Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 2 3 [4]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Finishing Canvas - Spraying or Rolling?  (Read 22989 times)
Mark Lindquist
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 312


« Reply #60 on: October 06, 2007, 08:31:26 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
For those interested in the lamination solution, the picture samples I provided above are from a Seal Image 6000 laminator.   Apparently the laminate itself is not the Satinex as I indicated but another brand that they decline to identify.  Trade secrets I guess.  At any rate I'm happy with it and they do a great job.

Here's the lamintor itself:  http://www.visutech.com/Seallaminator.html.

Good luck and hope everyone has a happy thanksgiving and remembers the true meaning of the day, Martin Frobisher's thanks for surviving his third voyage to the new world........
Doug
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=143942\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

This is a disappointment Doug - too bad they won't say what they're using.  I understand work product, trade secrets, etc., but in this aspect of archival-ness I would think that would be a problem.  If they won't disclose the name of the product there could be a reason for it.  Frequently sign shops pooh-pooh the archival quest mainly because their product often ends up on the trade show floor after a week long trade show.  Much of that material, although in some ways exhibiting UV protection (because signs go outdoors) is not necessarily compatible with archival standards and the substrates it's put on.  Again, I question why it is that we seek the highest quality of light through optics and sensors, lay down images with 200 year longevity inks on high quality substrates only to squash plastic on it or flood goop over it.  If they won't say what it is, who's to even guess the longevity of the product or even suppose the interaction with the inks and the canvas in the long term?

In 35 years of being in the fine arts, much of it on the museum level, I've seen this issue come back and bite the best.  You may like the look of it, but how can you guarantee the quality in years if you don't even know what the product is?

All this of course is said with due respect, out of concern.  But hey, everyone has a different approach.  You like it and it may be fine for you.  I just find it ironic, again, after all the work of getting there with the most acute sense of  concern for the materials to be finally at the mercy of a mysterious top coat applied as a guarded secret?  It did work for Stradivarius...  

But thanks for trying to get the answer for us-

Best wishes-

Mark
Logged
DougMorgan
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 144


WWW
« Reply #61 on: October 06, 2007, 11:46:08 AM »
ReplyReply

Mark:

I don't think it's much of an issue really.  

They found a product and procedure that works and don't want to give up an edge to the competition.    They'd have to go out of their way to find a non-UV stable product and it would be a short-lived gamble to use it.  One summer in my area at least would turn it yellow.   If I was using dye ink I'd  want to know of course since the coating would be probably the most important component of the archival aspect.   I  suspect also that my first statement posted in this thread above may actually be the right product  

If I can find my soapbox....... ah, here it is.    With UV-stable pigment inks and the proper medium I'm not sure how much additional UV protection really helps anyway.  It seems to make a large difference in Wilhelm testing but past 100 year longevity I'm not sure the additional years would really mean much in a real environment since all they are testing is UV resistance with an intense light bulb and extrapolating.  They are not accounting for anything in the environment other than light (and maybe not the full spectrum of that even).   I would think even cleaning products used around the artwork would take a much higher toll after a couple decades than additional sunlight, especially ammonia for the water based coatings.  The pigment inks also seem to be somewhat soluble in ammonia.   As an example, my wife's family has a habit of using windex on practically everything and I would suspect that would be a bigger threat than a sunny window.   What about a product like endust?  Would a couple coats of that protect a canvas?   Anyway, I'll step off the soap box now.....

Send along the sample if you want to do your own testing.....
Doug
« Last Edit: October 06, 2007, 11:54:31 AM by DougMorgan » Logged
Charles Gast
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 250


« Reply #62 on: October 09, 2007, 08:52:12 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I've done a lot of research and concluded that yellowing isn't an issue and that the finish itself is very neutral.  I've done some testing to destruction with heat guns and repetitive bending, and I'm pretty satisfied that it is a usable product, albeit eyebrow raising.  YMMV, etc.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=142762\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Thanks for the info Sean!
I remember Livick saying that clearshield slightly yellows in time but then stabilizes without further yellowing. I can attest to that with some prints I applied clearshield to over a year ago. The yellowing is very slight with a warming effect.  
I am definitely going to order some of that flooring varnish!  

Charlie
Logged
mmurph
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 507


WWW
« Reply #63 on: October 10, 2007, 12:22:46 PM »
ReplyReply

I saw some Paul Shambroom prints on canvas in Chicago recently.

They were apparently from 8x10 negatives or slides (I would guess negs.) They were about 3'x5', on canvas. Labelled as pigment prints with varnish.

They were *stunning*. It would be interesting to know the specific process and finish if anyone is familiar with his work.


Archival pigmented inkjet on canvas with varnish, 63X38 inches.


Best,
Michael
Logged
Doyle Yoder
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 500


« Reply #64 on: December 26, 2007, 06:04:12 PM »
ReplyReply

I have been doing some testing recently using film over-laminate on canvas. Initial tests are very promising. I think I have got the pressure, speed and temperature down and am just testing different laminates now.

The look I am getting now I must say is way better than liquid coatings expect if one wants a really flat/matte finish. I have not found any film that is that flat looking

What is really impressing me is how much more the canvas texture shows with film over-laminate. I see now where the liquid coating flatten out too much and it filling (covering) in the hollows of the canvas more than the ridges, where the film is doing an even coat on both the hollows and the ridges. And no, I don't see any milkyness in the hollows.

Doyle
Logged
DougMorgan
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 144


WWW
« Reply #65 on: December 26, 2007, 07:12:54 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I have been doing some testing recently using film over-laminate on canvas. Initial tests are very promising. I think I have got the pressure, speed and temperature down and am just testing different laminates now.

The look I am getting now I must say is way better than liquid coatings expect if one wants a really flat/matte finish. I have not found any film that is that flat looking

What is really impressing me is how much more the canvas texture shows with film over-laminate. I see now where the liquid coating flatten out too much and it filling (covering) in the hollows of the canvas more than the ridges, where the film is doing an even coat on both the hollows and the ridges. And no, I don't see any milkyness in the hollows.

Doyle
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=163271\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Ah a new convert!  

If you are referring to the pictures I posted far above in this thread they are heavily magnified and taken at an oblique angle.  The effect does not show up when when viewed normally.   That was also an early piece and I have not taken the loupe to any recent ones though I probably should.

The truly great thing is that they can be laminated so much faster than any sort of coating and taken immediately to the stretcher.   There is no way we could do the volume of printing with a water-based coating.

So far we've done somewhere over a 1000 feet of canvas, maybe as much as 2000, and the only wrecked piece (and only one) was due to some sort of defect in the outside of a new roll of laminate.

Doug
« Last Edit: December 26, 2007, 07:14:12 PM by DougMorgan » Logged
Doyle Yoder
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 500


« Reply #66 on: December 27, 2007, 09:17:36 AM »
ReplyReply

Doug

Are you doing the laminating yourself or are you sending it out?

Doyle
Logged
Mark Lindquist
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 312


« Reply #67 on: December 27, 2007, 09:34:13 AM »
ReplyReply

Never could find anything locally for laminating - all the tests were duds.
Have managed to work out the Glamour Gloss rolling technique however, and aside from the time involved (excellent point Doug) the results are amazing.  Everyone seeing the rolled finish comments and asks about - it's in it's own league entirely.  Something about a properly rolled finish is luminous and rich.  Several frame shops have grilled me about "how to".  Trial and error and proper mixing, heating the distilled water and even pressure - that's about it.  After all is said and done, worth the pain.

 

Mark
Logged
DougMorgan
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 144


WWW
« Reply #68 on: December 27, 2007, 11:15:09 AM »
ReplyReply

Mark:

I'd agree but only if I were doing one at a time or just for myself.   It doesn't scale up and to make it pay there would have to be a very large premium over laminate and in fact there is none.   Trying to speed up the process results in wrecked prints or sub-par results.    I've sent the laminator as much as 3 rolls of printed canvas at a time and it's ready for the stretcher in a matter of a couple hours.    In my limited experience with stretching both methods the laminated prints seem easier to stretch since the coating is no where near as thick and is much more even.   We send out most of the stretching as well as the laminating so I don't do much.

The sign companies  have some dip/dunk methods that are faster than hand rolling but I don't think it looks better than the laminate or is as quick and it's not something for someone working out of their basement or a small shop.  The samples I've seen have a sort of rubbery look since they are soaked in acrylic.

Doyle:  

All the laminating is sent out to a company in Vancouver BC: I think the details are above but PM me if you want the contact info.  I've never actually been to their premises and don't know them personally so the usual -- no affiliation, not responsible, blah, blah, blah.   They do an excellent job though.

The key is that they have figured out the right combination that results in virtually no color shifts.  They are also pretty secretive about the setup and judging from the local samples I understand why as the others I've tried resulted in a warming of the image that is not appealing for landscapes and results in case of the dingies for the skies.  

Note I use a matte canvas (formerly piezo pro, now breathing color) with a gloss or semi-gloss laminate applied and there is an increase in contrast but virtually no change in tone.  

I actually have a rejected proof on hand that I'd be happy to cut up and parcel out but you'd need to PM me with an address.    Same offer if you haven't given in to the darkside, Mark.

Doug
« Last Edit: December 27, 2007, 11:29:20 AM by DougMorgan » Logged
Doyle Yoder
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 500


« Reply #69 on: December 27, 2007, 12:28:19 PM »
ReplyReply

Doug

Actually I am setup to do this myself (or for others for that matter) so I am not looking for someone else to do my laminating. And since they don't want to say what product they are using I don't need to contact them.

I am pretty sure I know what they are using. Have you noticed any yellowing given the material that they are probably using?

Another thing is I hope they are not using Intelicoat's Florex as that is being discontinued.

However there are two laminates that I have tested that seem to work beautiful. Yes they are premium priced materials. The cheaper thermal or heat assists laminates do not conform to the canvas very well and are not as optically clears. I only issue for me is I wish I could get more of a matte look when I need it.

Doyle
Logged
DougMorgan
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 144


WWW
« Reply #70 on: December 27, 2007, 12:42:40 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Doug

Actually I am setup to do this myself (or for others for that matter) so I am not looking for someone else to do my laminating. And since they don't want to say what product they are using I don't need to contact them.

I am pretty sure I know what they are using. Have you noticed any yellowing given the material that they are probably using?

Another thing is I hope they are not using Intelicoat's Florex as that is being discontinued.

However there are two laminates that I have tested that seem to work beautiful. Yes they are premium priced materials. The cheaper thermal or heat assists laminates do not conform to the canvas very well and are not as optically clears. I only issue for me is I wish I could get more of a matte look when I need it.

Doyle
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=163407\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

There hasn't been any yellowing.  I think when I mentioned warming we are talking about the same thing.   If so I've had laminating done by a few local sources and the heat (or laminate itself) is giving it a warm or yellowish/amberish look.  It would probably be fine for things like portraits but I don't like the look on my skies.    Big white puffy clouds look dingy and some pinkish twilight skies turn a much less attractive orange tone.  

The laminate my source is using is available both glossy and matte but I don't have a sample of the matte on hand.   Only one of our outlets has requested matte so we haven't used it much.  The gloss is not exceptionally strong partly at least from the texture.    It looks a little sparkly if laid out horizontally but vertically it's more of a semi-gloss, if this makes any sense.   All these technical terms -- dingy, sparkly, pinkish.

If you want a sample to compare to or at least save me from making up more words, let me know: won't cost me more than a stamp to send you a swatch.

Doug
« Last Edit: December 27, 2007, 12:45:26 PM by DougMorgan » Logged
Doyle Yoder
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 500


« Reply #71 on: December 27, 2007, 01:04:14 PM »
ReplyReply

Doug

Maybe we will have to trade samples. Soon as I get a full roll of this I am going to make up sample pieces for anyone that wants one.

Like I said I am really impressed with one of these laminates. I have never coated any canvas with a liquid that looked anywhere nears as good as this laminate. The texture of the canvas is showing so much better with this film laminate than anything I have ever done either spraying or roller applying liquid laminating.

The only issue I am have is that neither one of the laminates I am impressed with comes in 60"-61" rolls. Occasionally I am printing this wide of rolls for clients and this was one of the chief reasons for  using film based laminates.

Doyle
Logged
DougMorgan
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 144


WWW
« Reply #72 on: December 27, 2007, 01:31:03 PM »
ReplyReply

The 11880 is going to make an impact for sure so 60 inches makes sense.  I would have bought one the last go around if I was printing currency rather than just pictures.   The laminate we are using now is wider than the 44 inches we need so I haven't asked what the width is.

PM'd you.... thanks
Doug
Logged
Mark Lindquist
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 312


« Reply #73 on: December 27, 2007, 03:10:49 PM »
ReplyReply

PM sent Doug-

Do not underestimate the quality achievable with Glamour Gloss.

Killer time consumer though, as discussed.

Man, you really know how to hi-jack a thread, eh?

         

Happy New Year!!!
Logged
Mark Lindquist
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 312


« Reply #74 on: January 26, 2008, 02:31:06 PM »
ReplyReply

Doug Morgan very kindly sent me sample swatches of the lamination (gloss and matte) over images printed on canvas.  This was most appreciated because actually having the work in hand to be able to put under various lighting conditions makes the discussion a proof-in-the-pudding one rather than just banter.

I have concluded that for my purposes (Fine Art on Canvas) that the time consuming pain in the a$$ process of rolling glamour gloss on images printed on Breathing Color Chromata White canvas is significantly superior (hands down) for my purposes.
 
My take on the samples of the hot/warm laminating process Doug sent me is:

The gloss lamination allows the image to show through fine, but the glare is there and it's odd how the light hits it (sparkly) I think mainly because the laminate wraps around the texture of the canvas and reflects the light the way a jewel or faceted prism does, especially under gallery lighting conditions and at various angles. The Matte is actually very good in surface and lack of odd reflectivity, but it clouds the image and for my purposes, significantly so.

It is as I suspected. But I definitely understand how these coatings would work in a professional or commercial situation where the workflow needs to be quick and easy.

Regarding the Glamour Gloss, in contrast, the coating is luminous, and almost glowing.  It is smooth, actually going down in and filling, rather than standing on the surface.  Since the evenness is not that , (an uneven quality results in a hand made effect that lends itself to the idea and aspect of and "art print"), and indeed, it is invested of the hand made, almost absurdly so by the time all is done and the object is hanging on the wall.

I have had several prints sprayed with Premier Art Eco Shield and the results have been acceptable - the canvas prints don't appear to have anything between them and the viewer.
The Premier Art spray appears to be a viable alternative and is quick and easy.

There is some luminous magic in that Breathing Color Glamour Gloss however - some kind of odd alchemy for sure, that for certain images makes them rich and luxurious.

My conclusion:

Many finishes available, and in every instance:
Use the right tool for the job.

Again, thank you Doug for sending the swatches, and I'm glad to see you have found the right coating that works for you for your purposes.

Mark
Logged
DougMorgan
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 144


WWW
« Reply #75 on: May 08, 2008, 12:22:59 PM »
ReplyReply

Update:

I get a few email inquiries from this thread so I thought I should post an update as some things have changed:

We have stopped laminating the canvas prints after a string of application disasters and are now spraying prints.   An apparently bad shipment of  media from drytac and an aging laminator combined to wreck two large orders.   I guess it's a good thing that the defects are immediately noticeably though why they would continue to run through the rest of the batch when something is wrong I have no idea.

No problems with the laminate product if it gets properly applied and a laminated piece has a few advantages that none of the coatings seem able to match --> nearly indestructible and never cracks during stretching (at all).  Only downside we've found is that the tension seems to loosen a bit over time but since ours were only laminated on one side it is easy to tighten with a bit of water and sunlight.  

Currently we are having the pieces sprayed by two different sources but are also waiting some test results for an additional lamination product that is something like a combination of spray and lam as we need something for commercial locations.  

Note that in answer to one of Mark's comments on the sparkle the laminate is textured and reflects light differently when layed flat than when hung on a wall.

We are outsourcing the spraying as I don't have time, space, or interest in doing it myself.   Printing is no problem as I can do something else while it's going on.  

One person is using a water-based acrylic (bc) and another is using the solvent based Clear Jet.   We are having some problems with cracking from both which was not an issue at all with laminate.   I haven't actually seen a finished sprayed result with the acrylic as the prints that are supposed to come back to me keep getting sold but compared to prior rolling efforts I prefer the clear jet.  Very thin and completely even with a nice low luster for the semigloss and the gloss really looks nice with the same sort of sheen as premium luster.   Delicate though and kids, don't spray this at home.

An interesting side issue with the acrylic coatings is that in investigating the cracking I was looking back over a bunch of old stretched canvases  that have been sitting in the back room for a year or two and found that I could not really tell the three different water-based acrylic coatings apart by visual quality alone.

take care...........
Doug

PS:  In searching for a Minneapolis canvas stretcher (see other post) I came across white house color (www.whcc.com) and though they won't stretch my canvas according to the website their canvas prints are laminated rather than coated.   I would expect it's for the same reason we were -- high volume / low labour.   I have no idea what their product is or looks like.
« Last Edit: May 10, 2008, 10:53:26 AM by DougMorgan » Logged
Pages: « 1 2 3 [4]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad