I dislike glass too. I think it detracts from any image. Lately I have
taken to printing with the image bonded to matte board and similar. The
prints are stiff enough to stand alone in a frame with no glass and no
additional backing. I had a 16x20 canvas done the same way. See
<http://www.millerslab.com/prints/features/mounting>
Chuck Norcutt
On 12/10/2013 12:30 PM, Bob Whitmire wrote:
> My reason for trying images on both canvas and aluminum is that in
> doing so, I avoid what I consider to be one of the disadvantages to
> paper prints, i.e., that they must be framed behind glass. The
> package is heavy, and the glass lies between the viewer and the
> image. For example, I am not a big fan of prints on glossy paper
> framed behind glass. That's two levels of shine to deal with, and for
> me it's unattractive. Luster is better behind glass, matte is best.
> YMMV.
>
> But no glass at all is better still. Of course it's more expensive to
> put images on aluminum or canvas, and the final cost of the product
> is higher for the consumer, but so far I've sold two rather expensive
> canvases, and, I think, six or seven metal prints.
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|