[Leica] OT: Acrylic vs Glass

[hopsternew at gmail.com (Geoff Hopkinson)]

Bob, I've actually just had a recent experience with this so maybe it might
be of some help. In Yosemite I obtained  a wonderful silver print made from
a rather famous negative and brought it home to frame and treasure of
course. The gallery staff and their included instructions specifically warn
against using non-reflective glass as it degrades the tonal quality. They
suggested that acrylic can be good in that its optical properties are fine
but that it was prone to scratching of course. I only just got my precious
print framed here by some specialists whose expertise I trust. They echoed
what the gallery folks had told me. We did go for 'museum quality glass' and
it is marvellous.
I guess that your other considerations are the practical ones regarding
handling/shaping (and shipping?) the material. Or are you obtaining pre-cut
sheets of some kind?

Cheers
Geoff
http://www.pbase.com/hoppyman


2010/1/21 Bob Adler <rgacpa at yahoo.com>

> Dear All,
>
> I have started to do a significant amount of framing and was hoping to get
> some input from this community on the pros and cons of glass vs acrylic
> for presenting photographs. Either would need to be UV resistant and
> non-glare. Also, acrylic would be needed for larger works simply from a
> weight point of view.
>
> Primarily I'm wondering how this might impact marketability of the image,
> or if it would at all. Does the market prefer glass as it is a bit more
> "upscale" or is acrylic better for some reason. Which provides the best
> viewing experience? I cannot afford "museum quality" glass and believe it 
> is
> a bit to delicate (fingerprints are difficult/impossible to remove).
>
> Thanks,
> Bob
> Bob Adler
> Palo Alto, CA
> http://www.rgaphoto.com Any feedback from this community before making a
> decision would be appreciated.
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>