The Framers Forum

There have been many conversations over the years where the client does not want to see any visible means of support for a 3-D object or work of art. Thus, I am proposing this conservation regarding the subject of ---- Why is this practice not acceptable for a picture frame shop client; while it is perfectly acceptable in a museum to have mounting mechanical widgets visible?

Personally, I feel that there is nothing wrong with seeing small inconspicuous mounts and or clear acrylic mounts. Mounts are designed via engineering to overcome the rules of gravity, expansion and contraction, etc.

If it's possible to support an object using hidden means they can have it.
If it's not they can't.
Here's a frame I was asked to frame, but it was going to be tricky to support as the frame was crumbling and unstable.
I decided to use canvas offsets and the customer was delighted.

Done with soldered brass rod - minimal visibility

JFeig wrote:There have been many conversations over the years where the client does not want to see any visible means of support for a 3-D object or work of art. Why is this practice not acceptable for a picture frame shop client; while it is perfectly acceptable in a museum to have mounting mechanical widgets visible?

Because when your customer goes into a museum they *think* they can't see any means of support because the *know* it is a museum and that a museum will have had things done to the highest specification possible. So they don't see the supports, so they want at home exactly the same as they saw in the museum.

Just a theory.

When it comes to museum displays they tend to be horizontal cases. Or shelves in cabinets. They don't tend to do 'frames' as such.
Much easier to mount say a heavy chunk of rock if you can lay it flat on a cushioned support. It isn't going to go anywhere.

I used to mount various items to appear to be floating in mid air, I've even framed some things with a space and a mirror behind the item, which really get people wondering, especially if the item is set back from a mount which is obviously further forward than the item.

However, I have not done anything like that since before the 2008 credit crunch. There's a limit to what many people are willing to spend these days and no matter has interesting the effect may look, to justify the extra cost is another matter.

You may well be aware now of my interest in Arabic/Islamic artwork and geometry. Bought this item of artwork along with a second similar item in the Grand Bazaar Istanbul several years ago. As the artwork has possibly Persian script on both sides I wanted to float it so as you could see both sides. I encapsulated it between two sheets of Mylar but the static was insufficient to hold it in place so I used a small amount of starch past to secure it position applied using the male part of velcro - hence small dots of paste. The mounting etc was done for an article in Arqadia's 4Walls but I shall remount the artwork in a more traditional Arabic/Islamic style.

I have used this method of support on a number of occasions when a customer wishes too see both sides of the artwork. Its relatively simple when one gets the hang of it.

Personally I don't regard melinex encapsulation as being 'no visible means of support', I regard it as 'hidden behind something very shiny and somewhat less than flat.' Personally I find it rather distracting and would rather have a visible - but not distracting - means of support.

How about this?
AR glass on the front, 3mm acrylic on the back.