Previous research has indicated that airborne pollutants can cause physical damage to inkjet print media. This study was initiated to determine if inkjet media enclosed in sealed window-glass-covered frames could generate volatile reducing or oxidizing agents (redox agents) when exposed to light which could potentially cause such damage. An additional objective was to determine if the attenuation of UV energy by window glass in frames could mitigate previously observed damage of ink-receiver layers (IRL) and whether glass-covered sealed and unsealed frames would produce different results. Because of the dual objectives, this was a study in two parts. Results of the first part of this investigation indicated that a resin-coated (RC) black-and-white silver-gelatin photographic print, included as a control, produced the largest change in a redox detector. One of the two inkjet photo papers included in this study also produced a noticeable change, but to a lesser degree. The detectors with the other inkjet photo paper and the polyester film control showed no noticeable change. In the second study, the same two unprinted inkjet papers were exposed to 50 kilolux xenon light for twelve weeks, each in three separate framing configurations. One frame was sealed with its glass cover identical to the frames in the first experiment but without the redox detector film. Another had a glass cover like the first configuration, but the glass was spaced slightly above the papers and was open on all four sides to allow for ingress of ambient air. The third configuration did not have a glass cover. Results of the second investigation indicated that glass reduced physical damage caused by light for both inkjet photo papers. However, the open frame produced the greatest reduction in cracking in the inkjet paper that showed a noticeable change in the redox detector in the first investigation; much more than the closed frame. This might have been because the volatile redox agents generated during exposure to light escaped from the open frame. The other paper buckled in the tightest wedge setting of the brittleness apparatus (near complete fold). This failure occurred in the paper support and was not the result of exposure to light because unexposed paper showed the same result. However, the IRL in this paper completely disintegrated after exposure to light in the frame that did not include a glass cover. A larger study should be done to include a wider variety of inkjet papers to determine if the generation of redox agents in closed frames is a widespread phenomenon or whether it is limited to only a few. This additional investigation should include the frame variations used in this study.