Variations of Previous Themes

[RobM]

Hi Everyone,

I revised a couple of previous ideas, following some feedback I received for them, and would love to know your thoughts.

The first one, a postcard print of a Grayson Perry picture, originally had quite a hefty frame around it in terms of being disproportionate to the image, and perhaps took away from the image too much. For this, I simply used a narrower frame, which I feel helps reverse the earlier anomaly. My eyes are much more drawn to the actual image this time. I maintained the same cream mounts, but feel the new frame blends well with them.

The second one, a landscape photo, I wanted to recreate the slight shadow gap done on another such photo. A valid point made on the original piece was that there was too much of a border and, as such, took some attention away from the image. This time I've taken a mount which is not so incase, and I can see the difference. And the shadow gap feel more effective for it, too. The frame was just one I had in, but I like to think it's sympathetic.

What do you think? Be brutal.

[vintage frames]

Once again, absolutely no criticism of your skills and handiwork in making these frames.
I can only give my personal opinion on what I see.

The Grayson Perry picture -

The moulding is horrible, echos of a bad village art-fayre, and the mount colour is just trying to make friends with the moulding and totally ignoring the art-work.

I would have expected some sort of off-white mounting and a gold hockey stick moulding of say 1/2" width.

Photographic prints are contemporary in nature and tend to look best is a simple flat black moulding - preferably of stained wood so that the wood grain reflects more the detail in the picture.
These 'arty' style mouldings just distract from the image.

Good for you in posting these questions. You will get there. Just pedal back a bit more on the presentation. When we stop noticing the framing, then you'll know you've got there.

[JKX]

The top one is a bit “Rovers Return” with its mahogany coloured frame. The mount width is too close to the frame width and you’ve also demonstrated one of many reasons I dislike these shadow mounts - ie shadows!

You can expect shadows on bevels but you’ve created extra ones on the artwork itself which is distracting and can make the image look off centre.
I think I first saw this strange method demonstrated in Larson juhl’s 4 walls magazine not very long ago, just someone trying something different to get noticed really, it serves zero purpose and I think you have far far more to get right before experimenting.

The next one has better balance but the frame could still be narrower and lighter and/or the mount could be much wider.
It also shows, slightly, what I mean about that shadow mount- the top and left margins appear fractionally wider than the bottom and right, making the image appear off centre.

Bottom one, balance is OK but mount colour hasn’t changed and it doesn’t suit.

I think you should adopt some basic principles and SOPs (Standard Operating Procedures!) A couple of mine were ..

No less than 3” of mount space around anything
Don’t hold any mount samples smaller than 4”- you can show narrower widths but you can’t show wider!
Avoid single plain mounts, unless maybe extra thick ones.


I think maybe you should visit some galleries such as the National Portrait gallery - even on line - Google searches like “watercolour exhibition” or “etching exhibition” will be interesting too.

[Justintime]

Grayson Perry - the new frame actually has some of the tones of the piece which pulls it together more. Still not keen on the tone of the mounts. The mount proportions feel good.
I don't think photos are the right medium for a shadow gap. I actually liked the first moulding, I was sorry when they discontinued it and the mount width was fine for me if you had used a second mount. This new one, I'm trying to ignore the moulding as I hate these kinds with a passion, the mount width is absolute borderline for me. But yeah like John said, be more adventurous, single mounts on the whole simply fulfil a function, double triple etc are a design aesthetic when used well.
When you have a piece of work on the table like the Grayson piece, I suggest that you put all of your mount samples on the table and go through pulling out every single one that is tonally similar to all and every colour in the piece. Once you have that pile then pick a top mount colour like ivory, cream, minuet, hayseed and play around changing the lower mount colour just with a 4mm slither of colour. You'll begin to see hopefully what effect picking out various colours from the piece can have and where it draws your eye in the piece.

[vintage frames]

I think maybe you should visit some galleries such as the National Portrait gallery - even on line - Google searches like “watercolour exhibition” or “etching exhibition” will be interesting too.

That is very good advice.
It's all a process of education and the only reliable way to learn is to see how others, with way more experience, handle it.

For instance, there is a gallery in London which sells pictures wholesale to the interior design industry. They've been doing for years and sell shed loads both here and in the US, so they kinda know what works and what doesn't.

You may not like everything you see but try to notice the simplicity of their presentation and the impact that can have.
Just something more to think about.
And maybe also notice that all their framing in hand-made and finished.

https://www.trowbridgegallery.com/VirtualGallery

[RobM]

Is the moulding for the Grayson Perry that bad? I was thinking it was pretty low-key/neutral.

Sounds like I'm got a way to go, but I'm learning more about how we match our frames with the artwork. Seems like one of the "rules" (I'll use that term carefully) is to pick up a colour or tone from the image, while simultaneously not distracting from it.

So:
- white/off-white for coloured art prints
- black (preferably stained) for photos

Thanks, Dermot.

Once again, absolutely no criticism of your skills and handiwork in making these frames.
I can only give my personal opinion on what I see.

The Grayson Perry picture -

The moulding is horrible, echos of a bad village art-fayre, and the mount colour is just trying to make friends with the moulding and totally ignoring the art-work.

I would have expected some sort of off-white mounting and a gold hockey stick moulding of say 1/2" width.

Photographic prints are contemporary in nature and tend to look best is a simple flat black moulding - preferably of stained wood so that the wood grain reflects more the detail in the picture.
These 'arty' style mouldings just distract from the image.

Good for you in posting these questions. You will get there. Just pedal back a bit more on the presentation. When we stop noticing the framing, then you'll know you've got there.

[RobM]

Rovers Return Agree - that was a very archaic-looking moulding.

I've noted your comments about mounts. I've just received a set of samples from one supplier - all well over 4".

And I completely agree about visiting more galleries. Always like to visit a gallery on holiday but I'll be calling across to some of my local ones this week.

Thanks, John.

The top one is a bit “Rovers Return” with its mahogany coloured frame. The mount width is too close to the frame width and you’ve also demonstrated one of many reasons I dislike these shadow mounts - ie shadows!

You can expect shadows on bevels but you’ve created extra ones on the artwork itself which is distracting and can make the image look off centre.
I think I first saw this strange method demonstrated in Larson juhl’s 4 walls magazine not very long ago, just someone trying something different to get noticed really, it serves zero purpose and I think you have far far more to get right before experimenting.

The next one has better balance but the frame could still be narrower and lighter and/or the mount could be much wider.
It also shows, slightly, what I mean about that shadow mount- the top and left margins appear fractionally wider than the bottom and right, making the image appear off centre.

Bottom one, balance is OK but mount colour hasn’t changed and it doesn’t suit.

I think you should adopt some basic principles and SOPs (Standard Operating Procedures!) A couple of mine were ..

No less than 3” of mount space around anything
Don’t hold any mount samples smaller than 4”- you can show narrower widths but you can’t show wider!
Avoid single plain mounts, unless maybe extra thick ones.


I think maybe you should visit some galleries such as the National Portrait gallery - even on line - Google searches like “watercolour exhibition” or “etching exhibition” will be interesting too.

[Justintime]

Hey Rob,
I understand that you're using some old mouldings that someone has given you, so don't take it too personally if we don't like what you're using, to most of us what you have is already dated, but to be honest there are plenty of currently available mouldings which are also out of date imo.
As well as the advice about visiting galleries, if you haven't done so already, get yourself copies of moulding catalogues from suppliers like Lions, Larson Juhl, Centrado to name a few. Lions would be a good one to start with, there are loads of styles, depths, colours to choose from and even if you're just window shopping it'll start to get you thinking about what type of work you would use each one for. I try and only stock what I like and some that I know certain customers would like. I also have plenty of fancy Larson Juhl samples that I don't know when I will ever use until that one job comes in that it's perfect for.

[RobM]

Must admit, I'm more in your camp about the revised frame, but I'm enjoying hearing the contrasting comments. I recall you mentioned the colour of the mount originally, and the intention would be for a lighter colour for future; I just wanted to change the frame this time, and I think at least the moulding and mat work better now.

I may have just been playing about with these shadow gaps for now. As you say, I need to explore more multi mounts.

Cheers, Justin.

Grayson Perry - the new frame actually has some of the tones of the piece which pulls it together more. Still not keen on the tone of the mounts. The mount proportions feel good.
I don't think photos are the right medium for a shadow gap. I actually liked the first moulding, I was sorry when they discontinued it and the mount width was fine for me if you had used a second mount. This new one, I'm trying to ignore the moulding as I hate these kinds with a passion, the mount width is absolute borderline for me. But yeah like John said, be more adventurous, single mounts on the whole simply fulfil a function, double triple etc are a design aesthetic when used well.
When you have a piece of work on the table like the Grayson piece, I suggest that you put all of your mount samples on the table and go through pulling out every single one that is tonally similar to all and every colour in the piece. Once you have that pile then pick a top mount colour like ivory, cream, minuet, hayseed and play around changing the lower mount colour just with a 4mm slither of colour. You'll begin to see hopefully what effect picking out various colours from the piece can have and where it draws your eye in the piece.

[RobM]

I have been ordering new mouldings but, yes, still have a few bits of the older mouldings that I'm using - and these were used in these examples. They have been useful for playing about and practising on less-valuable prints and pictures of my own. However, I'm conscious I need to get away from doing this, as the examples I'm showing are consistently looking a bit old-fashioned (and not in the good way).

At the studio here, I've got catalogues from the main suppliers (except Larson Juhl) so at least some of the examples I've posted have newer frames on. Though I need to be a bit bolder with some of even those choices.

Hey Rob,
I understand that you're using some old mouldings that someone has given you, so don't take it too personally if we don't like what you're using, to most of us what you have is already dated, but to be honest there are plenty of currently available mouldings which are also out of date imo.
As well as the advice about visiting galleries, if you haven't done so already, get yourself copies of moulding catalogues from suppliers like Lions, Larson Juhl, Centrado to name a few. Lions would be a good one to start with, there are loads of styles, depths, colours to choose from and even if you're just window shopping it'll start to get you thinking about what type of work you would use each one for. I try and only stock what I like and some that I know certain customers would like. I also have plenty of fancy Larson Juhl samples that I don't know when I will ever use until that one job comes in that it's perfect for.