Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;moreotherstuff, post: 4341431, member: 56&quot;]I have twice separated prints from backings by soaking them.&nbsp; It&#039;s fairly simple if the glue used is water soluble, a bigger issue if not.&nbsp; The thing to remember is to remove the backing from the print, not the other way round.&nbsp; This might be a good trial piece, if you want to try it, but the risk is there of destroying the print completely.</p><p><br /></p><p>The first time I did it was with a lithograph: Rieuse, by Armand Berton, 1897, the sheet size a bit more than 18&quot; by 14&quot;.</p><p>[ATTACH=full]358715[/ATTACH]</p><p><br /></p><p>The print was laminated to mount board that had warped considerably.&nbsp; I tried pressing it (for months), but the warp returned in short order.</p><p>[ATTACH=full]358716[/ATTACH]</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]358717[/ATTACH] </p><p>Removing the backing was something I wanted to try anyhow, so I gave it a shot.&nbsp; I have a large photographic processing tray (left over from the old days) and used filtered tap water.&nbsp; I was working on the premise that the backing was essentially 3 layers: a relatively thick layer that was little more than pulp laminated on either face with a sheet of paper, all this separate from the print itself.&nbsp; I immersed the print for about two hours and, working in the tray, worried the top layer of the backing away.&nbsp; It wasn&#039;t too difficult as the glue holding everything together was water soluble.&nbsp; Removing that layer exposed the pulp core to the water and I left it to soak for an additional hour.&nbsp; When I went back, I expected to be worrying away at that paper, but to my surprise it lifted off almost like a soggy felt blanket.&nbsp; That was the bulk of the backing gone, but the question remained, what was left?&nbsp; Was it the print adhered to another piece of paper, or was it just the print?&nbsp; I left it to soak for another hour and when I went back, I tickled a corner and found there was another sheet that I was able to ease off, leaving only the print.&nbsp; I left it soaking a while longer and used a paint brush to gently wipe away any remaining glue.&nbsp; I removed the print from the bath, patted it with paper towel and then pressed it between sheets of blotting paper for a day.&nbsp; It worked out well, but this description will probably have any trained conservator tearing their hair out.</p><p><br /></p><p>But then there was the second print which I handled even more roughly, and it&#039;s a pretty good print:&nbsp; The Mill of Ruysdael, Jean Jacques de Boissieu, 1774, after Jacob van Ruisdael, print sheet aout 10 1/2&quot; by 14 1/2&quot;.</p><p>[ATTACH=full]358719[/ATTACH]</p><p><br /></p><p>This was laminated to a simple sheet of paper.</p><p>[ATTACH=full]358720[/ATTACH]</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]358721[/ATTACH]</p><p><br /></p><p>I approached as I had the previous one.&nbsp; But in this instance, the glue was not water solvent.&nbsp; There was one corner of the print not properly adhered, and a couple bubbles showing other places where there was also lack of adhesion.&nbsp; I concentrated on these.&nbsp; The outer border of the backing sheet peeled away revealing the edges of the print, but the vast majority of the backing remained solidly adhered.&nbsp; Since that paper was soft from its immersion, I used my fingernails to scrape away at it.&nbsp; It took a couple hours and I essentially reduced that sheet to pulp scraping it away from the print, but I was not convinced that the job was complete.&nbsp; The paper, where it had bubbled, came way differently than the rest, leaving the print looking much more translucent than elsewhere.&nbsp; I removed the print from the bath, changed the water, re-immersed it and left it to soak.&nbsp; When I went back, I tried my fingers in those most translucent areas, wondering if they were clear of the backing, or if I had actually scraped away some of the paper of the print itself.&nbsp; Those areas felt greasy, which I took to be remaining glue.&nbsp; I figured that the water might not be removing the glue but it was softening it and causing it to swell (the danger of watching Baumgartner videos).&nbsp; I scraped gently at it and could feel my fingernails removing something, so I carefully worked over the entire surface of the print, gently scraping, looking for that greasy feel.&nbsp; The appearance of the paper became increasingly translucent as I continued until I could feel no more greasy patches and the translucency was of an even value over the entire surface.&nbsp; Then, as before, I removed it from the bath, patted off excess moisture and pressed it between blotting sheets.&nbsp; Once it was dry, I could clearly see that the print was on laid paper, even has a watermark (that I cannot read).</p><p><br /></p><p>Both these prints have other issues that I have yet to deal with.</p><p><br /></p><p>And there is a third print: Le Maitre D’Ecole by Edme Bovinet, 1809(?), after Adriaen van Ostade.</p><p>[ATTACH=full]358725[/ATTACH]</p><p><br /></p><p>For some unaccountable reason, this print has been laminated to a piece of foamcore.&nbsp; I have removed the backing sheet and the foam, but have not gone further.&nbsp; I&#039;m certain the adhesive is not water soluble and am concerned that the remaining backing paper is plasticized and water immersion ain&#039;t gonna help.</p><p><br /></p><p>But you know I&#039;ll give it a try eventually.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in