Hi Listers. We are getting close to printing all the photos and
photo/caption boards for an upcoming exhibit. The photos are all black and
white (some sepia), from the 1900s-1930s, and they look much better on matte
paper, with rich darks, than on pearl/luster paper. BUT, we'll also have
8-10 of these photo/caption boards on little easels outside of the display
case, scattered throughout the museum, where visitors (or volunteers) might
be touching them, or moving them around. Is it worth going for the
better-looking paper at the risk of getting fingerprints or smudges? (I'm
leaning toward the matte.)

 

Anyone have experience with using matte paper for signage that is not
protected?

 

Thanks!

 

--Kathie Gow

 

 

Kathie Gow

 

Oral History Producer

http://www.wordspicturesstories.com <http://www.wordspicturesstories.com/> 

 

Curator, Hatfield Historical Museum

http://hatfieldhistory.weebly.com <http://hatfieldhistory.weebly.com/> 

 

 


=========================================================
Important Subscriber Information:

The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "help" (without the quotes).

If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).