Mounting

[cmaclean]

Hi there team

I am mounting a watercolour on a Crescent artcare mountboard using pass through hinges. There will be no window mount, just the artwork surface mounted. The mountboard and art will be spaced off the glass using Frametek econospace. I'll use a 5mm foamboard as a backing.

My question really is what is an appropriate margin around the artwork to allow so it looks in the fitness of things, and do the same rules for a window mat apply here i.e same measurements on the side and top and a bit more on the bottom. Do you think I should use an 8ply heavier gauge board as well.

I have seen some work framed with the same margins on the sides but different (larger) margins on the top and bottom.

Any suggestions will be gratefully received.

Cheers

Campbell

[Spit]

I have seen some work framed with the same margins on the sides but different (larger) margins on the top and bottoml

So have I - usually an Ikea frame that somebody bought even though it wasn't the same proportions as the print they wanted in it.

Why no mount? Float mounting suits certain things, but I'm not sure that watercolours are one of them. As you are using pass-through hinges, the paper is free to cockle at the slightest hint of humidity.

[Moglet]

Hi Campbell!

First up, I have the same query as Steve, i.e. why no window mount? Is it because the artpiece has an attractive deckled edge you wish to keep visible?

Regarding spacers, I don't think econospace would give you sufficient clearance with the watercolour being completely flat. If, as Steve advises above, the artipiece cockles even slightly, it will definitely end up against the glass. If you must float mount the piece, I'd recommend much deeper spacers.

Regarding border widths, it can depend on the dimensions/subject of the piece itself. I always weight the base of my mounts for starters. Asymmetric top and side borders (i.e. sides are Xmm, top is Ymm, and X does not equal Y) can work on some pieces better than others: they either look right, and enhance the piece, or they don't. Overall, I use asymmetric borders as an exception, not a rule. If they are used just to fit an artpiece into an existing frame (per Steve's IKEA example), they can look really naff.

[Spit]

I wish I had your way with worms! That said what I meant to say

On borders, most will suit the same top & sides, with 5mm+ on the bottom - but that is to take up the slack, as a mount will normally be cut a couple of mm shy of the full frame width, which means it will sit low in the frame. If the bottom is wider than the other sides, the difference is less noticeable than if the top is too wide.

[Moglet]

Sitting in a bunker, here behind my wall...

[prospero]

Regarding border widths, it depends on the size and proportion of the work. Also, if the work is portrait or landscape orientation. I would add more to the bottom border on a portrait format than a landscape. It's a optical illusion. If you centre the window it will always appear nearer the bottom than the top. (It's not just the slippage factor as Spit says, but this does compound the effect and needs to be compensated for.)
This gives the veiwer a subconcious feeling of unease. Weighting the bottom border also gives a feeling of stabilty. Again, this is subconcious. If you want to prove this principle, just ask anyone to draw a triangle. They 99 times out of 100 they will draw it apex-up. It can't fall over that way. Very rarely will anyone draw it apex-down.
An upright picture looks more unstable, hence the wider border. Stranger still, this doesn't seen to happen with Oval windows.

But these are just general (I hate the term) - 'rules'. Practical considerations apart, if it looks right it is right.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Which is most pleasing?

[cmaclean]

Hi Campbell! Hi right back at you

First up, I have the same query as Steve, i.e. why no window mount? Is it because the artpiece has an attractive deckled edge you wish to keep visible?

No, it's because the client doesn't want a window mount, I would really love to frame it with a window mount.

Regarding spacers, I don't think econospace would give you sufficient clearance with the watercolour being completely flat. If, as Steve advises above, the artipiece cockles even slightly, it will definitely end up against the glass. If you must float mount the piece, I'd recommend much deeper spacers.

Thanks for that tip I actually will use a 12mm x 4mm spacer

Regarding border widths, it can depend on the dimensions/subject of the piece itself. I always weight the base of my mounts for starters. Asymmetric top and side borders (i.e. sides are Xmm, top is Ymm, and X does not equal Y) can work on some pieces better than others: they either look right, and enhance the piece, or they don't. Overall, I use asymmetric borders as an exception, not a rule. If they are used just to fit an artpiece into an existing frame (per Steve's IKEA example), they can look really naff.

I'm actually making the frames to suit. The prints are actually pastels (of landscapes in Central Otago in the South Island of NZ). The sizes of the artwork are 600mm x 460mm, and 810mm x 580mm (landscape). I was thinking of 90mm borders on sides and top and 105mm on the bottom. Do you think this would work?

[Moglet]

Suggested dimensions sound as though they're in the right ballpark. What's the width of the frame you are using for the pastels?

[w00dward]

If you are not using a mount you may find over time a collection of dust at the bottom of the frame from the pastels. I would normally use a mat with a foamcore spacer so the dust falls between the art and mat.