Seal Drymount Tissue

Anyone know if Seal MT5 drymount tissue for fiber paper is as good as their Archival Drymount Tissue for Fiber Paper (ie, archival)? B&H only has 11x14 "archival" paper in 100 sheet boxes, which is more than I need, while the MT5 is available in packages of 25.

On a side note, does anyone know if Kodak still manufactures drymount tissue? Under almost every listing of the Kodak stuff on B&H, they have the following: "Note! This item is temporarily not available. We have no estimated arrival date at this time."

My experiance is with seal archival tissue, it's very thin, and if

you need to, you can remove it with heat. You might try contacting a

picture frame shop in your area and ask if they'll sell you the

amount you need.

Erik,

<p>

I don't know the answer regarding MT5. I have always used Seal Color

Mount tissue to mount my fiber based prints. This was suggested in an

article I read in Photo Techniques Magazine. Subsequently, I took a

John Sexton printing workshop, and found that he uses Color Mount for

his photographs. This might give you another alternative.

I also use Seal Colormount for B+W mounting as well as injet and

color prints. Archival Drymount I believe is demountable with heat

while color mount and MT5 is not. Thats why achivists like it better.

<p>

Dave

Another option is to use Seal Fusion 4000 which has no paper in it at

all and is a pure archival PVA type glue in tissue form. It comes in

rolls and sheets and works perfectly in the dry mount press. I use the

kind already cut in sheets, but most of my friends use the roll and

cut to the size needed for the job. Not a direct answer to your

question, but I thought I would mention this because very few know

about this nice purely archival product . .

<p>

Scott

Erik, I have purchased dry mount tissue from Freestyle Sales in L.A.

in the past, and found it to be very reasonably priced and good

quality. You may want to give them a try.

Erik,

<p>

The frame supply store I use sells Techmount 3 (equivalent to

Seal Fusion 4000) in 36 inch by 30 yard rolls for around $45 per

roll.

<p>

I do a lot of mounting and a roll typically lasts me several months

to nearly a year.

<p>

This tissue, like the Seal product, is acid-free and can be

removed by re-applying heat (although I'll have to admit I've never

tried it). A side benefit is that using release paper you can

eliminate the need for a tacking iron.

<p>

Instead of tacking the "sandwich" of print-tissue-mount which

can result in some unplanned misalignments, what I do is put

the print and tissue in the press for 20-30 seconds between two

sheets of release paper, with the tissue hanging out about an

inch all around.

<p>

After a 30 second cooldown, the tissue and print are bonded and

it also takes any residual "curl" out of a print (such as single-wt

Azo). Then it's a simple matter to trim neatly around with sissors

and position on the mounting board. The tissue will be a little

"gummy" so it's almost impossi ble to get it out of position

whenn putting back into the press for the final mounting.

<p>

I've been using this system for about 10 years now and never

had a problem with a print mounted in this manner.

<p>

Hope this helps.

Erik,

<p>

Try to obtain a copy of Henry Wilhelm's book, "The Permanence and Care

of Color Photographs," Preservation Publishing Co., Grinnell, Iowa,

1993. He has an extensive discussion of the different Seal products,

much too long to quote here. The upshot: significant differences in

age yellowing among them. Seal ArchivalMount Plus much worse in this

regard than ColorMount, MT5 Plus, or Fusion 4000 Plus. Although none

of these materials apparently pass the strict archival standards in

ANSI IT9.2-1988, there has been little evidence that they actually

harm the print. Still, a thin yellow line framing your print has

little aesthetic appeal. I do not know if these materials have

undergone changes by the manufacturer since the time of the tests in

1991.

<p>

There is still, of course, the thorny issue of whether or not to dry

mount fine photographic prints at all. This issue is also extensively

discussed by Wilhelm. This is an expensive book, but well worth the

price for its 744 pages.

Have any of you or do any of you use canvas mount? I am interested in

canvas transfer and can not find much info on it.

<p>What do you mean by good? Archival is acid free adhesive on a buffered base while MT5, color seal, and 4000 is not. So, from an archival point of view, no it is not as good. However, it is made for Lithograph papers and as such is outstanding.<br>

Do not be confused by the term archival as it is used here. There is greatly reduced acid in the Seal/Bienfang archival mount however, no dry or vacuum press conforms to archival standards (search Library of Congress for Preservation Framing). Its not about the acid content; papers shrink or expand up to 3% as environmental conditions change. Hard mounted artwork/pictures will eventually warp, crack, or even peel. That is why LofC says you hinges the images and friction mount with the use of matting.<br>

So, again I ask, what do you mean by good?</p>