1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. WELCOME Grumblers
    Backup is now done at 3PM EDT. You may find the server down for up to two minutes at that time.

Art Glass?

Discussion in 'The Grumble' started by jim_p, Sep 9, 2010.

  1. jim_p

    jim_p SGF, Supreme Grumble Framer

    I just had the Omega rep come by the shop today to show off their new product, "Art Glass". It's made by "A European company" (he didn't know who) and it's their answer to AR and Museum Glass (since for some reason Omega doesn't sell Tru Vue). He had a little side-by-side display that suggested that it was slightly clearer than Museum Glass. He also claimed that it was more durable because "the coating is baked right in". On the other hand, a little fingertip-feel test on the side-by-side display suggested to me that it's .010"-.020" thinner than MG. The pricing is about 20% less than that of Museum Glass.

    Has anybody else heard about or seen this product? Anybody tried it? I'll save my own reactions for further down the thread :)
    Sponsor Wanted
  2. Framar

    Framar SPFG, Supreme Picture Framing God

    Wasn't that glass wrapped in blue plastic and sold by Crescent also called Art Glass? I sure loved that glass.........if for nothing else than the blue plastic. ;)
  3. Jeff Rodier

    Jeff Rodier SPFG, Supreme Picture Framing God

    I believe that Schott Glass has the baked coating. If you have a glass top on your oven you will see their name on it.
  4. FramerDave

    FramerDave PFG, Picture Framing God

    I'm not familiar with the product, but just be sure you know what you're getting. I've spoken to a number of framers who are selling Claryl glass as low-cost alternative to Museum Glass. They were not aware that it does not have a UV-filtering coating, and their website describes its UV-filtering properties as being the same as regular float glass.

    Before you jump on me, please know that I am not accusing anyone of being deceptive. I think we all know how hard it can be to keep track of all the different products out there and their features, and when someone sees anti-reflective glass the first impulse is to compare it to Museum Glass.

    Just make sure you're making an informed choice.
  5. Jim Miller

    Jim Miller SPFG, Supreme Picture Framing God

    What about UV blocking?

    David mentioned Claryl, whose established sales message compares their optically coated glass with Museum Glass. However, Claryl blocks about 78% of UV radiation (as I recall -- correct me if I'm wrong) so it would be comparable only to AR Glass.

    Schott Mirogard is also similar to Claryl, but blocks only 48% of UV radiation. Schott Mirogard Plus block 86%, so its UV blocking is comparable to AR Glass. Mirogard Protect blocks 99% of UV, so its UV blocking is comparable to Museum Glass.

    The point is that there are differences among the glass products, and those differences matter. So, when comparing prices, be sure to also compare specifications and the product's suitability for your intended purpose.

    (Note: A statement of disclosure about my Tru Vue relationship is not included here, because I have said nothing to promote any particular maker's glass product.)
  6. jim_p

    jim_p SGF, Supreme Grumble Framer

    Actually, Art Glass comes in two grades: "Art Glass" (same idea as Tru Vue AR) and "Art Glass UV" (same idea as Museum Glass). So the question of UV blocking is a non-issue; they're up-front about it (though I haven't seen any technical data as to the degree of UV-blockage...)
  7. Jim Miller

    Jim Miller SPFG, Supreme Picture Framing God

    It would be good for all makers to specify their UV blocking performance. Where can we get information about the UV-blocking performance and the frequency range?

    UV blocking isn't a "non-issue". As far as I've been able to determine, all authorities in art preservation, such as the Image Permanence Institute, conservators, and museum curators, FACTS, FATG, and PPFA recommend careful control of lighting in display areas. And when control of the light is not practical, as in nearly all consumer applications, they recommend blocking at least 95% to 98% of UV radiation in the range of 300 to 380 nanometers.

    When comparing prices, be sure to also compare specifications and the product's suitability for your intended purpose.
  8. Bob Doyle

    Bob Doyle SPFG, Supreme Picture Framing God

    Jim, when discussing glass I think you should disclose your connection to TruVue...

    Oh, wait, we've already gone down this road haven't we :)

    Does Schott Glass have Shot Glasses as a promo? That would be a "cute" play on their name :)
  9. Pat Murphey

    Pat Murphey SPFG, Supreme Picture Framing God

    Bob, someone in Warped said the fall session in Banned Camp is open for business. :D:D:D
  10. FramerDave

    FramerDave PFG, Picture Framing God

    Come on, we're having a decent discussion so far. Can we act like adults maybe?
  11. Bob Doyle

    Bob Doyle SPFG, Supreme Picture Framing God

    I think there have been discussions about Schott Glass in the past. I remember it being considered a very good product, comparable to TV in many ways.

    I think the blue wrapped glass was Guardian or Knight brand...

    I was only having fun, thought I'd bring it up in jest before it got brought up in earnest :)

    I have been a camper at a 4H camp. Got to stay 2 weeks, and got the top bunk!!! And got poison ivy real bad...

    I was a camp councilor years later. Wasn't as much fun, but the poison ivy was contracted in a more "adult" way ;)
  12. AHelper

    AHelper Grumbler

  13. Jim Miller

    Jim Miller SPFG, Supreme Picture Framing God

    Schott's laminated glass products are popular among museums, where security and shatter resistance can be important issues. Schott's quality is second to none, but for consumer framing, pricing and availability generally favor optically coated acrylic.
  14. RoboFramer

    RoboFramer PFG, Picture Framing God

    It sounds like this stuff, seems like a pretty good product, I've yet to try it but do have a sample of the non-uv version.
  15. Jim Miller

    Jim Miller SPFG, Supreme Picture Framing God

    Thanks for posting that link, Robo. The UV blocking data do not include the range of frequencies involved, which is important information. 95% blocking still would not meet the Image Permanence Institute's recommendation for preservation, and 100% blocking seems optimistic if the whole UV range is involved; 300 to 380 nanometers.

    Wessex Pictures is a wholesale distributor, right? Their product list includes Schott and Tru Vue, as well as Art Glass, so probably neither of those companies makes Art Glass. Do you have any idea who actually manufactures it, or where we can get more information on it?
  16. Framing Queen

    Framing Queen CGF II, Certified Grumble Framer Level 2

    Act like ADULTS ? Oh COME ON! It's called Warped for a reason ... not that I'm warped .... just sayin'

  17. RoboFramer

    RoboFramer PFG, Picture Framing God

    It's less than 95%, Jim ........
    "Artglass AR UV

    Low iron, water white glass, 99% light transmission
    Easy to cut and clean
    Reflection less than 0.5%
    92% protection from harmful UV
    2mm thick"

    The 100% claim is for the laminated glass, which other manufacturers claim too.

    Wessex are a large concern and recently took over the UK's top glass distributor "Glass and Mirror" I'm sure G&M would never have claimed any % of UV protection outside of the 'critical range'

    G&M still operate under that name, even though Wessex own them; they sell the same stuff, under the same name ('Art Glass') with the same 92% claimed.

    They've done a similar water white AR UV product for some time, I've mentioned it before. It gives 90% UV - made by a company (German?) named 'Flabeg'

    This company, (no idea who makes it, yet, but I'm assuming a different company to Flabeg) seems to have managed an extra 2% with water white glass and the coatings are tougher too.

    These water white products cannot match the UV protection of Tru VU CC or Museum, (yet?) but Tru Vu can't match the clarity - no discernible colour-shift and no 'ripple'.

    It all depends what you want/the customer wants - maximum protection or maximum clarity with a compromise and the company can provide whatever you do want, as they sell it all, it's not like this is the only AR UV glass they do.
  18. RoboFramer

    RoboFramer PFG, Picture Framing God

    Psssst - this isn't in 'Warped' this is The Grumble!
  19. Julie Walsh

    Julie Walsh MGF, Master Grumble Framer

    I'll be trying out the Art Glass, it will provide some good uv protection and clarity.

    I've used the Schott Plus product (called Mirogard Preservation up here) and like it alot. The Art Glass has a higher UV rating and comes in at a lower price.
  20. Framing:

    Framing: In Corner

  21. Bob Doyle

    Bob Doyle SPFG, Supreme Picture Framing God

    Honestly, is there really a difference :)
  22. Jim Miller

    Jim Miller SPFG, Supreme Picture Framing God

    Thanks for that information -- very useful. The UV range is 300 to 380 nanometers for the testing, so the blocking percentages would be comparable to other brands using those same parameters.

    By the specifications, Artglass™UV blocks 92% of UV radiation, so it would be better than AR Glass, but not comparable to Museum Glass for preservation framing.

    Artglass™Protect (Laminated) blocks 99% of UV, and it would be their only product comparable to Museum Glass for preservation framing. And since it is laminated, its shatter resistant would be much better.

    How do the prices for these products compare?
  23. jim_p

    jim_p SGF, Supreme Grumble Framer

    According to my Omega rep, Artglass UV is about 20% less than Museum Glass. They weren't offering Artglass Protect, I imagine because cutting it requires special training and equipment...
  24. Jim Miller

    Jim Miller SPFG, Supreme Picture Framing God

    The recommended minimum for preservation framing is 97% UV blocking, according to the Image Permanence Institute (IPI) and other preservation authorities. See the bottom of page 6 here:
    IPI Framing Recommendations

    ArtGlass UV does not meet the UV blocking standard for preservation framing, and it is not comparable to Museum Glass, which exceeds the standard.

    For non-preservation framing, You might as well compare ArtGlass UV to Tru Vue AR Glass or Schott MiroGard.
  25. drandall

    drandall CGF, Certified Grumble Framer

    I'm a little jaded maybe but none of this UV filtering will help much if the inks or pigments are not the highest quality and most fade resistant.

    I've had many many images fade in short order in my front window Tru Vue UV glass and all.

    The low light solution in museums is there for a good reason.
  26. Bob Doyle

    Bob Doyle SPFG, Supreme Picture Framing God

    I equate UV protection to sun block. It works, but isn't a cure for common sense. Used in conjunction with common sense however and it can't be beat.
  27. Jeff Rodier

    Jeff Rodier SPFG, Supreme Picture Framing God

    The main reason for the fading is that 99% blocking in the 300 to 380 nanometer range is a very small range of visible light. I don't recall the percentage of all light blocked but it is in the mid 60% range I believe. Someone here should be able to tell you the actual percentage.
  28. RoboFramer

    RoboFramer PFG, Picture Framing God

    At 92% it's getting there though and that is also higher than TruVu AR & Schott MiroGard; surely that counts for something.

    The IPI framing recommendations are created "with support from Tru Vue"

    I'm not sure if it's been changed since I last read it but our Fine Art Trade Guild's recommendations are 90% plus. What are the PPFA's?

    It's common sense that the higher the number, the better but (IMHO) saying 92% is no good for protective framing is like saying anything but active protection from matboards (zeolites/microchambers - IOW alphamat/alpharag artcare) is also no good.
  29. realhotglass

    realhotglass MGF, Master Grumble Framer

    Thanks for posting that link Robo.

    I never noticed this Tru Vue reference in relation to discovering it in my previous threads a week or two ago.

    So no one, anywhere, has ever specified UV protection must be 95% or more, without 'support from Tru Vue' ??

    This speaks volumes.

    I feel this new glass, with a good pricing point, is REALLY going to make inroads.
    And so it should.

    The clarity with using water white glass, dip coated, cut either side, glaze either side in / out, VERY hardy coatings (like DenglasUV had / Schott has) will make it far superior in many ways, and 92% in indoor framing situations is going to put it in the grade, I'm sure.

    At the very least, I can see increased competition, and die-hard supporters of TruVue will likely see benefits from cost reductions as a by product.

    Don't fight it !

  30. realhotglass

    realhotglass MGF, Master Grumble Framer

    I dunno Jim, does Truvue make a laminated product to match Groglass Atglass Protect ?
    If not, we can't really compare, can we ?

    (At this moment, I have no association with either Groglass or Truvue products.)

  31. Jim Miller

    Jim Miller SPFG, Supreme Picture Framing God

    UV blocking is the variable usually considered between preservation and non-preservation framing, so that was the point of my previous comparison.

    As far as I know, Tru Vue does not make a laminated glass product. So you would be correct; when shatter-resistance is the point of comparison, Tru Vue is disadvantaged. Schott has laminated glass, though, and that would make a valid comparison.

    That said, I believe all of the laminated glass products are much more costly than any of the single-layer glass products being discussed here, and for consumer/retail framing, it might be overkill. As a consumer framer, when I need shatter-resistance glazing for preservation framing, I use UV-blocking, abrasion-resistant, optically coated acrylic, because it has cost less than laminated glass every time I've checked. Acrylic is delivered free by my usual framing suppliers, weighs less, and I can cut it in my shop.
  32. Julie Walsh

    Julie Walsh MGF, Master Grumble Framer

    Interesting comments all around. I will promote and use the Art Glass.

    For any customer coming in and requesting non-glare, I will promote the Art Glass AR water white with 70% uv protection instead of the non-glare: it will provide clarity and some uv protection (far better than the etched blurry stuff that I can now get rid of!)

    For customers looking for some more protection and clarity and certainly shadow boxes, I will promote the Art Glass AR UV with 92%: this is a better rating than the Mirogard Preservation that I sell a lot of. (more than Museum)

    For original works on paper, or other items that require full-on conservation, I will promote Museum glass, but will continue to give the option to the customer.....maybe 92% is good enough for them; they get to make the choice (after I have explained everything to them).

    Bottom line; the Art Glass is another glazing product priced right that a large percentage of my customers can afford.
    Last edited: Sep 11, 2010
  33. RoboFramer

    RoboFramer PFG, Picture Framing God

    But the AR and optical coatings contribute diddly spit to the preservation.

    Over here, from the supplier I gave a link to previous, AR acrylic actually costs more than UV AR acrylic! Comes from 2 different countries I suppose.

    But the optically coated UV AR acrylic is an absurd price, I'd never shift a square inch of it. The 6mm version (just because I can't remember the price of the thinner stuff) would cost me about £4000 ($6140 today) for a full sheet, admittedly a HUGE sheet (96x60 I think) - but I'd probably have to buy that sheet - it's not the sort of stuff that the supplier would have offcuts of hanging around - and for that thickness it would have to be a large picture anyway so any offcuts would probably not warrant the thickness.
  34. Bob Doyle

    Bob Doyle SPFG, Supreme Picture Framing God

    TV has successfully promoted the use of UV glass, so much so that UV is the default, go to glass in my shop and many others. I am glad to see that there are competitors to TV is this market as that will, hopefully, mean that the pricing will come down. And with TV's track record of a reliable product, lower prices will mean I'll be carrying more of it in inventory.
  35. Pat Murphey

    Pat Murphey SPFG, Supreme Picture Framing God

    20% less for an inferior product. I think I'll skip it and stock up on MG this week - 20% off at LJ.
  36. Ylva

    Ylva SPFG, Supreme Picture Framing God

    I agree Pat, but it is still extremely interesting to read about all this and be aware of what other glass companies are doing. I wouldn't mind if TV lowers their pricing, that 20% off all the time sounds good to me!
  37. Bob Doyle

    Bob Doyle SPFG, Supreme Picture Framing God

    Inferior product? How so? COUld it be the "UV Glas" that was being discussed, that was packed in the neilsen wooden readymades? That glass had a blue cast to it if I remember.

    Supposedly this glass blocks 92% but maybe it blocks a larger bandwidth of uv rays.
  38. Pat Murphey

    Pat Murphey SPFG, Supreme Picture Framing God

    92% UV block is inferior to Museum Glass and does not meet conservation standards. What makes you you think it might block a wider bandwidth?
  39. Bob Doyle

    Bob Doyle SPFG, Supreme Picture Framing God

    I have just been listening to people here saying we need to compare apples to apples, not apples to oranges. We are being given part of the numbers but not the whole story.

    I just want to hear the whole factual story, not opinions. Opinions are great in the warped threads and I share mine freely, but when making a business decision I want to get my info devoid of as much opinion as possible.

    For all intents and purposes I will continuing using TV. But I want to know why it is the best, and have documented proof of the superiority of my choice. If this oher glass is UV protection, and if it is the stuff that Neilsen is claiming is UV protection in their ready mades then I want to be able to tell my artist customers that bring those frames to me that the glass in question, while labeled UV is really only sunblock spf10 not spf 40. Unless TV's numbers only show the best coverage and not the total uv bandwidth coverage.

    99% UV blockage is high, and when I hear it I want to know what is blocked, not just how much. Same with 92%, of what, where, under what conditions.

    When we had only one real choice then minimal data was OK, not great but OK. Now that we have choices lets compare the whole range of data, not just the good numbers.
  40. Pat Murphey

    Pat Murphey SPFG, Supreme Picture Framing God

    Then why say "maybe it blocks a larger..."
  41. JRB

    JRB PFG, Picture Framing God

    Hasn't Jim been a member of this board long enough for everyone to know that he does not BS us?

    Hasn't he earned a respected reputation in our industry?

    Why should it be necessary that every time he gives us his much valued input, that he also provides all his credentials?

  42. Jim Miller

    Jim Miller SPFG, Supreme Picture Framing God

    Thanks for your kind words, John.

    I really do appreciate you standing up for me, but let's not be too hard on Bob. He was only making a joke, after he saw my 'non-disclaimer' in post #5. Look for it in really small print. :thumbsup:
  43. Bob Doyle

    Bob Doyle SPFG, Supreme Picture Framing God

    John, I guess I was being too subtle for you, and probably should have posted in green or chartreuse or some other color.

    The disclosure thread and all the bull #### that floats up every time Jim or someone else with a professional knowledge on a subject speaks up annoys the #### out of me. I was really just trying to highlight how stupid we can be by asking "experts" to be quiet while we self proclaimed experts pontificate about subjects we have a slight knowledge about.

    That's why my second sentence mentioned we have been down that road too many times. Jim, I think was annoyed that I made that comment, but I am hopeful that he saw it also as acknowledgement that he has been the undeserved target of too much atack for being "too knowledgeable" about the products of one company. I think, just maybe, that to some his knowledge is a threat to their lack of knowledge, and instead of letting him help educate them they attack him as some way to show their "superiority", as if standing on his shoulders somehow makes them appear taller.

    So, if you must know my real motivation behind that post it was that I was giving him a friendly poke, and sending a snide poke at the usual detractors, before the could start their attack campaign.

    So yes :) you were absolutely correct in saying that Jim deserves our respect, as do other "experts" here that have been the target of "disclosure" campaigns. And I agree that the "prove it" comments come up. I was trying to derail them not open the door for them :)
  44. RoboFramer

    RoboFramer PFG, Picture Framing God

    It wasn't necessary, it contributed nothing at all and we'll never know if this thread would have run without any mention of affiliation without the friendly poke, which, as you admit, was also a snide poke, which could have just wound the 'detractors' up and kicked it all off again.

    If the last episode wasn't so fresh in everyone's minds it may well have.
  45. BalticFrames

    BalticFrames Grumbler

    Artglass Clarification

    Dear Grumblers,

    First off the disclosure - I am connected to GroGlass (the producer of Artglass), just as Jim is connected to TruVue, so I do have a bias for their products. However, I am primarily guided by the quest for intellectual honesty when addressing these questions. In response to your posts, a few corrections:

    “Baked Right In” – the Artglass and Artglass UV coatings are not “baked”, but they are magnetron sputtered, just like TruVue’s Anti-Reflective layers. The UV filtering is achieved by adding more sputtered interference layers, and the UV is reflected, while TruVue uses an additional chemical deposition process (the orange-peel) to roll on the UV-absorbing layer.

    “Artglass is Clearer” – what the Omega salesperson was trying to show is the difference in visible light absorption. By placing the Museum Glass on a piece of white paper or mat, you will see that the glass turns the white into a color of rust. This is because it is impossible to get a sharp 99% cut at the UV/Visible boundary without affecting the visible light transmission. Artglass UV cut stops at 92% precisely for that reason – not to affect the visible light transmission and stay true to it’s promise of “100% Art”.

    “97% is the cut-off for Conservation Framing” – Just as it is important that we disclose our affiliations, it is also important to say that both FACTS and Image Permanence Institute have one corporate sponsor from the glass industry (TruVue), and their recommendations match exactly the TV product specifications. Would you take nutrition advice from the Big Mac Institute? It is not their fault, of course – for a long time TV had been the only game in town, so what use is there to create standards, which are not achievable…

    I will be the first one to advocate UV protection for framed art, but it has to be looked at holistically. None of the abovementioned “authorities” is speaking about the damage to the artwork by the visible light as it is not in the interest of the framing industry, but the ugly truth is - if you want to really preserve something, don’t display it and keep it in a climate-controlled dark closet! I highly recommend this article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Picture_framing_glass - a balanced, well-written review of the glass choices and the UV issue.
    Looking for intellectual honesty, not only marketing opinions…


    PS Bob - Schott AG is the same company that made the first “shot” glass, so it is not a cute play on their name – it IS their name (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shot_glass#Friedrich_Otto_Schott.2C_Ernst_Abbe_and_Carl_Zeiss)

    PPS Jim – Claryl does not block 78% of UV. It does not transmit any less UV than uncoated glass. However, the fact that it lets in around 6-7% more light in all spectra, and since the visible light also damages artwork, it is more damaging to an artwork to display it behind Claryl than behind regular uncoated float. As I recall, regular clear float blocks around 40% of UV between 300 and 380.
  46. Jeff Rodier

    Jeff Rodier SPFG, Supreme Picture Framing God

    Now here is a question for those connected to the glass industry. What percentage of UV light is blocked accross the ENTIRE SPECTRUM of light by the UV Blocking Glass that is used in the industry. Framers tend to quote the 99% or other number but rarely add the 300-380 nonometer range as the taget spectrum used by the manufacturers.
  47. FramerDave

    FramerDave PFG, Picture Framing God

    I would be very wary of relying on Wikipedia for accurate, unbiased information. It can be edited by anyone including those with a connection to TruVue, GroGlass, Schott Glass or any other company.

    See signature line.
  48. Bob Doyle

    Bob Doyle SPFG, Supreme Picture Framing God

    In response to your posts, a few corrections:
    Jim is a consultant for TruVue and other companies. I don't beleive he collects a weekly paycheck from them. I teased him about disclosure, but that was because he is pretty honest about the co's he works with. And like you he has a thirst for knowledge and likes to share what he knows. So thank you for posting. I inserted this here as I know Jim's "connection to TV" but I don't know whether it is equivalent to your connection to GroGlass. I am assuming that you work for them first and framing secondarily. I'm thinking you are a glass guy that knows framing. Jim is a framer that knows about glass. Both views are welcome here :)
    So to my second question, do they give out shot glasses as promos :)
  49. Jim Miller

    Jim Miller SPFG, Supreme Picture Framing God

    Not exactly. It is incorrect to suggest that Tru-Vue has influenced the UV filtering recommendations, since all other makers of conservation glass and acrylic have similar recommendations. 97% UV flitering in the range of 300 to 380 nanometers is the recommendation of Image Permanance Institute, PPFA, and most of the conservation people I've contacted (and there have been several). Some recommend 99%, some say 95%, a few say something else. But everyone who works in conservation seems to agree that UV filtering over 95% is important. Tru-Vue's only distinction is that they have provided proprietary, detailed test data and other information to the institutions that have asked for it.

    Tru-Vue recommends 99%, which is consistent with the recommendations of other makers of conservation glass, such as Schott and Luxarfor their laminated glass products. Most acrylic makers recommend 98%, since that is their limit.

    FACTS is woefully out of date. Their Glazing Standard GLZ-2000 says:
    2.0 UV Blocking Glass or Acrylic
    2.1 A glazing material shall block more than 50% of all UV light from 300 to 400 nanometers to be considered a UV Blacking glazing.
    2.2 The higher the number, the greater the UV protection.

    In "Glazing Materials for Framing Works on Paper", CCI Notes 11/3 does not specify a minimum recommendation. Perhaps I've missed another CCI publication that does, but CCI Notes 11/3 says :
    "...If UV levels in a museum or gallery are higher than 75 microwatts/lumen and if windows and lights do not have UV filters, it is recommended that glazing with a UV filter be used."

    There is nothing ugly about that truth, except that most folks want to display their art, so that particular recommendation does not apply to them. A more realistic recommendation -- and one that works in real world framing -- is to display in low-light conditions, and use UV filtering glazing. That recommendation is entirely achievable.
  50. RoboFramer

    RoboFramer PFG, Picture Framing God

    Given the exact same artwork, hanging in the exact same lighting conditions , matted/mounted in the exact same way, bar the glass, what difference, in years, would 99% vv 92% make?

    99% is obviously almost maximum, but isn't 92% still 'high'?
Sponsor Wanted

Share This Page

Wizard Ad