Page 2 of 3

Re: The work of the devil.

PostPosted: Wed Feb 12, 2014 4:15 pm
by Roboframer
I said MAYBE FHS!!!


..... and now we're trying to make sense of technology we can't comprehend because no-ones invented it yet or never may. Imagine taking an i phone back two hundred years - or a piece of museum glass even!

MY MAIN POINT WAS .... and still is that today's best methods & materials won't be the best in 200 years time.

Re: The work of the devil.

PostPosted: Wed Feb 12, 2014 4:26 pm
by Roboframer
Is this part so hard to deny that the boot has to be put in on the bit that's easy to?

Roboframer wrote:I've had many old things in treated in similar fashion and have been surprised at the good condition they are in and to be honest would be just as surprised, after that amount of time, if they had been mounted with no adhesive in contact ..... to capture-air-borne-pollutant-and-spit-it-back-out cotton board and 100% UV filtering glass!

But I've had more in - from that old to framed 20 or less years ago, that are pretty wrecked, combination of methods, materials and where they've been hung. If something framed to the bestest possible standard is hung in a bad place it may well deteriorate long before something framed with the worstest that's been in the attic and never hung at all.


'specially the red bit - or is that just me?

Re: The work of the devil.

PostPosted: Wed Feb 12, 2014 4:37 pm
by JohnMcafee
Is anyone denying that you said "maybe"?

I was just pointing out that what you thought maybe was going to be possible at some point in the future is in fact not possible by any stretch of the imagination.

I thought you would appreciate me pointing that out so that you won't make the same mistake in the future and look like maybe you didn't know what you are talking about.

You're welcome, no need to thank me. :)

Re: The work of the devil.

PostPosted: Wed Feb 12, 2014 4:48 pm
by Roboframer
It's not a mistake to ponder over what may be possible in the future and I'll do it whenever I like, thank you.

So - the factual bit then - anyone?

Re: The work of the devil.

PostPosted: Wed Feb 12, 2014 4:59 pm
by JohnMcafee
Yep, roboframer, I wouldn't have it any other way. :clap:

Re: The work of the devil.

PostPosted: Wed Feb 12, 2014 5:12 pm
by prospero
Don't need a force field. Just go into time warp and you can see the thing when it was new. :clap:


It's framing Jim. But not as we know it.



I'll git me coat. :?

Re: The work of the devil.

PostPosted: Wed Feb 12, 2014 5:37 pm
by An Old Master
I think that your penultimate paragraph should be a header announcement for the forum, John.

Re: The work of the devil.

PostPosted: Wed Feb 12, 2014 5:42 pm
by An Old Master
Whoa! My thread, stop shouting. And digging.

Re: The work of the devil.

PostPosted: Wed Feb 12, 2014 8:34 pm
by An Old Master
I have a series of pantings done by myself and wife between 1976 and 1978. All done on what was then called typewriting paper, painted in gouache and regular watercolour, framed in extruded aluminium with Crescent French Gray ( American spelling) mounts, dry mounted to 2mm hardboard. Hung almost all their life in direct sunlight for half the day. No noticeable fading and certainly no damage staining ur burns. I have more examples of framing that I did BC (before conservation) too boring to mention, but none that require re-framing for any conservation based reason. Food for thought.

Re: The work of the devil.

PostPosted: Wed Feb 12, 2014 9:29 pm
by Roboframer
But surely you have seen many things treated similarly to that and the example in the opening post, that have been affected. I know I have - this is in at the moment ....

acid burn.JPG
acid burn.JPG (346.51 KiB) Viewed 9129 times



Acid burn from bevel and backing, fading on artwork, fading and discolouration on mount. Would conservation boards have prevented the acid burn? Would UV glass have made any difference?

Re: The work of the devil.

PostPosted: Wed Feb 12, 2014 9:59 pm
by JohnMcafee
But doesnt the framer loose credibility with the customer who goes against his conservation type framing advice, and the job continues to look fine in spite of all the dire warnings?

I'm a great believer in handing over full responsibility to the customer when it comes to decisions about whether or not to use conservation methods that are going to cost him more money.

Re: The work of the devil.

PostPosted: Wed Feb 12, 2014 10:19 pm
by Roboframer
Some framers don't give conservation advice or dire warnings, they just do it, it's not a big deal to/for them. E.g. my default boards, back and front, are artcare and my default mounting methods have either no adhesive or very little in contact with the artwork (on paper for now, just to keep things simpler)- I'd charge more for dry or wet mounting than I would for any of them and not having to make decisions on materials and methods with the customer saves time; not having to stock different qualities of board to fit in with those decisions also simplifies things.

Pretty much the only time I get in to a conservation conversation is when it comes to glass and then it's made clear that fading is a possibility, not a probability ............. and 9 out of 10 times the customer will say it's not a problem as it won't be hung in direct sunlight, to which I reply that's just as well as UV glass won't protect against that - etc.

So, a question answered - are any of mine going to be?

Re: The work of the devil.

PostPosted: Wed Feb 12, 2014 10:25 pm
by Not your average framer
I don't see a lot of point in stocking anything other than conservation mountboard these days. In my business, even the lower budget customers can have conservation mountboard, if they are willing to have what they are offered. I stock two colours in the Simons super value range (bought mostly for such customers), or offer them a choice of whatever colours happen to be in my stock of offcuts.

It's a good differentiator for low budget customers between me and competitors. I usually can find some suitable moulding off-cuts, I also have a limited range of low budget moulding just to help me when I otherwise might lose the sale.

As they say, there's more that one way of skinning a cat!

I was not so bothered about losing lower value jobs before the recession, but now I often find that lower budget jobs can bring customers back with better value jobs to follow.

Re: The work of the devil.

PostPosted: Wed Feb 12, 2014 10:41 pm
by Roboframer
Roboframer wrote:I'd charge more for dry or wet mounting than I would for pretty much any of them


edit in red

Re: The work of the devil.

PostPosted: Wed Feb 12, 2014 10:43 pm
by An Old Master
Robo, your acid burn example - treat the painting and restore, put new mount on and tell 'em to get it checked in a year or two. Repeat business.

Re: The work of the devil.

PostPosted: Wed Feb 12, 2014 10:46 pm
by An Old Master
Robo, clarify your 'edit in red' post please - went whistling over my head.

Re: The work of the devil.

PostPosted: Wed Feb 12, 2014 11:02 pm
by Roboframer
I wanted to edit the post above that to read like that but ran out of time - IOW possibly not all no-adhesive methods I use would be cheaper than wet/dry mounting.

I'm not qualified to treat and restore but I can help prevent, isn't prevention better than cure?

I've still got plenty of questions un-answered but I'll answer the above myself - yes, it is.

Re: The work of the devil.

PostPosted: Wed Feb 12, 2014 11:21 pm
by An Old Master
I would respectfully suggest that there is less to prevent than the framing buying public has been lead to believe.

Re: The work of the devil.

PostPosted: Wed Feb 12, 2014 11:37 pm
by Roboframer
By who? I just said that I (for example) just do it. So are the framing-buying-public reading ABT, the FATG website - The Grumble .... what? Do they really get the conservation bible thrown at them in the vast majority of frameshops they go in? Not round these parts, for sure.

Isn't it more a case, in your opinion, of that there is less to prevent than the average framer has been lead to believe?

This sub-forum's sub-heading is "Conservation Issues" and the fact that it even exists outside of general discussion speaks volumes - there is an 'issue' with conservation for some and I, who don't have one, is mixing it with them - and I'm not going to win, not that I'm interested in converting anyone to be 'born again' anyway.

I'm not going to get my basic questions answered am I? So unless many others' want to join in and have a stab at them - I'm out.

Re: The work of the devil.

PostPosted: Thu Feb 13, 2014 12:11 am
by Not your average framer
I find that many of my customers are more educated about protecting their valued artworks that you might think. Many ask about conservation mountboard, or UV glass. They may not know the details, but many have certainly heard something about these things, so it's often a good opertunity to have useful conversations.

The price difference between standard and conservation mountboards is often not a significant amount, but since perception has such a significant influence in obtaining repeat business, letting people know you have used conservation materials to protect their artwork has got to be a good idea!