Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,930   Posts: 1,556,857   Online: 939
      
Results 1 to 6 of 6
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Kansas City, MO
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    196
    Images
    3

    Why have glass/plexi in a frame at all?

    I really enjoy looking at paintings hung in local galleries and museums and it struck me that the vast majority of them have no glass or any kind of protection in front of the surface. It seems like common practice whether in the formal museum of art or at an art fair.

    Photos, however, are nearly always protected. I've always had a gut reaction against putting glass in a photo frame, but I've always gone with it because that's "the norm."

    Are any of you out there showing in exhibits or selling work that has no layer of protection in its final format? Is there a compelling reason photos and paintings are treated differently in this regard?

    Thanks!

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Australia
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    46
    I think the main reason for putting photos behind glass is that they are not as easy to clean as paintings, and are more susceptible to contaminants.
    When one of my photo frames fell off the wall and broke the glass, I sprayed the photo with gloss photo "varnish" - the result was a brilliant print that, ten years later, is still more vibrant that its peers.
    Perhaps the downside is that the varnish will eventually crack, darken, etc, so it depends how long you want the print to last.

  3. #3
    DWThomas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    SE Pennsylvania
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,253
    Images
    65
    Mmmm -- oil and acrylic paintings are typically displayed uncovered, but watercolors, pastels and most works on paper are just about always behind glass. The oil mediums can just about be washed, but other materials can be damaged by contact or abrasion or even rough handling, in the case of pastels.

    DaveT

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Seattle, Washington area
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    462
    Have a look at Kodak Tech Publication F-35.
    http://www.kodak.com/global/en/profe...bs/f35/f35.pdf

    Among other things, it summarizes reasons why display photos should have glazing. The topic concerns black/white photos (don't know about color work). Look particularly at the sections on "Framing" and "Controlling Light, Heat and Humidity." I was surprised about the comment regarding use of acrylic glazing, as it is in widespread use.

    As far as displaying paintings, I would guess Kodak pleads ignorance ... I would certainly want to research the materials used to clean a painting (if I had one).

  5. #5
    Jim Fitzgerald's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Ventura, Ca
    Shooter
    ULarge Format
    Posts
    1,794
    Images
    107
    Well, I am a carbon printer and I no longer use glass or any other glazing for my work. It detracts from the textured relief of my images. The difference is huge and I want to show my work in the best possible way. If someone owns one of my works then they will have to be careful with it. A carbon print is very stable.

    Jim

  6. #6
    David Brown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    near Dallas, TX USA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    3,327
    Images
    7
    Quote Originally Posted by DWThomas View Post
    ... most works on paper are just about always behind glass.

    Yes, there's the common denominator.



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin