The Framers Forum

A very well heeled couple have introduced themselves to us recently - bringing in quite valuable old prints and maps of London. They used to patronise a framers in Sloane Square, who are by appointment only - their website is just one page - address, phone No, email address and 'by appointment only' underneath, and that's it!

Anyway - today they brought in these two prints - the mounted one had the price on the back £450 - from an 'upmarket' London Print/map dealer (I think they saw them coming frankly) - the one in the frame, they said, is 'very valuable'

The Sloane Square framer did the framing and they wanted them to frame the mounted one to match - it's gilded, apparently. Oh - and they'd not even noticed that brown spot until I pointed it out!

The mounted print is about 20x16 - the moulding is about 30mm - how much do you reckon they were quoted? Frame, horticultural glass and MDF backing? Go on, have a stab before highlighting here: Could I match the frame - I couldn't, there was similar but smaller from Simons and maybe something closer from Frinton Gallery gilded - they weren't worried about gold leaf. They opted, after a small lecture of the disadvantages of having things of value against glass and conservation in general, to have the framed one mounted and re-framed and the mounted one re-mounted and framed to match - both full conservation jobs at £109 each.

They would be emailing the upmarket framer to ask why they had not only not advised them on conservation but also framed this (plus a load of other stuff I'll be getting to re-frame) in a manner that would speed up the demise of the print, and visibly - possibly - already is.

To me it beggars belief that some framers in areas that most of us couldn't even afford a lock-up in, don't offer - are even ignorant about - quality work for quality artwork for quality customers.

[youtube]uVvcD4Czx4Y[/youtube]
Maybe they are a bit like this- and this is why this topic is in after hours, I really couldn't give a stuff about upmarket places selling carp, I do wonder though if that framer is a bit like this guy!

Those prices do help explain to me why i am so busy!

I know that West London premises are more expensive than mine(and almost everyone's) but that really takes the p**s.

And unless i miss my guess i think you are right about the value of those prints. they're probably old book plates. Doesn't mean they're not worth something, but still....







note to self

must look into moving to West End....££££££££££££

Hi John,

My old books and prints shop used to have a lot of old prints, so I know a bit about these things. For the right print in the right condition, those prices would not be anything exceptional for that part of London.

The dealer would have his work cut out finding prints like that, they hardly ever turn up at auctions, these days and when they do the big name dealers will bid some very serious money if they are good ones.

However they probably were bought from smaller regional shops like my old shop or at at regional auction for a good deal less than his London price tag.

With chic London premises to pay for and travelling all over the place buying stock, he probably needs to charge those sort of prices. Don't forget, once he's bought it, cleaned it and prepared it for sale, he might have a long wait before it will sell.

Roboframer wrote:Could I match the frame - I couldn't

It's a hand finished job. I recognised it straight away, I do that one. It's an old favorite and very profitable too! Quite a few hand finishers know that one, but it does take time and skill to distress it and make it look good. The guy who did it, made a nice job of it!

It consists of a Rose and Hollis scooped moulding, with a Richard Burbidge - rope twist moulding(which is also available from Rose and Hollis - 1st page inside front of catalogue). The rope twist will have been glued and pinned on top of the main moulding.

As for the price, well for that part of London, it's about what I would expect.

Hi Mark

Could you pass on the catalogue numbers of both mouldings please. I fancy have a go at that one and notice the rope twist comes in 3 widths.

Thanks - John.

Where I used to work we had the new MD of a big publishing company come in with some framed prints and originals, they all needed reglazing after the move from London. He told me that they were of value and to take the utmost care of them, when I took them apart, some of the artwork had been stuck to the mount with vinyl packing tape I called the customer in to have a look. He told me most had been framed by some very upmarket framers in London.
As a result we had all his future framing, he even brought his art director in to meet me us, and he told him to use us for the company's framing.

If I charged £200 for that rope-twisty job, I would think it a nice little earner.

There again, I haven't got Sloane Square rent/rates.

Jonny2morsos wrote:Could you pass on the catalogue numbers of both mouldings please. I fancy have a go at that one and notice the rope twist comes in 3 widths.

Hi John,

The scoop is "A108 obeche" and the rope twist is "C11". (check out the prices)

The scoop has a cut away back, which can be a problem when cutting on a Morso, depending on the piece of wood that you get. Before cutting i fill the cut away back with plasticine, so that I don't get a rough cut on the back.

The rope twist is a very hard wood and needs drilling with a pin with the head cut off, to prevent splitting the wood. The pins are only needed to hold everything together while the glue sets, so I don't drive them in all the way and then when the glue has set, I pull them out and fill the hole. (Punching the pins below the surface is just asking for trouble with such hard wood).

I find it much easier to glue and pin the rope twist in place after I have already joined the scoop. I did once try cutting the two after they had been glued together, it was not a good idea!

Did you notice the lumpy bits on the inner and outer edges? I've seen that technique before and I like the way that was done. It made the whole frame look quite old.

Not your average framer wrote:
Did you notice the lumpy bits on the inner and outer edges? I've seen that technique before and I like the way that was done. It made the whole frame look quite old.

They're probably organic like the scratches on the music centre in that video!

I think there are a couple of framers in London who still use hand moulders and shaped scraping planes to create most of their profiles, I'm not saying this is one of them, but it does not look like a Rose and Hollis or other stock profile to me, maybe wrong though...

Many would say whats the point of making something by hand when you can buy it for much less, but there will always be people who want to spend money on totally handmade work.

Add on to this the labour to make the gilded finish, which could be anywhere between 1 and 2 hours per foot, charged at Chelsea, Kensington or somewhere else frightfully expensive hourly rate and your soon close to the figure quoted.

Great shame to spoil all the skilled, hard work making the frame by putting the image against the glass.

Don't forget the MDF

The print, which has a plate mark, has also been trimmed - not necc by this framer though.

framemaker wrote:it does not look like a Rose and Hollis or other stock profile to me, maybe wrong though...

Mmmm, I think I'll bring their catalogue home from the shop and have a closer look, perhaps I was a bit hasty. However the two moulding quoted are the one which I use to do something which looks very similar.

Another possibility, is that this is an older frame which has been reworked and refinished. I do this myself and to this end keep an eye on my local auction sales room and even get things from time to time from local charity shops.

A lot of customers will gladly pay for an old frame to be altered and refinished to suit their item for framing and this is not looked upon by these customers as something second rate. This is a popular, well used and financially worthwhile service to be able to offer, but it is more viable in some locations than in others.

framemaker wrote:there will always be people who want to spend money on totally handmade work.

I hope so too! Besides the fact that the work is financially worthwhile, the satisfaction of doing such work is why I enjoy doing it. In all my working life, there is nothing I can think of which even comes close to this sort of work for job satisfaction.

framemaker wrote:Great shame to spoil all the skilled, hard work making the frame by putting the image against the glass.

As you may have guessed, I see a fair bit of this sort of work and a significant propotion of it is far from conservation standards. Even more amazing, some of the most beautifully executed frames are often those with the least regard for conservation requirement.

Not all of these galleries and dealers do their own framing. I have no way of knowing why there is no consideration given to conservation issues, perhaps the gallery owner or dealer has instructed the framer just to make the frame look good, but not to spend any extra on framing to conservation standards.

I suppose, it is just possible that it is a deliberate choice to be being in keeping with the inferior standards of an earlier age. After all, a nice wobbly piece of horticultural glass in an old frame seems to add considerably to the marketablity of many older works.

I'm not joking, I get paid to change the modern glass in an old frame, so that they can have the wobbly stuff. I keep old screw rings, top screw eyes, bits of gesso frame ornamentation, slips and liners, when they come my way and even stock some of the old fashioned cotton based picture cord. When customers get to know about it, they want it on the latest antique acquistion, and will pay to have it done. There are other framers who also does this.

Those who've had a good look at the way that this frame has been executed, may have noticed various "lyrical imperfections" where there is an imperfection showing through the finish. Part of the technique and skill in this work is in how these imperfection are produced without looking contrived and still maintaining the expected level of workmanship. Those who want to learn more will do well to have a good look at the posted pictures. It's a nicely executed job!

Not your average framer wrote:It's a nicely executed job!

Executed IMHO is exactly what it should be.

My customers, who the other framer would probably have referred to as clients - have been victims of rip-off hype - I subtly suggested that - and they, not so subtly - agreed! The lady (a trustee of the Royal Albert Hall, amongst other things) said, that after listening to me she would rather of had a skinny black plastic frame around something treated the right way within it.

And anyway, I just don't get the practice of making new frames look like battered ones. Ideally you'd want the artwork to be good as new, so why not the frame? Who- in those days, would have bought a frame with chunks missing? !! Gawd I wish my customers would today, that would save me a whole LOAD of grief with replacements and credit notes.

The customers were, and admit they were, victims of perception - Sloane Square? Oh Yeah - must be the bollocks. Not! Load of - end of!

Having had a more careful look at the posted photos, I'm not so sure if the main moulding is a scoop after all. It looks like it could be, but it's not that easy to be sure.

With a bit of filler applied either side of the rope twist, to blend it in and to look like it's all into one moulding, I still think it looks much the same.

There is also a handly ridge feature on the A108 scoop which helps to line up the rope twist before fixing it into place.

Lokks more like a reverse section to me Mark. Bit like RH A611 (p27) but bigger. Bit difficult the judge the scale.
As you say, not difficult at all to knock up. Could even be a restored old frame.

prospero wrote:Looks more like a reverse section to me Mark.

Hi Peter,

It still looks like a scoop to me. This is nuts! Why is this so difficult to figure out what we are looking at? Now I'm wishing I hadn't bothered!