Old picture stuck to frame - how can I lift if off?
January 2, 2009 7:35 AM Subscribe
I have a really old, treasured picture. I need to scan copies of it to give to relatives, but it is stuck to the glass in it's frame. Ideas?
This is a large picture in one of those antique oval frames with the domed glass. It's about 19 inches long, so quite large. Seeing as how it's my great grandparents' wedding picture, I estimate it to be dated to about 1900-1905. One of the sides of the picture has experienced some water damage at some point and while it didn't show up on the picture side, it's fairly visible on the back.
We took the backing off and saw that the picture is actually printed onto a rather thick cardstock of some kind. The thick paper is really, really brittle and my mom already took a hunk out of it. When I carefully pried it up, however, I did even worse damage and some of the picture coating lifted from the cardstock and stuck to the glass.
I am afraid to go any further!
So, my questions are these:
-What is the best method to lift this picture from the glass without destroying it? I have found sites that tell you to use scrapbooking knives or other tools and I don't really trust them because I assume they are referring to glossy Kodak-style photos. This definitely has a paper texture on the picture side. Steam, perhaps?
-What would be the best way to ensure that no further damage occurs to this picture? It's pretty darn special and I want it to last for quite a while. I know this probably involves getting professional assistance, but what kind? We live in a small town, so resources are limited.
Thanks so much!
This is a large picture in one of those antique oval frames with the domed glass. It's about 19 inches long, so quite large. Seeing as how it's my great grandparents' wedding picture, I estimate it to be dated to about 1900-1905. One of the sides of the picture has experienced some water damage at some point and while it didn't show up on the picture side, it's fairly visible on the back.
We took the backing off and saw that the picture is actually printed onto a rather thick cardstock of some kind. The thick paper is really, really brittle and my mom already took a hunk out of it. When I carefully pried it up, however, I did even worse damage and some of the picture coating lifted from the cardstock and stuck to the glass.
I am afraid to go any further!
So, my questions are these:
-What is the best method to lift this picture from the glass without destroying it? I have found sites that tell you to use scrapbooking knives or other tools and I don't really trust them because I assume they are referring to glossy Kodak-style photos. This definitely has a paper texture on the picture side. Steam, perhaps?
-What would be the best way to ensure that no further damage occurs to this picture? It's pretty darn special and I want it to last for quite a while. I know this probably involves getting professional assistance, but what kind? We live in a small town, so resources are limited.
Thanks so much!
If this photo has a lot of sentimental value, the best way to ensure that no further damage occurs is to take it to a paper or photography conservator and pay them to do it for you. It won't be cheap, but a conservator will have special equipment and techniques for this project.
posted by pluckysparrow at 7:45 AM on January 2, 2009 [1 favorite]
posted by pluckysparrow at 7:45 AM on January 2, 2009 [1 favorite]
Response by poster: I tried photographing it in-glass but the glass is steeply domed and I couldn't get around that difficulty.
posted by bristolcat at 7:52 AM on January 2, 2009
posted by bristolcat at 7:52 AM on January 2, 2009
Are there any photo shops/ photographers in your town, the kind that offer old photograph reconstruction services? Maybe they have some experience with this. Even if they do not, they might know who to recommend. If it were my photograph I'd take the professional route with this, because it's not something you can allow yourself to mess up (otherwise I'd tell you to try steam for sure).
As an aside, are you sure of that date? That paper doesn't really look that old to me - I have many old family photos and turn-of-the-century ones are printed on hard cardboard (back of picture), and they feature my Great-grandmother as a baby (I'm 30).
posted by neblina_matinal at 8:00 AM on January 2, 2009
As an aside, are you sure of that date? That paper doesn't really look that old to me - I have many old family photos and turn-of-the-century ones are printed on hard cardboard (back of picture), and they feature my Great-grandmother as a baby (I'm 30).
posted by neblina_matinal at 8:00 AM on January 2, 2009
I'm sure a pro photographer can get around the glare of the domed glass to take a high-res picture, and professionally photoshop it as well. It may not be quite as good as a scan, but it will be better than destroying the original.
posted by Brodiggitty at 8:31 AM on January 2, 2009
posted by Brodiggitty at 8:31 AM on January 2, 2009
Response by poster: I'm familiar with a lot of photographers in town and they are pretty much only of the wedding/senior picture variety. This is a small town and there isn't a professional conservator in the area. I'm paying for this out of pocket - no relatives are helping me, so I'd really rather try to do this myself...especially considering I only have a week or two before I need to have the printed copies. I'm also positive on the date. The "paper" I've mentioned could be considered a very stiff, compressed paper or cardboard. In one picture there is a more modern cardboard backing.
I'm pretty damn handy with a camera and Photoshop, but the glass has a lot of distortions in it and it's just something I'd really rather have a high quality scan of.
I'm willing to try steam because the picture has already been exposed to water and the image wasn't hurt at all until I tried lifting it. Also, the image is centered in the oval, so there are about five inches on either side that are just gray areas. So, I guess I'm just really asking for a compelling reason that steam would be a bad idea or if something else would be better.
posted by bristolcat at 8:48 AM on January 2, 2009
I'm pretty damn handy with a camera and Photoshop, but the glass has a lot of distortions in it and it's just something I'd really rather have a high quality scan of.
I'm willing to try steam because the picture has already been exposed to water and the image wasn't hurt at all until I tried lifting it. Also, the image is centered in the oval, so there are about five inches on either side that are just gray areas. So, I guess I'm just really asking for a compelling reason that steam would be a bad idea or if something else would be better.
posted by bristolcat at 8:48 AM on January 2, 2009
The geeky solution would be to immerse it in a clear liquid with the same refractive index as the glass, then photograph it vertically through the flat surface of the liquid (this after sealing the back of the photo to prevent damage).
posted by madmethods at 9:28 AM on January 2, 2009
posted by madmethods at 9:28 AM on January 2, 2009
Seconding the "contact your local conservator." This link to the USD special collections department would be my first stop. If they don't provide services, they will definitely know who in the area does.
posted by mrmojoflying at 9:34 AM on January 2, 2009
posted by mrmojoflying at 9:34 AM on January 2, 2009
The geeky solution would be to immerse it in a clear liquid with the same refractive index as the glass, then photograph it vertically through the flat surface of the liquid (this after sealing the back of the photo to prevent damage).
posted by madmethods at 9:28 AM on January 2 [+] [!] No other comments.
Eponysterically bad advice, IMHO. Seconding mojoflying that you should contact a professional and ask for advice over email.
The Canadian Conservation Institute has a nice "preserve your heritage" page and you might well contact them (just pretend you are from Toronto or Moose Jaw or somewhere like that).
posted by Rumple at 10:28 AM on January 2, 2009
posted by madmethods at 9:28 AM on January 2 [+] [!] No other comments.
Eponysterically bad advice, IMHO. Seconding mojoflying that you should contact a professional and ask for advice over email.
The Canadian Conservation Institute has a nice "preserve your heritage" page and you might well contact them (just pretend you are from Toronto or Moose Jaw or somewhere like that).
posted by Rumple at 10:28 AM on January 2, 2009
Umpteenthing the "contact a conservator" opinions.
Given the damage already done, you are far beyond DIY territory. You need professional expertise to save the picture. Saving the picture is now your primary task...not getting a copy made. That can come after the photo has been rescued.
And, yeah, do not immerse it in anything. Period.
posted by Thorzdad at 12:27 PM on January 2, 2009
Given the damage already done, you are far beyond DIY territory. You need professional expertise to save the picture. Saving the picture is now your primary task...not getting a copy made. That can come after the photo has been rescued.
And, yeah, do not immerse it in anything. Period.
posted by Thorzdad at 12:27 PM on January 2, 2009
If you steam it and it's so brittle, I'd be afraid it'd turn to mush or really warp on drying.
Have you tried any near-by cities? If your MeFi profile location is correct, it does look you're a far ways from any major town that might have a skilled preservation society, but you could get lucky.
Also, if this photo is 19 inches long, do you have a scanner that would scan the thing in one go? It sounds too large for typical scanners, in which case you'd need to do a few passes, and anything off of the glass could get blurry.
With your photoshop and camera skills, you might want to take a series of shots, with lighting from various angles. Or is the image itself distorted by the glass? If so, a preliminary present with your best skills could be nice (since no one has seen an undistorted photo prior), and you can send it to a professional for a delayed, amazing present.
Are you looking to do a 1:1 reproduction of the photo? And why the rush to get this done in a week?
posted by filthy light thief at 12:28 PM on January 2, 2009
Have you tried any near-by cities? If your MeFi profile location is correct, it does look you're a far ways from any major town that might have a skilled preservation society, but you could get lucky.
Also, if this photo is 19 inches long, do you have a scanner that would scan the thing in one go? It sounds too large for typical scanners, in which case you'd need to do a few passes, and anything off of the glass could get blurry.
With your photoshop and camera skills, you might want to take a series of shots, with lighting from various angles. Or is the image itself distorted by the glass? If so, a preliminary present with your best skills could be nice (since no one has seen an undistorted photo prior), and you can send it to a professional for a delayed, amazing present.
Are you looking to do a 1:1 reproduction of the photo? And why the rush to get this done in a week?
posted by filthy light thief at 12:28 PM on January 2, 2009
I'm willing to try steam because the picture has already been exposed to water and the image wasn't hurt at all until I tried lifting it.
Steam will melt the gelatin emulsion. You might be able to remove the picture from the glass is the paper doesn't fall apart, but chances are the image will be destroyed. Either take it too a conservator, or photograph and remove light glare in Photoshop.
posted by oneirodynia at 1:06 PM on January 2, 2009
Steam will melt the gelatin emulsion. You might be able to remove the picture from the glass is the paper doesn't fall apart, but chances are the image will be destroyed. Either take it too a conservator, or photograph and remove light glare in Photoshop.
posted by oneirodynia at 1:06 PM on January 2, 2009
Wow, I am full of typos today.
posted by oneirodynia at 1:10 PM on January 2, 2009
posted by oneirodynia at 1:10 PM on January 2, 2009
This thread is closed to new comments.
The advantage is that there's absolutely no risk to the original with this method. The disadvantage is that it's probably not as good as actually scanning the original.
posted by fogster at 7:45 AM on January 2, 2009