How to frame a 24x36 fine art print with no mat in a Nielsen metal frame

[dogdude]

I need to frame a 24x36" baryta print in a nielsen metal frame. My client does not want a mat, and I'm unsure of the best method to use to get the job done and ensure there isn't buckling. I've looked at pass through or "s" hinges, mounting the print on foamcore or matboard, and I just need someone to tell me what to do! I ordered this initially from a lab, and I'm not happy with the results. The spring clips used on the frame caused rippling along the edges, it looked like a postage stamp. For a couple of different reasons, I need to handle this job myself, and the client is already sold on the metal frame/no mat combo. I've framed fine art prints before, but only with a mat using the T-hinge method.

I've been told that museum glass with this frame is not a good combo and prone to breaking, so I'll likely be using conservation clear acrylic. I'm also concerned about bowing of the foamcore, so I was going to go with gatorboard, but I would like to keep it all acid-free. What would you recommend? If this is already covered off somewhere please point me in that direction. I've read a ton of this forum, but most of the related threads are for smaller works.

Thanks!

 

[Shayla]

When using acrylic and/or spacers with metal frames, we avoid spring clips.
Instead, we fill the back to depth with foam core.

 

[alacrity8]

Framing any paper art in a frame without giving it room to expand/contract will cause problems.
It is usually best to raise the glass off of the art.
If you are doing so with spacers on the art, you are putting pressure just on the edges, causing it to not be able to expand outward, but the center can expand, causing bulging/rippling.
You could frame it without spacers, allowing for proper expansion/contraction, but then you have the issues of the art touching the glass.
Many state that Acrylic against the art is less likely to be harmful.
If you are framing the art without any border, any hinging is likely not necessary.
Floating the art with 1" of mat around the piece, and the spacers on the mat is usually a better option, as it will allow the paper to adjust in a more pleasing manner.

Museum Glass at 24"x36" should not be a problem at all.
We frame with it up to 40"x60", and the occasional 48"x48".
Conservation Clear Acrylic is not a bad option, but it will have a different look.

Filling the back with foam, in stead of spring lips (as Shayla suggested) is a good way to reduce pressure points.

Framing is filed with trade offs between what looks best, what is structurally sound, and what is best for the longevity of the art.

Best of luck,
Brian

 

[Ylva]

You are creating a sandwich. Make sure to cut your backing board larger than the print.

How valuable is this print? I don't know if there are special properties to baryta paper (I believe it's 100% cotton?)
I don't like spacers, they will constrict the print and cause ripples. There are some concerns even with plexiglass when putting it right on top, so you should address that with the customer. Even a small margin mat would be better than no mat. Inform them well and have them make the final decision.

I don't use spring clips but fill with matboard and/or foamboard strips.

 

[dogdude]

When using acrylic and/or spacers with metal frames, we avoid spring clips.
Instead, we fill the back to depth with foam core.

Thanks Shayla. I read this on another post (likely a comment from you!) and I'm going to take this clip free approach for sure.

 

[dogdude]

Framing any paper art in a frame without giving it room to expand/contract will cause problems.
It is usually best to raise the glass off of the art.
If you are doing so with spacers on the art, you are putting pressure just on the edges, causing it to not be able to expand outward, but the center can expand, causing bulging/rippling.
You could frame it without spacers, allowing for proper expansion/contraction, but then you have the issues of the art touching the glass.
Many state that Acrylic against the art is less likely to be harmful.
If you are framing the art without any border, any hinging is likely not necessary.
Floating the art with 1" of mat around the piece, and the spacers on the mat is usually a better option, as it will allow the paper to adjust in a more pleasing manner.

Museum Glass at 24"x36" should not be a problem at all.
We frame with it up to 40"x60", and the occasional 48"x48".
Conservation Clear Acrylic is not a bad option, but it will have a different look.

Filling the back with foam, in stead of spring lips (as Shayla suggested) is a good way to reduce pressure points.

Framing is filed with trade offs between what looks best, what is structurally sound, and what is best for the longevity of the art.

Best of luck,
Brian

Thanks for chiming in. Based on your comments, I think I'm going to go no hinge, conservation clear acrylic directly on the print, fill the back to the needed amount of foam core.

 

[dogdude]

You are creating a sandwich. Make sure to cut your backing board larger than the print.

How valuable is this print? I don't know if there are special properties to baryta paper (I believe it's 100% cotton?)
I don't like spacers, they will constrict the print and cause ripples. There are some concerns even with plexiglass when putting it right on top, so you should address that with the customer. Even a small margin mat would be better than no mat. Inform them well and have them make the final decision.

I don't use spring clips but fill with matboard and/or foamboard strips.

I love a good sandwich. The baryta I'm using is 100% cotton. I addressed the acrylic on top of the art part with the client when they ordered and suggested a mat, but they were set against it. I usually prefer a mat visually, but for these two works it does look better without. Thanks for your input!

 

[Ylva]

One more thing, don't fit it too tightly. I am not completely sure how cotton expands and contracts, vs paper, but I would still not fit it tightly

 

[artfolio]

In my opinion this is Mission Impossible.

If the print is sandwiched between the backing and the glass and not mounted down onto the backing it will cockle and possibly stiock to the glazing or the glazing will polish the print..

If conservation is a priority then the choice is a float with a border or hinging with a matt.

 

[Jim Miller]

...I've been told that museum glass with this frame is not a good combo and prone to breaking, so I'll likely be using conservation clear acrylic.

If the glazing is in direct contact with the art, then yes, avoid glass of any kind, because it will condense moisture easily when the temperature and humidity conditions are right. For more on this, search "Direct Contact Overlay" on this forum. Instead, use acrylic, because it is less prone to dew-point condensation.

If the glazing will be separated from the surface of the art, then Museum Glass would be a good choice, if properly fitted. Maybe your advice to avoid it in a sectional aluminum frame is due the fact that the glass-edge-to-metal assembly is prone to edge fissures/cracks/chips. In that case, any glass would have the same problem, but broken Museum Glass would be a greater loss.

...I was going to go with gatorboard, but I would like to keep it all acid-free.

Gatorboard is loaded with nasty chemical elements and is absolutely not preservation-worthy. Instead, I suggest using a backer of fluted polypropylene lined with Conservation or Museum matboard.

 

[Prospero]

People tend to regard a mat as an aesthetic thing - which it is, but there is a very important practical
purpose. I proper "Book Mount" provides a way to retain a piece of art on paper while allowing unrestricted
expansion/contraction of the paper. Also it makes a nice little 'cocoon' whereby the package can be safely handled
and inspected. Flipping back the top mat affords a view without actually touching the art.
People also think that placing glazing in direct contact will keep the paper flat. It won't.

A full sheet of watercolor paper will 'grow' about ½" when saturated with water. That's an extreme example, but it will
swell with humidity. If it can't go <> it will go ~~~~~~~. Great forces are involved. So don't restrict the edges.

 

[wpfay]

If preservation of the print is the goal, you would be better served to leave the piece in a folder rather than straight fit it.
Consider the value (only pristine pieces retain full market value), and cost & ease of replacement.

A lot of art was framed in the 70's using a float mount and a minimum visible margin (1/4"). With a 1/4" rabbet that would amount to a 1" total increase in the size of the mount/glass/frame.
This can be achieved fairly easily in sectional metal framing by using FrameSpace. The FrameSpace also provides a protective barrier between the edge of the glass and the inside of the metal frame, thus avoiding the metal to glass interface and dew point issues that Jim Miller touched on.

 

[dogdude]

If the glazing is in direct contact with the art, then yes, avoid glass of any kind, because it will condense moisture easily when the temperature and humidity conditions are right. For more on this, search "Direct Contact Overlay" on this forum. Instead, use acrylic, because it is less prone to dew-point condensation.

If the glazing will be separated from the surface of the art, then Museum Glass would be a good choice, if properly fitted. Maybe your advice to avoid it in a sectional aluminum frame is due the fact that the glass-edge-to-metal assembly is prone to edge fissures/cracks/chips. In that case, any glass would have the same problem, but broken Museum Glass would be a greater loss.

Gatorboard is loaded with nasty chemical elements and is absolutely not preservation-worthy. Instead, I suggest using a backer of fluted polypropylene lined with Conservation or Museum matboard.

Thanks Jim. I appreciate the info!