

(Filmoplast P90 is a self-adhesive, not a gummed tape.)

Those tapes that employ a water activated adhesive (not Filmoplast P90) at first glance may seem easier to reverse, but in reality, the linen, plastic or paper carrier is the only thing being removed. The adhesive layer upon contact with water dissolves and moves further into the paper creating a "tide line" or stain that may, or may, not be immediately evident. This now embedded adhesive may also serve to attract and hold foreign contaminants.

Our adhesive is not water-soluble but instead absorbs water. In doing so it swells, developing a greater affinity for itself then it has for the paper fibers. In this state it can be lifted and removed from the paper surface.
 
Yes, but, there is also this paragraph:
In attempting to remove our product it is helpful to understand a little about how a self-adhesive works. Self-adhesives bond by attaching to or enveloping the paper's fibers. It should be noted that on loose woven papers it may be impossible to remove the tape without leaving trace amounts of adhesive and/or removing some of the paper fibers. Typically this occurs ata level not readily visible to the naked eye.

​
Also, to quote a conservator:
As is well known by book, paper, and photo conservators, the pressure-sensitive tape Filmoplast P-90 becomes progressively more difficult to remove as the adhesive ages.


​
And for a "decent, low cost (for our customers) adhesive for hinging" why not use gummed Hayaku rather than Filmoplast?
 
Just which F word are you referring to??

I figured it was because it started with the letter "F".
 
thanks again, I probably shouldn't have "partial posted". My take away remains the same, though. For items of low value, easy replaceability, non loose woven papers, etc., etc. this seems like an inexpensive alternative to paste hinges when archival issues have been discussed with a customer.
 
ha ha.

just checking in one last time before heading home and saw I had missed the note about using hayaku rather than filmoplast. That is what we have been using for such jobs but I am curious, is there a potential issue with tide lines when using and/or removing hayaku? And don't they use some sort of preservative that people are a little nervous about?
back tomorrow

thanks!!
 
CAframer said:
And for a "decent, low cost (for our customers) adhesive for hinging" why not use gummed Hayaku rather than Filmoplast?
​
Click to expand...

Because it's not as convenient.

I'd skip the Hayaku and use starch paste and Japanese tissue - you still have to wait for it to dry and if you compare prices per square foot - the best is actually far cheaper.


​
 
Tried about half a roll of that F****** Hayaku pre gummed )&$^&^&&^&*^%##@_). Went back to Filmo or rice starch.

This week I've been doing "repairs" at the shop.... lets see.... mmmmm
Gummed linen tape holding on 2-ply rag for a "Museum Quality" backing paper. I guess until the gum dessicated it helped hold in the acid from the cardboard backer.... that was scabbed with masking tape... which stopped holding last century...

Got in a re-mat job (doesn't go with the new wall color or pillows).
Our sticker on the back proudly said 10 years... and we're now on year 30..... the glue holding the dust paper still holding with tenacity, as was the Filmoplast. Hmmm I guess 20 years just isn't long enough to know for sure. I put it back on with Filmo; and because I'm a suspenders and belt kind of guy, added perimeter tabs for when the Filmo fails and the piece falls..... oh wait, the tabs are pressure sensitive too.....

I'd better call the customer in the morning and warn them that when they are old and gray to expect the hinging to fail.
 
There is a "new" version called, Filmoplast P90+.

I have not tried removing it yet, but I can tell you that the "paper tape" portion of Filmoplast P90 is easily removable with water. The adhesive, however is not.

Filmoplast P90 does NOT work well on watercolor papers, or papers with texture. It does work well on RC photographs.

I am not endorsing the use of the product, but there are some applications where I find it appropriate. Now, before I become the Filmoplast "whipping boy" in this thread, what I am saying is that sometimes you have to use what works and is the least compromising for the piece while still allowing for profitabililty in the outcome.

As a benefit of my PPFA membership, as an PPFA chapter event we were able to tour and spend a day in the Getty Museum Conservation Laboratory, and had a long one on one session with their cheif conservator. Part of the discussion surrounded using materials that might not be considered "conservation" quality by some for framing in a conservation setting.

If a conservator uses it does it become conservation quality?

At any rate, we were discussing Tamayo's hand made papers that are prone to separation under their own weight - so conventional paper hinges were just not strong enough to hold the image. And, these images needed to float in the frame, so they did not have the benefit of support for overmatting. The Getty's solution was to use HOT GLUE (now mind you it was a "special grade" of hot glue) but I bet that if you were to do the same on an MCPF test, they would flunk you.
 
I was tempted to get a "free sample roll" Till the questionare asked for my CC#....Uh fellas just tell me the shipping cost,I`ll pay that....I don`t want you thumbing through my credit! L.
 
How much preservation do you want?

Filmoplast P-90 has age limtations. So does Hayaku, and most gummed linen tapes, and other prepared tapes that contain plasticizers, preservatives, or other chemical additives in their adhesives. That doesn't mean you should avoid using them altogether. However, you should learn about their limitations and act according to the needs of the project at hand. Manufacturers' packaging seldom tells all. I suggest getting opinions from two or more qualified conservators, because you will find that they do not all agree, either.

If absolutely the best hinging is required, there is no substitute for freshly-cooked starch paste and torn (not cut) Japanese paper hinges, properly applied.

Instead of hinging, edge supports or an overlay may be better alternatives, because no adhesive contacts the art paper. No contact, no potential later problems with unknown adhesive properties.

When hinging is necessary, and something less than absolutely the best is appropriate, take your pick. After most of the water-base adhesive tapes, we have some really good quality pressure sensitive tapes, too, which leave permanent residues. But otherwise, they may be suitable for the purposes of moderate preservation.
 
I just got done with a nightmare on frame street wherein a page from a Piccasso book had been "repaired" with Filmoplast P. The "repair" stuck out like a sore thumb on the black ink.

Like Rob said, the carrier came right off with water, but the adhesive remained. It took four hours of brushing with distilled water until the adhesive reached that milky white and lifted off...with most of the black ink.
 
The “F” word!!?? I’m guessing it is not fabulous?

OK folks, for those that do not know I am the archival products manager for Neschen, makers of Fine filmoplast tapes so I am just a bit biased. My purpose in jumping in here is not so much to try and sway anyone but rather to offer some factual information on our products.

First: Filmoplast tapes are made in Germany and employ an adhesive that is an acrylic in water dispersion. Acrylics are naturally tacky and as such will not dry out with age. That’s the good news. The bad news is that because they never dry out over time the adhesive will move further into the paper making it more difficult to remove. How much, how far, how fast all depends on the type of paper and how it is stored/displayed.

Second: As Mr. Miller points out adhesives are often “tweaked” with plasticizers and tackifiers to alter the initial tack and hardness of the adhesive. These additives are prone to migration and as such we do NOT use any. (Yeah I know, who knew?) This is a question I have asked many people many times at the factory, as it is kind of important. Please recall that these tapes, with the exception of the new P-90 Plus were all first designed for library and archive use and we had the benefit of input from many conservators.

Is filmoplast a direct replacement for paste and paper hinges? Heck no. In fact emphatically no but that said it does have it’s place and as professional picture framers it will be up to you to make this determination. To help with this let me offer reprints of a paper done by two of the worlds leading conservation experts on self-adhesive tapes. The paper traces the history of self-adhesives starting with rubber-based formulations and talks about additives and problems in the aging and removing of PS tapes. To say it is a “dry” read is something of an understatement but if you can muddle through you will be well armed to evaluate the different products out there. PS tapes are truly not all the same. Those who would like a copy are welcome to e-mail me at HYPERLINK "mailto:vze25bkk@verizon.net" vze25bkk@verizon.net.

Oh, and Luddite, our free demo rolls are just that and I can’t imagine why anyone would have asked for your CC#. An error to be sure. If you, or anyone else is still interested, use the same e-mail as above, give me a mailing address and I will see that you get what you asked for.

Thank you all for your indulgence,

Dave Dannhauser
Neschen Americas
 
tapeguy said:
some factual information on our products.

The bad news is that because they never dry out over time the adhesive will move further into the paper making it more difficult to remove.

it does have it’s place and as professional picture framers it will be up to you to make this determination.
Click to expand...

Not quite what it says on the box then?
 
Dave,

Thanks for venturing into Grumble-land and providing us information on your product. Welcome aboard!

And now, back to the topic. From Vivian Kistler's Conservation Framing, p. 72: "An RC print will resist water-based adhesives typically used to attach paper hinger. Support the art onto the backing board by using corner mounts, mounting strips or flanges, or hinge it to the backing board with gummed paper or Filmoplast P-90."

Since corners/strips aren't recommended for larger, "floppier" pieces and the gummed paper has icky stuff in it, as a previous poster mentioned, isn't P-90 the most reasonable choice in the case of an RC photo? I remember Hugh Phibbs mentioning that corners aren't always a good idea because you're forcing the art to stand on its lower edge.

Any input from our beloved conservators out there? Hugh? Rebecca?
 
Welcome to The G, Dave. Your explanations are appreciated.

tapeguy said:
...The bad news is that because they never dry out over time the adhesive will move further into the paper making it more difficult to remove...
Click to expand...

That is what we call migration. In agreement with what you said, migration makes it difficult to remove from fiberous materials such as paper and fabrics. Quality of the adhesive is not the issue, because even the best quality pressure sensitive adhesives could migrate. I'm no conservator, but they say the conservation treatments to deal with that are chemically invasive and not entirely effective.

tapeguy said:
...adhesives are often “tweaked” with plasticizers and tackifiers to alter the initial tack and hardness of the adhesive. These additives are prone to migration and as such we do NOT use any...
Click to expand...

More to your point, conservators say those various additives can cause unpredictable chemical changes over time, which could make them more gummy and more migratory, or make them dry out, or otherwise weaken their bonding strength. It is good that Neschen does not use them, but some other adhesive tape makers do. Trouble is, we often do not know how to identify them.

I have never had bad results with the Filmoplast tapes I have used, but due to migration issues, I do not use any pressure sensitive adhesives in direct contact for best-preservation framing.

Some time ago I recall hearing from a credible source about an issue of P-90 causing discoloration. I guess that could have been a unique problem caused by localized conditions, or perhaps a short-term defect in the product. Do you have any comments about that?

Neschen has provided good quality adhesive products, useful in framing, for many years. But it is important for users to realize that all products have limitations. As responsible framers, it is our job to learn about those limitations and respect them.

My speculation is that most problems of damage to framed customers' property are related to some kind of adhesive. Of all the products we use daily, adhesives are among the most mysterious and the most troublesome. When in doubt, caution is advised. And read the package instructions carefully.
 
Hugh describes how to make continuous paper edge strips to hold art/photos in place without adhesive, in lieu of corners or non-continuous edge strips. There are a number of variations on this theme, for different scenarios, that he details in the latest AIC Book and Paper Annual. The photos there really help.

I bet he has written about the same techniques in one of his Picture Framing Magazine articles, if they would be easier for you to find.

Alternately, I think hinges made with Lascaux HV 360 and Japanese kozo paper would work on RC papers.

I've worked out system that usually works for removing Filmoplast, using xylene and a blunt scalpel, water just makes a big fat mess, as per Seth's description...

Rebecca
 
Rebecca said:
....I've worked out system that usually works for removing Filmoplast...Rebecca
Click to expand...

That removes the tape, but what about the adhesive residue? Can you remove all of that from the fibers? And in that regard, would Filmoplast be any better or worse than other good quality pressure-sensitive tapes? Don't they all migrate into the fibers of paper and fabrics?
 
Beats me Jim. I'm sure there is some residue left, just as there will always be residue left from any adhesive whatever the type may be. I don't put it on, I just take it off ; ). The point I was trying to make is that water is the worst way to try and remove Filmoplast.

Rebecca
 
Rebecca said:
Beats me Jim. I'm sure there is some residue left, just as there will always be residue left from any adhesive whatever the type may be. I don't put it on, I just take it off ; ). The point I was trying to make is that water is the worst way to try and remove Filmoplast.
Click to expand...
Rebecca,
It sounds like you are saying that Filmoplast is not quite as tragic as we are lead to believe?

Is the residue left by Filmplast dramatically worse than the residue left by starch paste?

On a theoretical scale where starch paste and torn Jap paper hinges are 10/10, where would you place Filmoplast as a hinging tape???
 
No, I'm not recommending Filmoplast or any other pressue sensitive tape other than than the one made with Lascaux HV360 and Japanese paper.

I would think the residue left would be worse than wheat or rice starch paste, because starch pastes have been used for centuries and are known to age well. And better than adhesives that are know to stain and crosslink. But one still shouldn't count of being able to remove every last trace, and because it does seem to become more difficult to remove with time, some amount of crosslinking could be happening.

If it's acrylic with no additives, it would certainly be better than many other kinds of adhesives, but I'm not aware that it is considered by any to be an "A" material for using on art. I've asked for a copy of the adhesives article; it should make interesting reading and may answer some of your questions.

I'm just saying that water isn't a good way to remove Filmoplast; attempts to remove with water can lead to considerable damage to the underlying paper.

Rebecca
 
Thanks Rebecca!
It will be good to hear what you have to say about this when you have done your research.
I realise that starch paste is the best adhesive for hinging and it's what I use for conservation hinging, but I am interested in the degree of detrimental effects of the adhesives used in products like Filmoplast.

I imagine that the detrimental effects of it over time would probably be worse when used for hinging very thin paper, than it would be on very thick paper.
 
Again, the Grumble proves itself to be a most useful forum. It is interseting to hear that the adhesive in Filmoplast sounds like a copolymer, which is tacky without the addition of tackifiers (good thing). It is certainly an excellent material for repair of pages in books that must be handled by readers, but like anything pressure-sensitive, one has to ask how it can be expected to stand up to the long term pressure of gravity, since it is always in its activation (pressure-senitive) mode. Recent research has indicated that application of water to paper weakens the cellulose and when added to problems of tideline formation, it would appear that removal of this or any other hinging material with water, may not be a risk that framers would want to undertake. Archival quality tapes are probably fine for use with low value items, but their preformance can never be fully predicted, as long as they contain ingredients that are trade secrets. Starch paste and Japanese tissue are both forms of cellulose and we know how they perform, so when something has to be preserved, they can be counted on.



Hugh
 
According to the newest PPFA "For Members Only" newsletter, Lineco has come out with a new tape that appears to be virtually identical to P-90. It's called ABACA.
:kaffeetrinker_2: Rick
 
Rob Markoff said:
There is a "new" version called, Filmoplast P90+.

I have not tried removing it yet, but I can tell you that the "paper tape" portion of Filmoplast P90 is easily removable with water. The adhesive, however is not.

Filmoplast P90 does NOT work well on watercolor papers, or papers with texture. It does work well on RC photographs.

I am not endorsing the use of the product, but there are some applications where I find it appropriate. Now, before I become the Filmoplast "whipping boy" in this thread, what I am saying is that sometimes you have to use what works and is the least compromising for the piece while still allowing for profitabililty in the outcome.

As a benefit of my PPFA membership, as an PPFA chapter event we were able to tour and spend a day in the Getty Museum Conservation Laboratory, and had a long one on one session with their cheif conservator. Part of the discussion surrounded using materials that might not be considered "conservation" quality by some for framing in a conservation setting.

If a conservator uses it does it become conservation quality?

At any rate, we were discussing Tamayo's hand made papers that are prone to separation under their own weight - so conventional paper hinges were just not strong enough to hold the image. And, these images needed to float in the frame, so they did not have the benefit of support for overmatting. The Getty's solution was to use HOT GLUE (now mind you it was a "special grade" of hot glue) but I bet that if you were to do the same on an MCPF test, they would flunk you.
Click to expand...
Replying to a VERY old post here, Rob, but hoping you'll see this and have a useful reply. I was searching for any suggestions for mounting a Tamayo print as I have one in the shop now. Not huge, about 40 x 24, but certainly problematic. Do you know of a good solution? The hot glue idea, "special grade" or not, is a bit scary.
 
That is electrical grade hot glue.
 
path said:
Replying to a VERY old post here, Rob, but hoping you'll see this and have a useful reply. I was searching for any suggestions for mounting a Tamayo print as I have one in the shop now. Not huge, about 40 x 24, but certainly problematic. Do you know of a good solution? The hot glue idea, "special grade" or not, is a bit scary.
Click to expand...

Hi, path. To clarify, is this a print by Rufino Tamayo? If so, is it a mixograph?
 
Create a Post
Back
Top