Reading mode: Light Dark

Museum Glass tones B&W pics toward sepia??

Go to last post
G

Gekko4321

Forum Enthusiast
Messages
345
Reaction score
4
Location
Camden, USA, ME, US
I just bought 'white' mat boards and museum glass from Aaron Brothers. 'Museum' is their top UV protected anti glare glass they sell. The 'white' mat board it turns out is not really a pure white which starts this chain reaction. The Museum Glass though on top of the 'white' board turns the board and the B&W pic toward a yellow/brown tint. Addtl info: My photo has pure white and black points. I notice that regular glass tones down also but not to the extent that museum glass does. Color pics increase in saturation slightly. White is my main point I want to preserve. Even on pure white copy paper, the glass tones it down. Has anyone experienced this? What do others do with B&W photos?
 
I have framed for the past 20 or so years in acrylic. Purchase it in the 48x96 inch sheets from my wholesaler and it isn't that expensive. It takes a little bit of time to get used to working with, brilliantize for glazing is the only way to go because it will scratch but it is clear and won't give you a color shift because it is clear, it will crack when dropped but it won't shatter like glass.
--
http://www.christopherbroughton.com
 
I agree with Chris. Plus, acrylic does not pass moisture from the air. In UK it's referred to as Perspex - and here in USA the most famous brand is Plexiglass. It's considered archival for framing.

--
Jon Cone
Inkjetmall • ConeColor • Piezography • Cone Editions Press
 
Gekko4321 said:
I just bought 'white' mat boards and museum glass from Aaron Brothers. 'Museum' is their top UV protected anti glare glass they sell. The 'white' mat board it turns out is not really a pure white which starts this chain reaction. The Museum Glass though on top of the 'white' board turns the board and the B&W pic toward a yellow/brown tint. Addtl info: My photo has pure white and black points. I notice that regular glass tones down also but not to the extent that museum glass does. Color pics increase in saturation slightly. White is my main point I want to preserve. Even on pure white copy paper, the glass tones it down. Has anyone experienced this? What do others do with B&W photos?
Click to expand...
Reproducing drawings and graphic arts pieces for a local museum makes me familiar with all kinds of museum glass they use there. You probably have a glass with a heavy UV cut filter. If the prints you make have a high fade resistance to light (HP Vivera pigment inks for example) and the framed print is hanging indoors then a heavy UV filtering isn't necessary. Selecting acrylic instead wouldn't be my choice, the UV filtered types can show similar problems, the plain acrylic not better than plain float glass.

A higher weight paper shouldn't change color with an off-white museum board underneath if compared to mounting on bright museum board which isn't recommended as it will have OBA.FWA aboard. If your print paper has OBA/FWA aboard the effects of a UV light cutting glass will make the total counterproductive. The OBA/FWA needs the UV light to deliver the higher brightness (not whiteness) of the paper white. Even normal float glass will reduce that effect. On the other hand UV light destroys both ink and OBA/FWA the fastest. Best approach is selecting a thicker paper with a high whiteness factor, without OBA/FWA, good inks and neutral museum glass.

http://www.icn.nl/nl/search/global?query=UV+werend

spectral plots of +100 inkjet papers:
http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm

--
Ernst Dinkla

Try: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/
 
Don't disagree with what you say, but add that optical brighteners fluoresce in the blue end of the visible spectrum, so the effect of this is that if the optical brighteners fade (as some do through UV exposure - they "wear out") and/or if UV reaching the paper is suppressed through UV absorbing glass, then with the blue-ness removed, the prints/paper also looks yellowed.

A classic example of this is Epson's premium presentation matte, archival matte, or whatever it happens to be called in various markets. I'm looking at a print on this paper, 5 years old, unframed and pinned to the wall in front of me. The paper looks yellow now (it looked yellow after only a few weeks exposure - the OB dies fast in this paper), but the ink doesn't seem to have faded at all. The print is good, but just not on bright white paper any more.

Next is that museum grade glass absorbs about 95% UV, but even ordinary glass absorbs 90% - not a huge difference. But on the other hand, if UV is the main factor in fading, then the museum glass might offer double the longevity - certainly not to be sneered at if the print has great value, but for an inkjet print from a digital image, then the value is just the cost to run off another copy perhaps...
 
Interesting information. I am surprised your archival matte paper lost whiteness so fast! That does not bode well for people like me using normal acid based photo media hoping for longevity. Thanks for all the info from all.
 
freddyNZ said:
Next is that museum grade glass absorbs about 95% UV, but even ordinary glass absorbs 90% - not a huge difference. But on the other hand, if UV is the main factor in fading, then the museum glass might offer double the longevity - certainly not to be sneered at if the print has great value, but for an inkjet print from a digital image, then the value is just the cost to run off another copy perhaps...
Click to expand...
The UV contribution to ink fading indoors has been estimated to be less than 15%, the bigger part is done by visible light and gas fading. The last is already reduced through framing or with a varnish and RC paper usually slows gas fading too. On the other hand almost all RC papers contain OBAs. I think it is wiser to keep the frame glass as clear as possible but reduce the exposure to light when nobody is around. And use good permanent inks + a stable paper.

--
Ernst Dinkla

Try: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/
 
Yeah, the original 'archival' epson matte paper was renamed to EEM (epson enhanced matte) for a reason. It was pretty darn non-archival. One of the reasons everyone uses hanemuhle photo rag rather than an epson option for matte.

xilvar
freddyNZ said:
Don't disagree with what you say, but add that optical brighteners fluoresce in the blue end of the visible spectrum, so the effect of this is that if the optical brighteners fade (as some do through UV exposure - they "wear out") and/or if UV reaching the paper is suppressed through UV absorbing glass, then with the blue-ness removed, the prints/paper also looks yellowed.

A classic example of this is Epson's premium presentation matte, archival matte, or whatever it happens to be called in various markets. I'm looking at a print on this paper, 5 years old, unframed and pinned to the wall in front of me. The paper looks yellow now (it looked yellow after only a few weeks exposure - the OB dies fast in this paper), but the ink doesn't seem to have faded at all. The print is good, but just not on bright white paper any more.

Next is that museum grade glass absorbs about 95% UV, but even ordinary glass absorbs 90% - not a huge difference. But on the other hand, if UV is the main factor in fading, then the museum glass might offer double the longevity - certainly not to be sneered at if the print has great value, but for an inkjet print from a digital image, then the value is just the cost to run off another copy perhaps...
Click to expand...
 
Another option for dealing with making a print for use behind UV filtering glass is to simply ask that your custom profiles be produced either with full fledged oba compensation on (which just uses the uv-cut read data).

Or by using the recent x-rite light compensation system for determining the exact effect of oba's given the light being used.

The first option is probably more appropriate for UV cut museum glass.

The i1pro comes in both uv-cut and non uv-cut versions whereas the i1isis can make both sets of readings at once for every target.

xilvar
Gekko4321 said:
I just bought 'white' mat boards and museum glass from Aaron Brothers. 'Museum' is their top UV protected anti glare glass they sell. The 'white' mat board it turns out is not really a pure white which starts this chain reaction. The Museum Glass though on top of the 'white' board turns the board and the B&W pic toward a yellow/brown tint. Addtl info: My photo has pure white and black points. I notice that regular glass tones down also but not to the extent that museum glass does. Color pics increase in saturation slightly. White is my main point I want to preserve. Even on pure white copy paper, the glass tones it down. Has anyone experienced this? What do others do with B&W photos?
Click to expand...
 
-you're not buying sunglasses. I do not like that glass would change the color of the print, that AB has chosen to sell this stuff is one more reason to avoid them. Historically high prices being another. They cater to the masses.

I've used Light Impressions for years for mats (natural/gallery white) and the last time I bought glass I purchased a case of it from a glass company in Southern California that supplies quantity glass to galleries (weighs a ton by the case)...sorry I cannot provide the name, the box is at a different home.
 
xilvar said:
Yeah, the original 'archival' epson matte paper was renamed to EEM (epson enhanced matte) for a reason. It was pretty darn non-archival. One of the reasons everyone uses hanemuhle photo rag rather than an epson option for matte.
Click to expand...
HM Photorag isn't free of OBA either but much less than EEM though and most likely a better quality OBA throughout coating and paper base. EEM has it only in the inkjet coating and the paper base isn't very white, probably the best example of a high brightness (reflection measured at 457Nm and 10Nm wide, so in the blue part) versus whiteness that counts the reflection over the full visible spectrum.

HP Matte Litho Realistic is a heavier, non-OBA alternative to EEM, cheaper too. Not as bright but it keeps that white longer.

Canson and Moab have some matt paper qualities with a high reflectivity and non-OBA content. Check the spectral plots of EEM, Photorag, Canson Rag Photographique, Moab Entrada Natural, etc here:

http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm

--
Ernst Dinkla

Try: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/
 
freddyNZ said:
Next is that museum grade glass absorbs about 95% UV, but even ordinary glass absorbs 90% - not a huge difference. But on the other hand, if UV is the main factor in fading, then the museum glass might offer double the longevity - certainly not to be sneered at if the print has great value, but for an inkjet print from a digital image, then the value is just the cost to run off another copy perhaps...
Click to expand...
"museum grade" glass has a coating that blocks (reflects) about 98 percent of the UV energy below 390 nanometers wavelength. Because it still absorbs more energy at 400-420 nanometers than ordinary framing glass, it can impart a slight yellow appearance as can UV-cut acrylic. Ordinary glass transmits about 50% UV at approximately 340 nanometers, and this increases to about 90% by 370 nanometers which is a peak wavelength for activating most optical brigheners. Hence, it can allow about twice as much overall UV energy onto the print surface as UV-cut acrylic or Museum conservation glass, and for certain inks (but not all) this additional UV energy will increase fading by a factor of about 2-4x, a factor of two being typical.

Standard acrylic blocks about 90% UV at 370 nanometers, so it will still allow some OBA fluorescence, and by 400 nanometers, it's pretty uniformly transmitting so it looks about as clear as one can achieve (but it does scratch easily). Anyway, you can see the effect of transmission characteristics for standard acrylic, UV cut acrylic and ordinary glass on OBA fluorescence in figure 4 on the following webpage:

http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com/news.18.html

cheers,

Mark
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com

--
Mark McCormick
 
So maybe having one of each of the i1's would be a good idea when making profiles? I am think about getting an i1iO soon.

--
Bill
Keep on keepin' on!
 
Thanks everyone for the input. Mark, that was a great web site! Thanks you. I knew I was not crazy. It is disappointing to learn this after the fact but thats life I guess. I already bought and paid for this glass so I guess I am going to have to get used to a slightly toned down version of what I intended. Live and learn! thanks again for all the advice.
 
JonCone said:
I agree with Chris. Plus, acrylic does not pass moisture from the air. In UK it's referred to as Perspex - and here in USA the most famous brand is Plexiglass. It's considered archival for framing.
Click to expand...
Have you guys not seen Museum Glass in person? The anti-relective coating is pretty amazing (this is not the same as the non-glare stuff that has a matte/etched surface). Acrylic is not even close to being as nice, not by a long shot.

To answer the original question, I believe the UV protection is what adds the yellowing. It's not unique to museum glass, pretty much any UV-shield glass or acrylic will have this issue to some extent.

You may want to consider the non-UV-shielded version of Museum Glass, I believe it's called AR Reflection-Free. IT still has the anti-reflective coating, but it doesn't have the additional UV protection.

IMHO UV-shielding is not really necessary if you're printing with pigment inks, unless the print will be getting direct window light. Regular old glass blocks something like 70% of UV already. If you look at the longevity-testing at Wilhelm, he publishes for bare print, behind glass, and behind UV glass. Regular glass already gives a pretty big boost to print longevity.

--
Jeff Kohn
Houston, TX
http://www.pbase.com/jkohn
http://jeffk-photo.typepad.com
 
Good reply. I found that glass has a 'dimming' component to it too. I would say half of what the Museum glass has in it. I laid out a piece of copy paper and put museum over top half and regular non UV over other top half. The bottom was exposed and pure white, museum was yellow in comparison, and regular glass was in between. Now thru this posting I understand what OBA's are and how they work. As for glare, the museum glass sells itself next to the regular glass or UV glass! Shockingly so. I just have to take the regular glass out of the frame I bought and lay it on my print next to same with museum glass and it becomes a 'no contest' situation! Museum glass is amazing. But the trade off is showing the pure white you intended to display with. I am finding that absent a side by side, I am getting used to it in the museum glass. If I compare side by side, I am sick! But acrylic is not the way I want to go and nothing else will protect.
 
I have been a custom picture framer for 20 years. and like people using the generic name Zerox for copies, many dealers use Museum Glass for UV filtering glass that is not true "Museum glass"

Museum glass does impart some color cast (despite the advertised claims of tru color rendition), but UV filtering "Conservation Clear" does in fact impart a pinkish, or as said "sepia" color cast.
Make sure you are getting what you pay for!

"Museum Glass" is also available from a few different companies and is quite expensive per Sq Foot.

Tru View Glass has some good explainations of the differences of their products on their site. use the tabs at the top to see the different products.
http://www.tru-vue.com/Framers/

Their are many factors related to print, (ink) quality and display conditions that can affect print longevity and fading of both the print and matting.
 
Gekko4321 said:
What do others do with B&W photos?
Click to expand...
No glass at all. For years I thinked I was alone on this technique, but in my last trips to Germany I discovered it very common there, at last in the middle and Southern part of Germany.

For me it works very well.

Regards,
--
O.Cristo - An Amateur Photographer
 
Osvaldo Cristo said:
Gekko4321 said:
What do others do with B&W photos?
Click to expand...
No glass at all. For years I thinked I was alone on this technique, but in my last trips to Germany I discovered it very common there, at last in the middle and Southern part of Germany.
Click to expand...
I've used this approach for my personal prints. But there's an issue with larger sizes; without the glazing in front, the mat usually won't stay completely flat against the print and you see a small gap in places which I really dislike. It's more of a problem with larger prints. Using 8-ply mats helps quite a bit, but 8-ply mats are just too expensive for large prints (the price difference between 8-ply and 4-play on a 20x30" print with 3" mat surround is huge).

--
Jeff Kohn
Houston, TX
http://www.pbase.com/jkohn
http://jeffk-photo.typepad.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top