Mounting decides how your print physically meets its backing — and the two most common approaches carry very different implications for both looks and archival practice.
A permanent bond that keeps the print perfectly flat
Dry mounting adheres a print to a rigid backing board — typically foam board, gator board, or dibond — using a heat-activated adhesive tissue that's fused under a heat press. The result is a completely flat, rigid panel with no waviness or buckling, ready to frame or display with minimal additional support.
The trade-off is permanence: dry mounting is generally not reversible without risking damage to the print. Once mounted, the print and backing are effectively a single object. This is a meaningful consideration for anything with long-term collector or resale value, where conservators typically prefer reversible mounting methods.
The print appears to hover, unmounted, above its backing
Float mounting attaches a print to its backing at select points — often just along the top edge, or with small archival hinges — rather than adhering the entire surface. Combined with a shadow-box style frame that holds the glazing away from the print, this creates a striking visual effect where the print appears to float slightly above the mat or backing, with a visible edge and subtle shadow.
Because the bond is minimal and typically uses reversible archival hinging materials rather than full-surface adhesive, float mounting is generally considered more conservation-friendly — the print can, in principle, be un-hinged and remounted or reframed later without the same risk dry mounting carries.
Matching the method to the piece
Dry mounting suits large-format prints, especially canvas or photographic work meant to be displayed without a mat, where a perfectly flat, rigid surface matters more than long-term reversibility — much display, hospitality, and commercial work falls into this category.
Float mounting suits fine art prints on cotton rag or deckle-edged paper, where the paper's natural edge is part of the aesthetic, and for any piece where preserving reversibility and long-term conservation value is a priority — a common choice for collectible, limited-edition work.
Why archivists favor reversibility
Conservation practice, broadly, treats reversibility as a core principle: any intervention made to an artwork — mounting, mending, cleaning — should ideally be undoable without damaging the original, because materials, techniques, and even the artwork's condition can change in ways that make a future conservator wish they could undo an earlier decision.
Dry mounting violates this principle by design — it's meant to be permanent. That doesn't make it wrong for every situation; a commercial print destined for a retail display isn't being treated as a conservation object. But for anything with genuine long-term or collector value, the reversibility of float mounting (or leaving a print entirely unmounted, simply matted and framed) is generally the more conservation-conscious choice.
Is dry mounting bad for archival prints?
It's not inherently bad — dry mounting on archival board with archival tissue can be perfectly stable long-term — but it does sacrifice reversibility, which matters more for pieces intended as long-term collectible or resale objects.
Does float mounting cost more than dry mounting?
It's typically comparable to slightly more, largely due to the more labor-intensive hinging process and the shadow-box style framing it usually requires to achieve the visual effect properly.
Can a dry-mounted print ever be reframed later?
Reframing the piece within a new frame is straightforward, but separating the print itself from its mounted backing generally is not, since the heat-activated adhesive bonds the two surfaces together.