Framing a 'lop sided' block canvas

[J T Framing]

Having made a frame for an oil on a block canvas I realised that at least one corner is not a right angle. So I made a larger frame thinking that I could build it up on one corner. Unfortunately it is so out that it seems impossible to frame. I wondered how easy it would be to remove the canvas from the block then attach it to a board and then frame it. The artist has not painted the sides of the canvas otherwise it could be mounted without a frame. Julia

[caro]

How is it fixed to the block? Is the actual artwork image square? My feeling would be to try to work with the existing artwork and fill in with something in t h e out of square parts. Could you post a picture?

[J T Framing]

Hi Caro. I hope these photos help. I've tried moving it within the frame but it's impossible as there will always be a gap. I wondered whether I should remove the canvas from the board but I don't want to damage the painting. I'm fairly new to framing. I realise I should of checked the angles of the corners before making the frame. Julia.

[Graysalchemy]

My thoughts would be to use a L shaped tray frame, that way you can leave a wider gap all the way round and the decrepency elwont be seen. You could also put a frame around that as well.

[IFGL]

I would either do as Alistair suggests or re stretch it.

[prospero]

I cringe a bit when people want stuff framed this way - with the edges showing and tight up to the frame. Not only does the canvas have to be dead square, it also has to stay that way. Some canvases can sag over time and will need re-tensioning. This will alter the shape a small amount, but it means it won't fit back in the frame.

Machine-stretched photo prints tend to be quite regular, but original oils/acrylics can vary quite a lot - particularly it the artist stretched it himself.

Frames have rebates to compensate for this. Bigger the canvas the wider the rebate needs to be. If people can't bear for a few mm to be hidden then you should design the frame with the issue of possible varying size in mind.

In the case in point I would remove the canvas - square up the bars and remount it. And hope it stays square.

If it were a little bit out I would be tempted to give some of the wedges a wee tap to pull it right. But I think maybe a a complete re-do would be safer. You might also consider using a better quality bar. Those look a bit iffy to me.

[kuduframes]

Not only iffy, they are also stapled over the mitre.....

[GeoSpectrum]

Can you use a narrow slip to cover the edge?

[IFGL]

Simple but very effective suggestion Geo Spectrum.

[prospero]

I may have got the wrong end of the stick. You aren't trying to free-float the canvas so that the edges are a wee bit away from the sight-edge. It's just a normal frame.

Some mouldings are made with canvas-fitting in mind and these generally have a wider rebate. The ash one in the pic only has a diddly rebate width. Enough for a mount/glass but not ideal for a canvas. As it happens I'm presently doing an almost identical one. But the canvas is machine-stretched and dead true. Even so it needs a bit of fine tuning to get the size just right.

I'd agree with adding a small extender. Not sure, but I think there are small sections intended for use on-edge as spacers, and There may well be one in ash which would match the farme. One 12mm wide will give you a ample scope to cover the shortfalls and only encroach about 5-6mm into the image. I've done this before on similar mouldings and a simple square step looks quite good.

[Steve N]

I had one like this only a couple of months ago, the customers had commissioned a artist to paint this picture, they told how they were going to frame it, he (the artist ) had stretch the canvas himself, he had only painted the front of the canvas, there was a gap of 10mm . I told them that the canvas would need to be taken off the stretchers , the stretchers squared up and the canvas re-stretched and this would leave white bits of the canvas showing, I suggested they took it back to the artist and get the artist to do it as they could then paint the white bits of the canvas (also they had paid a heck of a lot to do the painting). It took the artist 2 more attempts to get it right

[prospero]

Of course there is the option of making a lop-sided frame.

[A3DFramer]

The slip option seemed the most obvious and best choice to me and after some reflection, I realised that the OP has made another frame that the canvas does not fit in. Given the nature of the moulding shown it seems possible, with access to a good bench saw, to rip off the face of the redundant moulding and use that as slip.

This topic caught my eye because, as a case maker, I dealt with many different types of clients, artists and producers of 3D artwork of a non durable nature, who seemed to be prone to causing this sort of situation. In the moment creative flux they grab the nearest board that looks right and get stuck in.

When it needs framing the rectangular case is even more unforgiving than the 2 dimensional frame. Prospero's lop sided frame is not such a far out option, as corner embellishments could well cover a gappy mitre, I have always supposed that these styles of frames originated in an age when it was more necessary to disguise the work of less accurate tools of another age.

Although it was the Victorian taxidermists, who bought 3D framing to it's zenith, some of their modern day counterparts had difficulty in working within the constraints of rectangles. One particular instance comes to my mind of a very rare Eagle Owl on a habitat base that was needed in a matter of days for an exhibition, base was more that an inch out in 24in and the cover made the error all too obvious. As the position of the Owls head was looking down, it seemed to be giving a very critical look at the saw bench as the angles were corrected rather brutally.

Before the obvious ribald remarks accompany this reminiscence, the taxidermist was not the only culprit. Occasionally an architect stepped out from behind their preference for plastic and opted for a reproduction glass and wood framing. One client swore that his lop sided base had had to be true as the scale model had been done from the plan. I was sure that I was not using warped glass and all my angles were being cut with a fixed 45 degree mitre machine.

Ship Model makers can suffer from a blind spot for the over hang of the sail yards. Having placed the model on the base, it is highly frustrating to find that the glass cover will not descend to the appropriate slot of the base without reducing the hours of work to a resemblance or a Trafalgar veteran.

As an after thought, I recall that at an early point in my career in 3D framing I learnt always to check the diagonals as well as the other more obvious dimensions of bases and frames.

[Whitewater Gallery]

Of course there is the option of making a lop-sided frame.

I frame for an artist who used to make her own stretchers (using the standard profile lengths) often each pair could be out by 5-10mm. These we framed in a tray frame so we made lopsided frames to match the canvas! Being large canvases no one ever noticed, and it was far less obvious than leaving gaps - as I did with the very first one when I did not think to check the dimensions of all 4 sides .

I now mitre and join the profile for free, it speeds things up for me when we come to make the frame as now I know its square.

[Not your average framer]

You've probably already quoted a price for framing this canvas and had the customer accept your quote. I would also guess that there to much fiddling about is going to dig into your profit margin. So you need a quick, professional, and easy to justify way out of this one!

Don't waste any more time on this, extend the rebate width with a 12mm slip (such as Rose and Hollis SL1 in ash) and frame it as it is. Afterwards, explain to the customer that the canvas was not square and the slip was necessary to enable this be framed. Problem solved!