>>5460113>>5460134Not for archival purposes, no.
Within 8-10 years (maybe sooner) you'll see the first signs of burn from the cheap backing they use and some discoloration from the non-UV glass. It looks kind of cool in a dingy way, where the rabbit of the frame creates this stark outline of ruined versus non-ruined portions of an image. But if it's a $12 reproduction print you bought online, I wouldn't invest in anything better than an Ikea frame. A Mondo poster or a numbered limited press band tour poster, though...
If you're really worried about discoloring from the backing board, you can follow my advice here
>>5458797 and just get a cheap acid-free mat board to replace it. The shitty Ikea glass won't really help matters in terms of UV protection but it's not going to directly hurt anything either. That's the job of natural ambient light. If you want to upgrade that aspect, any decent custom frame shop will cut you a sheet of 27x40 Tru-Vue standard glass for like $30 or so.
>>5460286I didn't realize google was a requirement of my job.
