Do you display pictures or copys?

[ww2_1943]

I have several autographed pictures and documents that I would like to frame and display. I am afraid of them fading. I am thinking about making color copies to display while leaving the originals tucked away.

What do all of you do? I was thinking about buying a roll of U.V. resistant film to cover the glass on frames, but how well does that stuff work?

[Plant#4]

Most of the pictures/photographs I display are black and white, but I frame them and keep them away from the windows with direct sunlight, same with the oil paintings and the colored prints I have on display. I would, if they are colored, copy them and display the copy, my 8 X 10s are in museum albums. Unforntunately I have a large picture that has to reside in the garage.... because I have no room to display it in my home. Its a 3 1/2 X 7 foot picture of a B-58 in flight. How ever the 3 X 4 foot picture of the YB-49 is inside.....(awaiting reframing) My wife thinks I have too many framed pictures.......... my 2 1/2 cents worth Dave

[barker944]

Dave

 

Your B-58 picture sounds cool. I spend a few years as a kid watching them take off in Indiana.

[The Meatcan]

I'd love to see the huge photo of the B-58! any chance you can post a pic of that?

thanks

Terry

[Teamski]

You can get UV resistant glass wherever you get custom frames. If you ever get something framed, they typically use UV glass.....

 

Remember to alway mat your photos. Having the photo up against the glass is very much bad.

 

-Ski

[Plant#4]

You can get UV resistant glass wherever you get custom frames. If you ever get something framed, they typically use UV glass.....

 

Remember to alway mat your photos. Having the photo up against the glass is very much bad.

 

-Ski

You are quite correct! I for got to mention the matting, it is essential. Dave

[Bluehawk]

Some suggestions...

 

- Keeping exposed works on paper (or wood or textile or anything with paint etc on it) away from direct sunlight is, indeed, mandatory.

 

- The same is true of, believe it or not, flourescent lighting. Which is why few museums use it or when they must, they apply UV filtering covers to ALL such lamp tubes.

 

- UV filtering glazing can be had in either glass or plexi-glass.... and is not cheap even in small sizes. Bear in mind though, it does not last forever in direct sunlight and is not a way to circumvent that problem.

 

- Matting is usually THE most expensive part of framing, and while helpful in keeping artifacts away from touching the glass, is not the only solution. Much cheaper is to use simple spacers between the frame and back/mounting board to allow a thin separation.

 

- Filtering barriers or shields are a good thing, but they do break down in time... I'd guess within 5 years or less depending on how close to the light source they are located.

 

- The American Association of Museums sponsored a lighting study several years ago to discover exactly HOW much lighting was being used and to what effect. The result was that they determined most museums had been using about 75% too much light, and industry-wide changes went into effect. You almost never see direct sunlight in any form being allowed into any museum display area, and artificial light levels today are far below what was once thought allowable.

 

- Another good safety measure is to apply sunlight reflective film to the insides of all windows in rooms where artifacts are displayed. That also saves a bunch of money on utilities year-round.

 

- Fading is, along with moisture and/or irregular relative humidity and insect invasions, the most damaging preventable injury to artifacts of most kinds. Most of the income conservators earn comes from attempting to repair these damages.

[LoadedColt45]

I have a photograph of Eisenhower that was autographed in 1944. One of the Signal Corps guys in SHAEF who helped to set up Ike's first battle headquarters on the European Continent obtained the autograph along with an autograph by Lucius Clay.

 

I decided to have the Ike photo beautifully framed. It was done using museum glass which filters out 99.9% UV and set on archhival quality matting and materials. It wasn't cheep, but I got the photo at a reasonable price so I could justify the expense.

 

Before I recieved the photo, it had begun turning a little yellow on the back bottom corner because what the previous owner attached it to (cheap scrapbook and wasn't acid free) So, I actually had it framed to preserve the photo and autograph. I haven't however done anything yet to the Lucius Clay autograph except for put it in a cheep frame and tuck it away in one of the foot lockers and the framed Ike photo is sitting in my safe...

 

Here's a photo of it before it was framed...I'll have to post a pic of the framed photo - it really is gorgeous!

 

[gsmilligan]

- Matting is usually THE most expensive part of framing, and while helpful in keeping artifacts away from touching the glass, is not the only solution. Much cheaper is to use simple spacers between the frame and back/mounting board to allow a thin separation.

 

Bluehawk has some great suggestions, well worth following!

 

With my collection I try to follow the "do no damage" policy, and sometimes doing nothing causes damage!

 

Here's my suggestion for circumventing the pricy framing: I bought a mat cutter for less than a professional framing would have run (I think about $75). I have a good relationship with the guys at the local framing shop and get scrap matting from them dirt cheap, sometimes free. Now I do my own matting 90% of the time. The local glass shop sells UV picture glass, too. I get frames on sale/with coupons/at VOA, etc. and cut UV glass to fit. (Practice scoring and snapping on the cheap glass that comes with the frames first!)

 

All this gives me more scratch to spend on new pieces for the collection!

[23engineers]

with digital photography available these days, I prefer to never display the origionals.