Glass is rarely applied in front of oil paintings because of the nature of the beast - canvas is meant to breath and is best left open. Actually, some museums do put glass in front of rare master pieces - The Met kept Van Gogh's 'Starry Night' under glass for protection.
In the case of photography - glass serves to protect the image and is a traditional framing method. There are other options out there that give you a better presentation.
Mounting your images to a durable substrate and applying a UV lamination over top is a great look. Many Chelsea galleries are doing this and then framing with a thin floater frame, no glass or plexi. The UV lam allows you to clean the surface of your image while deferring the reflective components that glass and plexi provide.
L2 Fine Art Mounting and Framing is a reputable custom mounting and framing company that serves the fine art photography market - they do great work at a fair price and a timely turnaround - they also crate and ship all over the world.
Acrylic (Plexiglass) has roughly the same same light transmittance as glass (92%).
Originally Posted by email@example.com
Unfortunately the question of glass vs acrylic is similar to which type of lens - prime or zoom. It depends on what you are doing. I have a decent amount of info about the pro's and con's of glass vs acrylic here:
Glass vs Acrylic
Last edited by fdi; 12-11-2009 at 02:14 PM. Click to view previous post history.
That's what I got:
Originally Posted by fdi
You are not authorized to view this page
The Web server you are attempting to reach has a list of IP addresses that are not allowed to access the Web site, and the IP address of your browsing computer is on this list.
Please try the following:
Contact the Web site administrator if you believe you should be able to view this directory or page.
HTTP Error 403.6 - Forbidden: IP address of the client has been rejected.
Internet Information Services (IIS)
Technical Information (for support personnel)
Go to Microsoft Product Support Services and perform a title search for the words HTTP and 403.
Open IIS Help, which is accessible in IIS Manager (inetmgr), and search for topics titled About Security, Limiting Access by IP Address, IP Address Access Restrictions, and About Custom Error Messages.
Do you have a clean link?
When visiting Dick Phillips the camera builder I was surprised to see that none of the many framed prints on the walls had glass. He listed all the complaints given by others here and said that this was the way he liked it. I don't argue with a man who has built six hundred of the finest cameras in his basement over the years and whose year's production sold out one year in the first three days of the year. The following year they sold out in the first half day of the year. They were very nice photographs. I would have been very proud if I had shot and printed them that well.
Perhaps in museums we are putting glass around the wrong object. If people are going to do such terrible things as have been mentioned, perhaps we should put each patron in a glass box with casters so that for an additional fee they can be wheeled about to see the images in frames without glass.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
I prefer no glass -- but the d**n fly s**t is a PITA.
At least with LF landscape, a bad day of photography can still be a good day of exercise.
I am very sorry about that. Thanks for letting me know.
This will work much better:
glass vs acrylic
I was testing new product pages on our staging website. I checked the link and of course it worked fine for me. I also changed it my original post.
Originally Posted by RalphLambrecht
I just paid $50 for a piece of glass to protect a mid sized watercolor. Having printed on the old tektronix iiiPXi for some years, in which the magenta ink was extremely transient, I am suspicious about glass or plastic that doesn't offer lots of uv protection. For any purpose, pigment, dyes, or prints made by conventional chemical means.
Reflections are no fun. However, a lot depends on HOW displays are lit. The best lighting considers the way reflections work. Angle of incidence = angle of reflection. A spotlight mounted overhead which illuminates the art at an angle of 45° or so will reflect that light down toward the viewer's feet and won't be visible as a distraction. Then, if the room itself is kept fairly dark, the light coming from the viewer which would cause the viewer to be reflected on the surface will be insignificant, and will be overcome by the light on the subject. Little or no distracting reflection.
By the way, this is a great way to photograph art under glass, or which has a highly reflective surface of its own. Better than polarizers on a copy stand or copy board in most studios, a single spotlight as far from the copy as possible in an otherwise darkened room works great. If the light is far enough from the copy, the difference in illumination on the near and far sides of the copy will be so trivial as to be undetectable. I've done this in the summer outdoors on dark nights. The only issue there is that the light attracts moths. They get toasted and smell bad.