Double-sided Frame

[RobM]

I appreciate this isn't particularly different from the question I posed last week about stained glass, but it might be something some of you have already dealt with.

A client has brought in this artefact, an envelope for a letter written by Albert Schweitzer, and would like to be able to see both sides, even if the rear side is as normal.

Still, it would be nice to look for a better arrangement with a complete double-sided frame if it was possible to do so.

You can actually buy ready-made frames in this style off Amazon for standard sizes, and I did spot a video online of an American framer who had made one (albeit without actually explaining how he did it).

Is this a thing that any of you have done?

[theframer]

You can mount it between 2 pieces of glass,

[vintage frames]

Mounting between two pieces of glass will hold it, ok but being in constant contact with glass could cause future condensation issues (thank you, Justin) and damage the item.
You could seal the glass package and that would help but a better idea would be to use archival acrylic.
It's easy enough to buy in pre-cut to size.

I would leave a see-through border around the object as this suggests the back end is available to view.

Frame wise, make the front frame, load in some spacers to both hold the package and bring up the surface level with the back of the frame.
Then use a fillet/slip as the back frame and glue in place.
It might be easier to use a plain wood fillet and paint it black or whatever.

[Justintime]

If you want to do a double sided frame I've seen it done beautifully with those neodymium magnets recessed into the back of both frames.
Personally design-wise, i'd think about having a window mount on each side, the aperture slightly bigger than the envelope. I haven't thought it through totally, so there might be some framers magic involved, a wand etc...

[vintage frames]

How does that work, Justin?

What's holding the envelope up?

[Justintime]

That's the million dollar question. Answers on the back of a postcard! Off the top of my head, perhaps encapsulating it in melinex?

[Justintime]

I'm just trying to work backwards from the finished design I can see in my mind..

[Justintime]

Maybe also think about photographing the back sender details, using a single sided frame, with a title window below the piece showing the back sender details?

[vintage frames]

If you were to use melinex, does that not give a sort of plasticky film effect over the envelope? Only asking as I've never used the stuff.

Taking a photo print of the back would work I suppose, but you tend to lose the magic and actuality of the original.

Still waiting to hear how its going to sit inside the mount..

[WannabeFramer]

I have done a simple version of something similar recently but can’t find a photo, sorry.

I encapsulated the paper in Mylar, then sandwiched between two window mounts, just slightly larger than the edges of the paper so it looked like it was floating, but should have enough pressure to stop it slipping down. Jim Miller has a good guide with distances for the tape etc. Yes, it was glossy but the customer preferred that to a scan and print of the reverse.

The frame was standard on the front, glass instead of backing board held with glaziers points, then a slip glued in to cover the points. I did seal with narrow gummed tape before putting the slip in.

I’m sure there are better ways, but it worked for me and the customer with the budget they had. I would love to see the magnet method!

[Justintime]

The magnet method I saw was simply magnets recessed into the back of both frames. I'm guessing your measurements for the magnet holes have to be spot on. Magnets glued into the holes, job done. The magnets are very strong.

[Justintime]

I'm guessing it was sandwiched with spacers on both sides to hold the sandwich in the middle of the two frames. Jo could probably elaborate on this, I think I saw it at hers but I'm not entirely sure.

[Tudor Rose]

Yep, the magnets is something Alec does very effectively with double sided frames. So you likely saw it as one of our examples Justin. A popular teaching topic for our students! Not just double sided frames but use of magnets in other ways within a frame too.

[vintage frames]

Interesting idea of using magnets to hold the two frames together but getting back to the original question, I suggested the simple solution of holding the envelope between two pieces of acrylic and making up the frame package as WannabeFramer did.

Is that a stupid way of doing it?

[Justintime]

I think it's a perfectly acceptable way of doing it for an everyday object, but from a conservation perspective, the melinex would be my preferred choice if mounting is out of the question. Obviously t hinged between two cotton window mounts (the back mount could have a fraction smaller window to hide the hinging) would be best imo. Depends how precious the envelope is!

[vintage frames]

But does the melinex change the matt antique character of the piece?
WannabeFramer noticed that it gave the object a glossy appearance.

[Justintime]

It is the same as when a print is wrapped for sale. I've seen it in a museum setting. I think it's something that our minds look past when looking at an object, we don't necessarily focus on the wrapping but on the artwork.

[vintage frames]

Mutter - mutter..
Still think two pieces of acrylic might be better.

Further thought. Would the meliex squash the paper the same way as the acrylic, so as to hold it up?
A looser grip would look better.

[Justintime]

"Encapsulating paper art between two sheets of archival polyester film like Melinex or Mylar is the standard conservation practice. Sandwiching paper directly between two rigid sheets of acrylic is not recommended by conservators, as it creates high pressure points, traps moisture, and risks chemical damage".

[vintage frames]

Yes, i get your point.
If there was not great value on the piece, I'f maybe go for the acrylic - quick and easy, don't like mounts!
Otherwise the melinex would be best.

Would look right with say, a stamp but not so much with a larger piece.