In the book "Framing Pictures" by J.T. Burns, it says on p.40 that a nice margin to allow around the picture would be 7.5 cms at the top and sides, and 8.8 cms at the base.
The reason for not having the margin equal on all four sides is explained as follows:
"The extra width at the bottom creates an optical balance without which the base appears to be narrower than it really is."
The same idea is put forward on p.30 of the book "An Introduction to Picture Framing" by Vivien Frank where, as an example, the dimensions of the sides and top are 8cms, and the bottom 9 cms.
Pete Bingham in his book "Picture Framing" says on p.34 that, if a mat is cut with all its borders equal in width, the bottom border will appear narrower than the top. This is an optical illusion, but one that needs to be compensated for. Pete mentions that the balance rule is not adhered to slavishly, as some mass-production requirements may dictate otherwise and equal-sided mats (mounts) are much quicker to cut than those with a balance.
I have just bought a ready-made 20 x 16 inch frame which has a mat cut so that the left and right margins are 70mms, and the top and bottom margins are 58mm. I am not sure why the margins of the left and right sides are are 12mms more than than those of the top and bottom, but most people who have looked at this frame haven't noticed anything wrong with the way the mat has been cut. However, do you think I should use this mat, or would it be desirable to get one custom made so that it adheres to the "balance rule" referred to above?
I have also purchased previously a mat for a 20 x 16 inch frame that has equal margins all round of about 70mms. Until I read about the "balance rule" I hadn't really perceived that the base appears to be narrower than it really is! Even when I stand back some distance from the picture, I can't really detect the optical illusion that the above writers are talking about! Can you readily detect this optical illusion if the margins are equal on all sides?
I would be interested to hear your views on whether most picture framers use mats that have equal margins on the top and sides, but a larger margin at the bottom.
Thanks very much for your help.
Regards, Fred
Margins Around Pictures
-
John
- Site Admin
- Posts: 1886
- Joined: Sun 27 Apr, 2003 8:00 pm
- Location: Ireland
- Organisation: Tech Support
- Interests: Forums and stuff
- Location: Belfast
- Contact:
I was about 10 years into my framing career before developing a critical eye for the percieved imbalance that can sometimes be seen when all the borders are equal. It is a very subtle thing and probably wouldn't be noticed by 99.9% of your customers, and I certainly couldn't begin to explain it, but there is something which just looks right when that extra bit is added to the bottom.
I don't know if others would agree, but it seems to me that the effect is more noticable when the aperature is portrait rather than landscape.
However there is another more rational side to this, and that is that when all the borders are equal, the visible amount of mount at the bottom is actually less than the top and sides due to the fact that the bottom of the mount is touching the frame, so more of it is hidden by the rebate than the sides and top. Remember, the frame should never be made to fit tightly around the mount.
So when all sides are equal, the visible width at the bottom is smaller - it is not an illusion.
I don't know if others would agree, but it seems to me that the effect is more noticable when the aperature is portrait rather than landscape.
However there is another more rational side to this, and that is that when all the borders are equal, the visible amount of mount at the bottom is actually less than the top and sides due to the fact that the bottom of the mount is touching the frame, so more of it is hidden by the rebate than the sides and top. Remember, the frame should never be made to fit tightly around the mount.
So when all sides are equal, the visible width at the bottom is smaller - it is not an illusion.
HOW Much!?
EstLite Picture Framing Software
EstLite Picture Framing Software
-
markw
golden section, an ancient rule of proportion consisting of the division of a line so that the proportion of the smaller to the greater is the same as the greater to the whole. The proportion is roughly 5 to 8. In framing and art this makes for an eye pleasing proportion.
well thats what it says on the net - i would say that if you had a mount with top and sides at 5cm then 8cm would be visually too deep. i would use 5 - 6. (basically same proportions stated in your reference book) as the picture gets bigger the larger element at the bottom becomes more neccesary to balance the mount. Personally i like big mounts on photographs - you can achieve very striking effects with wide mounts and fairly stark frames. photography is going through a real revolution now that prints can be printed relativly easily on large format paper. You can get a lot more out of the image by mounting it well - double mounts - deep bevel mounts can both add an extra dimension to the finished product.
well thats what it says on the net - i would say that if you had a mount with top and sides at 5cm then 8cm would be visually too deep. i would use 5 - 6. (basically same proportions stated in your reference book) as the picture gets bigger the larger element at the bottom becomes more neccesary to balance the mount. Personally i like big mounts on photographs - you can achieve very striking effects with wide mounts and fairly stark frames. photography is going through a real revolution now that prints can be printed relativly easily on large format paper. You can get a lot more out of the image by mounting it well - double mounts - deep bevel mounts can both add an extra dimension to the finished product.
-
SquareFrames
- Posts: 380
- Joined: Mon 23 Feb, 2004 9:37 am
- Location: Dromore, Co. Down, Northern Ireland
- Organisation: Dromore Picture Framing / Down School of
- Interests: Reading, relaxing, and funnily enough, its hard to stop thinking of framing
- Location: Dromore, Northern Ireland
- Contact:
Margins
Hi Folks,
When I was being taught, I was always told to make the bottom border approx. 15-20% deeper then the rest, something, funnily enough I have stuck to, unless asked not to. I agree with Markw's idea of larger, wide mounts on photographs and experimenting with deep bevels, double mounts, etc.
I also frame a lot of HND and Degree photographs here, (and lately they have been mainly black and white), and if the photograph is smaller than 10X8 inch in old money, i usually put the following borders, 4, 4, 4, and 8 at the bottom. If the photo is B&W, then a soft white, texturd board looks best, with a silver or black fillet.
I also frame for a lot of artists, but the 2 main artists we use here, and we have been framing for them for 8 years now, have always used this method, (unless they want something diffferent), the mount is normally a double ivory and borders at 3, 3, 3, 3 1/2 with a V groove set 1 inch away from the inner mount's bevel. Mind you they do sometimes allow me to experiment with different colour inner mounts, fillets, deep bevels, wider borders, etc. but alas I admit not that often, but after 50 years of exhibiting all over the world, one is not for changing. Took me the first 2 years to convince one of them 'just' to change the mount standard.
Experimenting with mounts is great fun, and can make bland photographs much better, such as, B&W photos can look good with a 5 band wash and panel, black and grey lines, and a light grey wash, on a simple white mount this is the way we do most of the new B&W school photographs.
Steven
When I was being taught, I was always told to make the bottom border approx. 15-20% deeper then the rest, something, funnily enough I have stuck to, unless asked not to. I agree with Markw's idea of larger, wide mounts on photographs and experimenting with deep bevels, double mounts, etc.
I also frame a lot of HND and Degree photographs here, (and lately they have been mainly black and white), and if the photograph is smaller than 10X8 inch in old money, i usually put the following borders, 4, 4, 4, and 8 at the bottom. If the photo is B&W, then a soft white, texturd board looks best, with a silver or black fillet.
I also frame for a lot of artists, but the 2 main artists we use here, and we have been framing for them for 8 years now, have always used this method, (unless they want something diffferent), the mount is normally a double ivory and borders at 3, 3, 3, 3 1/2 with a V groove set 1 inch away from the inner mount's bevel. Mind you they do sometimes allow me to experiment with different colour inner mounts, fillets, deep bevels, wider borders, etc. but alas I admit not that often, but after 50 years of exhibiting all over the world, one is not for changing. Took me the first 2 years to convince one of them 'just' to change the mount standard.
Experimenting with mounts is great fun, and can make bland photographs much better, such as, B&W photos can look good with a 5 band wash and panel, black and grey lines, and a light grey wash, on a simple white mount this is the way we do most of the new B&W school photographs.
Steven
Someone Once Said 'Knowledge Is Power'
Down School of Picture Framing http://www.downschoolofpictureframing.co.uk
Ireland's Only Accredited Training School
GCF Examination Centre
Accredited Valiani Demonstration / Training Centre
Down School of Picture Framing http://www.downschoolofpictureframing.co.uk
Ireland's Only Accredited Training School
GCF Examination Centre
Accredited Valiani Demonstration / Training Centre
-
Fred's Photos
Margins Around Pictures
Thanks very much for these helpful replies. Because I am now looking at the borders around all the framed photos that I have, I can see imbalances that I would never have noticed before I started framing pictures! I tend to notice it when the extra amount is added to the bottom border, but I don't really perceive any imbalance when all the borders are the same. Perhaps my photos aren't hung high enough up on the wall, because I guess the higher they are, the narrower the bottom margin would appear to be?
But if expert framers always have a larger margin at the bottom, then to show that I am aware of this practice, I guess I should conform to it when framing my pictures, otherwise people may suspect the truth, that I'm just a beginner!
So I think it would be unwise for me to use some matts that came with ready-made frames where the left and right margins are 70mms and the top and bottom margins are 58mm. Has anyone seen matts cut like this? I find this shape to be quite distracting, would you?
Thanks for your input, it's much appreciated.
Regards, Fred
But if expert framers always have a larger margin at the bottom, then to show that I am aware of this practice, I guess I should conform to it when framing my pictures, otherwise people may suspect the truth, that I'm just a beginner!
So I think it would be unwise for me to use some matts that came with ready-made frames where the left and right margins are 70mms and the top and bottom margins are 58mm. Has anyone seen matts cut like this? I find this shape to be quite distracting, would you?
Thanks for your input, it's much appreciated.
Regards, Fred
-
SquareFrames
- Posts: 380
- Joined: Mon 23 Feb, 2004 9:37 am
- Location: Dromore, Co. Down, Northern Ireland
- Organisation: Dromore Picture Framing / Down School of
- Interests: Reading, relaxing, and funnily enough, its hard to stop thinking of framing
- Location: Dromore, Northern Ireland
- Contact:
Margins
Hi Fred,
This may sound rather silly but, I take it that you are a professional photographer? One thing in our business that is so frustrating, is the following practices by photographers:
1. The placing identification labels on the back of the photos, although not hard to get off with the use of a little white spirit, but very time comsuming especially when a larger order comes in.
2. The photographers signature on the front of the photograph, why this is done I have no idea, the photographers are cute here, and it simply cannot be hidden by mounting, and the customer has probably not even noticed it. Why do photographers go to the bother of signing a photograph in the first place, its not as if its a piece of original artwork?
3. The dreaded 'Blob' of silicone or double sided tape behind the photo inside one of those terrible blue or brown, strutted, cardboard mounts, again a practice that beggars belief, thankfully I have never ripped or destroyed a photrograph mounted like this, but how many other framers havent been so lucky?
4. Those awful graduation photos, mounted in, again, blue or brown cardboard, strutted mounts, with either gilt or sliver lines and the university's logo, right at the very top and the name at the bottom, impossible to put a frame around without loosing some if not most of the logo and name. The best way of framing these is to float mount the entire piece or simply remove the photo, mount and frame as normal and place the cardboard mount onto the back of the frame for a keepsake. Not the photographers fault I know, but they end up supplying them, but someone should inform the manufacturers of these mass produced mounts and the university's of this.
5. Another thing, and maybe a bit controversial. I know not all photoraphers study to become professional photographers, but some do, so why then do they not know how a photograph should be treated, mounted or framed? I can understand your situation, you want and are willing to learn, that is very commendable, and any advice you want, you just have to ask, but there are a lot of photographers who wont even let the photograph out of their premises without it being heatsealed, a practice I personally dont like, but in the end I do what my customers want. We, as framers are expected to know the whys and what fors of our business, why not photographers?
6. Most photographers stick an unsightly swept frame around a photograph and charge huge amounts for this, why?
Photographers and framers 'should be working together', but this is never likley to happen.
Steven
This may sound rather silly but, I take it that you are a professional photographer? One thing in our business that is so frustrating, is the following practices by photographers:
1. The placing identification labels on the back of the photos, although not hard to get off with the use of a little white spirit, but very time comsuming especially when a larger order comes in.
2. The photographers signature on the front of the photograph, why this is done I have no idea, the photographers are cute here, and it simply cannot be hidden by mounting, and the customer has probably not even noticed it. Why do photographers go to the bother of signing a photograph in the first place, its not as if its a piece of original artwork?
3. The dreaded 'Blob' of silicone or double sided tape behind the photo inside one of those terrible blue or brown, strutted, cardboard mounts, again a practice that beggars belief, thankfully I have never ripped or destroyed a photrograph mounted like this, but how many other framers havent been so lucky?
4. Those awful graduation photos, mounted in, again, blue or brown cardboard, strutted mounts, with either gilt or sliver lines and the university's logo, right at the very top and the name at the bottom, impossible to put a frame around without loosing some if not most of the logo and name. The best way of framing these is to float mount the entire piece or simply remove the photo, mount and frame as normal and place the cardboard mount onto the back of the frame for a keepsake. Not the photographers fault I know, but they end up supplying them, but someone should inform the manufacturers of these mass produced mounts and the university's of this.
5. Another thing, and maybe a bit controversial. I know not all photoraphers study to become professional photographers, but some do, so why then do they not know how a photograph should be treated, mounted or framed? I can understand your situation, you want and are willing to learn, that is very commendable, and any advice you want, you just have to ask, but there are a lot of photographers who wont even let the photograph out of their premises without it being heatsealed, a practice I personally dont like, but in the end I do what my customers want. We, as framers are expected to know the whys and what fors of our business, why not photographers?
6. Most photographers stick an unsightly swept frame around a photograph and charge huge amounts for this, why?
Photographers and framers 'should be working together', but this is never likley to happen.
Steven
Someone Once Said 'Knowledge Is Power'
Down School of Picture Framing http://www.downschoolofpictureframing.co.uk
Ireland's Only Accredited Training School
GCF Examination Centre
Accredited Valiani Demonstration / Training Centre
Down School of Picture Framing http://www.downschoolofpictureframing.co.uk
Ireland's Only Accredited Training School
GCF Examination Centre
Accredited Valiani Demonstration / Training Centre
-
Merlin
- Posts: 1538
- Joined: Thu 05 Jun, 2003 5:50 pm
- Location: Cornwall
- Organisation: Merlin Mounts
- Interests: Aviation
I totally agree with Steven here, for the past few years I have taught at the local College, both A level and City & Guilds students on the Photographic courses.
On both courses - some 30 weeks in length - only 30 minutes is allocated to mounting of a photograph.
Most photographs are heat sealed to grey board - just look at that orange peel !!! WHY? I asked. Coz the course notes say so
What heat setting do you use?. Dont know, whatever setting it is left on !!
Other photographs are T hinged using masking tape.
Again I asked why. Coz the course notes say to use tape !!
Quite impressive really, seeing as the C & G course costs £168.
No mention of other mounting techniques. Dry or Wet.
No mention of the properties of the backing boards or top mount boards.
Only one Logan hand mountcutter available, which the instructor has no idea how to calibrate. Each student has to do 10 mounts. In white or black, equal borders. A very confused look on the instructors face when I mentioned mount weighting.
An even more amusing look and a very sharp intake of breath when I mentioned that even PVA makes a good cold mount on super smooth board. It takes too long and is too messy to apply. My God, it makes you wonder just what they are using to apply the PVA. I have had excellent results from a cheap Woollies 100mm sponge roller and the PVA mixed two parts to one part water.
So much so, that about half of the students on the courses end up in the shop workshop after hours. Learning how to do it all properly and having some fun as well..
Suffice to say this has not gone down too well with the college, because the students are producing finished articles, that are not in keeping with the current teachings. ie Instead of white or black mounts, they have used Light grey / black core and weighted the pictures.
Not too sure now that I will be asked back next term. Oh well,
On both courses - some 30 weeks in length - only 30 minutes is allocated to mounting of a photograph.
Most photographs are heat sealed to grey board - just look at that orange peel !!! WHY? I asked. Coz the course notes say so
What heat setting do you use?. Dont know, whatever setting it is left on !!
Other photographs are T hinged using masking tape.
Again I asked why. Coz the course notes say to use tape !!
Quite impressive really, seeing as the C & G course costs £168.
No mention of other mounting techniques. Dry or Wet.
No mention of the properties of the backing boards or top mount boards.
Only one Logan hand mountcutter available, which the instructor has no idea how to calibrate. Each student has to do 10 mounts. In white or black, equal borders. A very confused look on the instructors face when I mentioned mount weighting.
An even more amusing look and a very sharp intake of breath when I mentioned that even PVA makes a good cold mount on super smooth board. It takes too long and is too messy to apply. My God, it makes you wonder just what they are using to apply the PVA. I have had excellent results from a cheap Woollies 100mm sponge roller and the PVA mixed two parts to one part water.
So much so, that about half of the students on the courses end up in the shop workshop after hours. Learning how to do it all properly and having some fun as well..
Suffice to say this has not gone down too well with the college, because the students are producing finished articles, that are not in keeping with the current teachings. ie Instead of white or black mounts, they have used Light grey / black core and weighted the pictures.
Not too sure now that I will be asked back next term. Oh well,
John GCF
-
markw
Merlins comments are very interesting. The recognition of standards within our industry is the job of the Fine Art Trade Guild - I often wonder just how far they go to communicate with other allied bodies. Does the authority that controls the city and guilds courses even know that the FATG exist.
Is there such a thing as a city and guilds qualification in picture framing? I know that apprentiships in framing are not supported by the various government initiatives to encourage modern apprenticeships. If my comments are correct - and hopefully someone will shoot me down with the facts - if not then we are in danger of being a forgotten industry only controlled by self appointed participants.
Is there such a thing as a city and guilds qualification in picture framing? I know that apprentiships in framing are not supported by the various government initiatives to encourage modern apprenticeships. If my comments are correct - and hopefully someone will shoot me down with the facts - if not then we are in danger of being a forgotten industry only controlled by self appointed participants.
-
SquareFrames
- Posts: 380
- Joined: Mon 23 Feb, 2004 9:37 am
- Location: Dromore, Co. Down, Northern Ireland
- Organisation: Dromore Picture Framing / Down School of
- Interests: Reading, relaxing, and funnily enough, its hard to stop thinking of framing
- Location: Dromore, Northern Ireland
- Contact:
Hi Markw,
I am endeavouring to find out the answer to your question about C&G in framing, but the GCF is the world-wide recognised qualification in picture framing, BUT and here the big BUT (an oh God I wish I could say more, but sorry, at this time I cannot) the Guild needs to do more to promote it, and I am personally looking into that, so please bear with me.
I can remember a conversation a few years ago, as to why the Guild went down the GCF path and not C&G, so let me do a bit of research and get back to you all.
Steven
I am endeavouring to find out the answer to your question about C&G in framing, but the GCF is the world-wide recognised qualification in picture framing, BUT and here the big BUT (an oh God I wish I could say more, but sorry, at this time I cannot) the Guild needs to do more to promote it, and I am personally looking into that, so please bear with me.
I can remember a conversation a few years ago, as to why the Guild went down the GCF path and not C&G, so let me do a bit of research and get back to you all.
Steven
Someone Once Said 'Knowledge Is Power'
Down School of Picture Framing http://www.downschoolofpictureframing.co.uk
Ireland's Only Accredited Training School
GCF Examination Centre
Accredited Valiani Demonstration / Training Centre
Down School of Picture Framing http://www.downschoolofpictureframing.co.uk
Ireland's Only Accredited Training School
GCF Examination Centre
Accredited Valiani Demonstration / Training Centre
Hi,
I hope it's not too late to post a reply to this topic.
I have a template, or diagram if you prefer, that describes a method for placing an image in the optical centre of any size mount. This is what I use for framing my photographic images as I never think they look right when mounted with equal borders all round.
Can I take issue with SqareFrames concerning his beef about photographers signing their prints? I will anyway. Photographers sign their prints, in open or limited editions, because like any other artist they want to be identified as the author of the work. I don't understand why that is a problem for you, you accept the signatures of other authors on their limited edition prints (printed using the same methods in many cases), i.e. inkjet. Is this a case of elitism?
Can I also say that in describing photographs, as some here have, as having no or little value, or making the assumption that a photograph is automatically reproducible is really not on. I believe the FATG insists that it is the customer and not the framer who decides if a a piece of work, of any type, is valuable or not. Some photographs are not reproducible, the negative or digitial file may have been lost or destroyed, to assume otherwise is arrogant folly.
I am only just starting out as a framer but I have been a photographer for many years. I believe that I am now producing saleable work and I will always insist on framing it to the highest archival standards, or not at all.
Rant over.
There is much useful discussion and information on this forum, which I very much welcome but I wonder why the FATG never hosted such a forum in the first place, or am I being naive?
Les Sutherland aka less
I hope it's not too late to post a reply to this topic.
I have a template, or diagram if you prefer, that describes a method for placing an image in the optical centre of any size mount. This is what I use for framing my photographic images as I never think they look right when mounted with equal borders all round.
Can I take issue with SqareFrames concerning his beef about photographers signing their prints? I will anyway. Photographers sign their prints, in open or limited editions, because like any other artist they want to be identified as the author of the work. I don't understand why that is a problem for you, you accept the signatures of other authors on their limited edition prints (printed using the same methods in many cases), i.e. inkjet. Is this a case of elitism?
Can I also say that in describing photographs, as some here have, as having no or little value, or making the assumption that a photograph is automatically reproducible is really not on. I believe the FATG insists that it is the customer and not the framer who decides if a a piece of work, of any type, is valuable or not. Some photographs are not reproducible, the negative or digitial file may have been lost or destroyed, to assume otherwise is arrogant folly.
I am only just starting out as a framer but I have been a photographer for many years. I believe that I am now producing saleable work and I will always insist on framing it to the highest archival standards, or not at all.
Rant over.
There is much useful discussion and information on this forum, which I very much welcome but I wonder why the FATG never hosted such a forum in the first place, or am I being naive?
Les Sutherland aka less
-
Framing Norah
- Posts: 145
- Joined: Fri 18 Feb, 2005 4:03 pm
Hi,
FN, I have been trying to locate the web site that I originally downloaded this from without success, however I have managed to track down the file on my computer, I can email it to you, and anyone else, if you wish. Just send an email request to lsutherland@eclipse.co.uk. I'm away for a couple of days but will answer any outstanding emails on Thursday.
Les Sutherland aka less
FN, I have been trying to locate the web site that I originally downloaded this from without success, however I have managed to track down the file on my computer, I can email it to you, and anyone else, if you wish. Just send an email request to lsutherland@eclipse.co.uk. I'm away for a couple of days but will answer any outstanding emails on Thursday.
Les Sutherland aka less
-
Framing Norah
- Posts: 145
- Joined: Fri 18 Feb, 2005 4:03 pm
Hi less,
After a quick Google, found this: -
http://carbonphoto.cicada.com/pdf/opticalcentre.pdf
Is this the same as your template?
After a quick Google, found this: -
http://carbonphoto.cicada.com/pdf/opticalcentre.pdf
Is this the same as your template?
FN