A conservation question

[Bagpuss]

Hi,
I've used Colourmount mountboard for years, I only use the White Core board and for a while I've realised that some colours are described as "Conservation" stand and other colours are not. I don't want to totally switch board e.g to Bainbridge, where all colours are conservation standard apparently but I thought for the sort of jobs that really do require conservation standards I could add a thin 'barrier' board (750mic) of conservation standard card underneath the mount and on top of the print ( obviously with an aperture cut in the middle ).

I suppose it sounds a bit fiddly but at least I could be assured of offering the correct level of protection to the artwork. Has anyone else done something similar to this before and if so, what 'barrier' board/card did you use ?

cheers,
Adam/Bagpuss

[Roboframer]

I'm not totally familiar with colourmount but I believe that some colours are classed as conservation quality (only by FATG standards though - are they made from pure alpha cellulose? - doubt it!) and others not, due to the surface papers used; the cores and backing papers are the same quality regardless of surface paper, bar black/coloured cores I suppose. This applies to other makes too, like Arqadia.

So you'd not really be gaining anything by adding a thin barrier of no better quality than the board's backing paper.

[Bagpuss]

What I thought about using was the Colourmount "White Conservation Barrier Board", this is 0.45mm thick and is described as "100% Conservation Quality, totally acid-free & alkaline buffered" . Although probably a bit fiddly, I would be giving an extra layer of conservation protection wouldn't I ?

[Roboframer]

A very thin one, yes, but protection from what? If it's the core of the board and/or the surface paper, then that is still open/exposed to the artwork.

For things that really warrant protection, why allow in any board that could cause harm?

In nightclubs the bouncers are outside

[Roboframer]

some colours are described as "Conservation" standard and other colours are not. I don't want to totally switch board e.g to Bainbridge, where all colours are conservation standard

Why not just use Bainbridge for these problem colours?

Although probably a bit fiddly

Wouldn't the cost of the two colourmount boards (4 ply plus the barrier board) and the extra labour, make just buying a better single board the best option?

[Not your average framer]

for the sort of jobs that really do require conservation standards

If a job needs to be carried out to conservation standards, then there are no half measures and there is no such thing as "sort of" conservation. The relevent standards are quite specific and with good reason!

I could add a thin 'barrier' board (750mic) of conservation standard card underneath the mount

This is not conservation framing! The use of barrier boards are not mentioned at all in any conservation standards.

Conservation mountboards are not all that much more expensive than white core mountboards, so why not use the correct materials. If you add up the costs, you will find that adding the barrier boards to a non-compliant mountboard is not saving any money at all. In fact it is costing you more on both material and labour costs.

[brianbogie]

Hi Bagpuss
Thanks for bringing this up - it is a question I get asked a lot.

The Colourmount White Core product range is split into two sections, because of one clause (reproduced below) in the Mountboard standards, which relates to colour bleed.

'2.5.1. Bleeding - Bleeding - (test based on TAPPI T 475) Any dye or pigment in the board shall show no bleeding when soaked in distilled water for 48 hours at room temperature while held down with a weight against a sheet of white bond or blotting paper.'

All Colourmount White core is made using an Alpha Cellulose core, buffered with CaCO3 to meet the Conservation standard. The backing paper and the face papers all meet the standards laid down by the FATG Conservation spec, except that some colours do not pass the above test.

As signatories to the FATG standards, we therefore split our range into Conservation White Core(no bleed under these test conditions) and Standard White Core (colour bleed possible)

As you can see from this explanation, the use of a barrier sheet would make no difference, since the parts of the board that come into contact with the art work are Conservation standard anyway.

Obviously, the purist approach is to use the many colours from the Conservation range!

Hope this helps

Cheers
Brian B

[AllFramed]

I generally use and like Colourmount too. So in reality, what kind of conditions in a sealed package in a well made frame are likely to cause any such bleed?

[Bagpuss]

I thank Brian Bogie from Slater Harrison for replying to the above, he actually called and left a message on my answerphone, how's that for Customer Service ?

I like Colourmount board, I've always used it and bought it through D&J Simons for years . If I was using a mountboard that was Conservation standard across the entire color range then I wouldn't have raised the initial post. When a customer comes in and we pick a colour they like to go with their artwork I don't want to say "sorry, you can't have that one I'm afraid, it's not Conservation board".

To get round this, I thought by sticking a Conservation barrier board to the underside of the cut mount that sits on top of the Artwork, that would be sufficient protection ?? Could any "bleeding" travel through the Conservation barrier board, onto the art ? I'm trying to envisage it...

I really do not want to start ordering mountboard from yet another Supplier, as a Sole Trader I want to stick to the few Suppliers I have at the moment, I'm just trying to find a sensible "work around" for this Conservation dilema.
regards,
Adam/Bagpuss

[Not your average framer]

Hi Adam,

Have you read the Colourmount product information relating to the 300 series conservation mountboard and the 300 series standard mountboard? The differences in their specifications are much more than just bleed resistance. I am quoting the following information directly from their fold out colour selector chart and using their own words. Significant differences are show in red text.

The 300 series conservation mountboard is:

* Buffered with calcium carbonate to an alkaline pH.
* Core and backing are white and stay white - does not discolour with age.
* Fade and bleed resistance - BWS rating for surface paper 3+. BWS rating marked on label.


The 300 series standard mountboard is:

* Buffered with calcium carbonate to a nuetral pH specification.
* Pure white bevel - stays white - non acidic.

One is a conservation quality product, the other is most clearly not a conservation product and the addition of a thin barrier board still does not cause it to comply with either the FATG, or FACTS standards for conservation framing.

Some framers get around this issue by offering painted bevels on double mounts, using high permanence pigmented acrylic paints on conservation mountboards. Done correctly this not only looks stunning and adds kudos to you business, but also increased profitability. This could be the perfect solution to your objective of not having to buy another brand of mountboard, while still providing a full range of colour options.

I hope this helps.

[Roboframer]

Well, if you're going by FATG standards, for conservation level you don't have to use UV filtering glass, so I wouldn't worry too much about bleeding from surface papers..... unless you are using UV glass....... but then you'd be talking (drum roll) museum level and would have to use cotton board which would limit your colour choice further.

I think that the adhesive used to bond the barrier to the mount would be more of an issue than the bleeding from the surface paper, what would you use? It's .45 mm away from the artwork and the surface paper is 1.545mm away from it.

If you are doing a conservation job then you use boards that fit the bill back and front; not boards that partly fit the bill, therefore, even with the added barrier, the bill would not be fitted, like I said in my first reply and like you've now heard from the horse's mouth.

Back to the nightclub bouncers - "I've got a flick knife, but it's OK, my pal's got a first aid kit" - reckon they'd get in?

[Not your average framer]

not boards that partly fit the bill,

They don't even partly fit the bill, but fail to comply with conservation framing standards on the specification of the core, the backing paper and the surface paper. End of story!

[Roboframer]

I bet you get even less road rage than I do Mark

Like I said to start with - I'm not up to date on colourmount anymore (it was my default until I discovered a world outside of Euro Mouldings though) I was just going by what Brain Bogie said (Welcome to the forum Brian) and assuming it was just the surface papers that differed on some boards. So, the 300 range meets FATG conservation quality bar those colours, but those colours still have the same core and backing papers as the other colours.

I've looked a bit further now though and all I'd say - again - is that if you want to offer true conservation quality boards and true levels of conservation framing, you have to look beyond the FATG standards and levels because they are partly designed to keep the people that want to sell you product sweet.

[prospero]

Strange how we agonise about mountboard when even the current "standard" stuff probably contains fewer nasties than the paper the artwork is likely to be done on.

I recently framed 3 drawings done on Colourmount board.

Just saying.......

[Not your average framer]

So, the 300 range meets FATG conservation quality bar those colours, but those colours still have the same core and backing papers as the other colours.

Nope! Colourmount's published product information clearly shows that the series 300 conservation mountboard has a core and backing which are to an alkaline pH, whereas the series 300 standard mountboard has core which is to a nuetral ph and the backing is not even mentioned at all. If the core and the backing was the same, then would Colourmount have used difference descriptions in their published information?

BTW, It is not for nothing that the largest ranges of colours in consrvation mountboard ranges come from American based companies, who have far larger home markets and therefore with the economies of scale of production can afford the investment required to develop a full range of colours for conservation grade surface papers.

I bet you get even less road rage than I do Mark

Don't you believe it! Down here in Devon we have very narrow country lanes which the grockles don't know how to drive on, but still insist on taking caravans and coaches along. Funny thing is that no one wants to be the one who has to reverse back down the lane when they can't see, because their door mirrors are stuck in the hedges either side and they can't see what is behind the caravan.

Even better than this, is when the one who has finally backed down and started reversing meets a herd of cattle coming along the road behind them. Cattle don't have a lot of brains and have been know to cause road rage of their own, including trying to climb over the car.

[Roboframer]

Strange how we agonise about mountboard when even the current "standard" stuff probably contains fewer nasties than the paper the artwork is likely to be done on.

There's many factors like that to take in to consideration and at least we have the option of not adding anything that will help it along the road to self-destruction and/or adding things that will do more than simply not self-destruct themselves, i.e. actively protect, such as artcare boards and UV glass.

[absolute framing]

Hi,

Just to clarify that colourmounts "standard cream core" boards are the 800 series and not the 300 series.

The 300 Series is split into two
- Conservation White Core
and
- Standard White Core (the ones whose face paper does not pass the bleed test)

My reading of this is the only difference is the face paper, but I am open to Brian from Slater Harrison correcting me.

[AllFramed]

Either the product info needs correction or Brian's post is incorrect, he clearly states:

"All Colourmount White core is made using an Alpha Cellulose core, buffered with CaCO3 to meet the Conservation standard. The backing paper and the face papers all meet the standards laid down by the FATG Conservation spec, except that some colours do not pass the above test".

Still curious, as per my post above, what conditions in a sealed package in a well made frame are likely to cause such a bleed to take place?

Cheers
Tim

[brianbogie]

Many thanks to 'Allframed' and 'Not Your Average Framer' for pointing out the ambiguous information on our websites.

I can confirm that all Colourmount White core products are made using a conservation backing and core, which is buffered to a pH between 7.5 and 9.5.

The error has been corrected.

I hope to see many of you at the 'Meet Learn Celebrate event at Wyboston on the 11-12 June.

Happy framing
Brian

[iantheframer]

Still curious, as per my post above, what conditions in a sealed package in a well made frame are likely to cause such a bleed to take place?

Cheers
Tim

Absolutely none that I can think of. The frame would need to be subject to such abuse that the artwork would probably be totally destroyed anyway