Which tape

[kartoffelngeist]

I know this is better done without the self adhesive tape. I know, and one day I will start to phase in doing it properly, but...

If you were going to use self adhesive tape to mount pictures to the undermount, is any self adhesive tape better than others? I've been using PH7-70, but wondered if there was a better choice or if they're all much and such the same?

Thanks,

andrew

[David McCormack]

Hi Andrew, as you say self adhesive tape shouldn't really be your first choice for hinging art but, if I had to use it I would go for Filmoplast P90 or for heavier paper P90-Plus, I always have both these tapes to hand for all sorts of uses

[David McCormack]

Tapes.pdf

(736.89 KiB) Downloaded 186 times

[prospero]

It depends on what you are hinging. P-90 is a good general tape for hinging run-of-the-mill items. PH7-70 is
too thick. The hinge should always be weaker than the paper art. You only need put a tiny amount on the art.
If you burnish it down well it will hold well. An agate burnisher is the tool for the job. Or a fingernail at a push.

Some valuable or irreplaceable items demand hand torn hinges stuck with starch paste. If should mention that this
process needs to be practised well before using it in anger. You could actually damage the art if you don't do it right.

[kartoffelngeist]

Some valuable or irreplaceable items demand hand torn hinges stuck with starch paste. If should mention that this
process needs to be practised well before using it in anger. You could actually damage the art if you don't do it right.

Problem is, a lot of the people working here have quite varied levels of ability. The very thought of cooking up starch paste in here terrifies me! Be fine if I was on my own.

To give it some context, when I first started here, pictures where taped down all the way round the back of the mount aperture with brown tape, so hinging with decent tape is already a good start! Getting some of the guys who had been here for a while to change over was a bit of a challenge, change needs to be fairly incremental here!

[prospero]

PM sent.

A recent new customer of mine had been mounting his own prints for 30-odd years by sticking all round
with Sellotape. He had absolutely no conception of hinging. OK, a lot of the time it don't make no nevermind,
but this guy is an art teacher. The things is, it is often easier and quicker to do it the right way than do a lash-up.

One of the saddest sayings: "We've always done it like that"

My philosophy when it comes to framing is that whatever you frame you should be able to un-frame without
leaving any evidence that it had been framed. Not always practical and sometimes not possible, but an ideal to aim towards.

[kartoffelngeist]

I'm definitely slowly working towards everything being reversible. The things that were done with double sided tape when I started here would give people on here a heart attack!

PM sent to me? didn't get anything here...

[kartoffelngeist]

Thanks for the pdf link by the way, I'd been trying to find something like that.

[Jamesnkr]

Filmoplast tape is not, practically, reversible. It is archival so won't do any damage to the picture, but despite being water based it requires a skilled conservator to remove it.

Don't kid yourself that it's really reversible. But for most things, it really doesn't matter.

BTW when did anybody last see a picture that had torn because it had been hinged with tape that was too strong?

[prospero]

There are other consequences.

[Jamesnkr]

That's the consequence of using miles of tape that extends into the visible area of the picture. Not very clever.

Initial question repeated!

[prospero]

Well, whether you have seen it or not, reason dictates that it has happened sometime.