The Framers Forum

I am restoring the picture rails in my 1930's bungalow that were ripped out before we moved in. When positioning the D rings and measuring wire length to hang the pictures from the rails it is easy to do by trial and error. However if it was for a customer I would be interested to know if there is a known relationship between the distance below the picture rail the picture is to hang, the position on the frame for the D ring and the vertical size of the frame.

Richard

Welcome!
I generally fix D-rings 1/3 the way down the frame. The amount of slack in the cord (i.e. how deep the inverted 'V' is) depends on the aspect ratio and weight. I treat each on its merits - don't know if there is any formal/informal best practice.
John.

My brother in law is a professional picture hanger and states that the centre of the picture should be about 1.6-1.7m from the floor. As for d-rings, third of the way down for me too.

I have heard a few old stories about hanging picture from rails.

I heard it said that they would be hung deliberately leaning forward so they could be seen better when they were hung relatively high. Some houses have ceilings that are quite high - 12-13ft maybe. And if you think about it, hanging them at eye level doesn't really work if you are sitting down. A lot of Victorian frames I have seen have the hangings about halfway down. Go figure.

There is also the theory that having the picture leaning forward makes it so the front doesn't gather dust.

But if you want to hang from a picture rail, I would put d-rings quite near the top of the frame.

Many of the pictures I have seen that were hung from rails, such as those in my grand parents house, were hung with chain. This was clearly visible between the top of the picture and the rail and was a little more decorative than cord or wire. The chain on my Mum and Dad's wedding photo still in its original frame (late 40's and still up to the job) is a little under a quarter of the way down. The chain is not held in by D rings but by screw eyes, also of the era I guess.

When we "restored" our last house which was late Victorian, we had to put back picture rails in many of the rooms. I was surprised as to how high on the wall was their original position, quite a bit higher than our previous 30's house. They would have had to have had the chain or whatever exposed to hang the pictures where they could be seen due to the high ceilings. They would also hang them from two chains vertically as well as one in the inverted V. I guess this would be more stable if the fixing were closer to the top?

Broadening the subject a little, is this also the reason traditionally that mounts were cut wider at the bottom so as to provide a more even perspective when looking up at a picture hanging at an angle?

Thats my understanding as to why the bottom of a mount is weighted- I find even borders stick out like a sore thumb

It depends on high the picture rail is off the ground, could be different for every house across the country.

AllFramed wrote: Broadening the subject a little, is this also the reason traditionally that mounts were cut wider at the bottom so as to provide a more even perspective when looking up at a picture hanging at an angle?

Yes, so it also depends again on how high the picture is hanging, the higher it is the more you have on the bottom border, so it looks the same as the sides borders. I think it's a personal thing, me I'm not bothered if the borders are even all round, in fact all the pictures in my house have even borders.

Steve

That's interesting about weighted bottom borders and picture rails. I agree that four even borders just doesn’t look right making the image appear to be too low in the frame, even if viewed straight on never mind hanging above eye level. I always weight the bottom border on my jobs but it would make life easier if all the borders were the same size when cutting on the old Ultimat Gold

I think visible chains is the way to go when hanging from a picture rail

Showing my age i suppose but as a kid living in police houses - i always remember 'picture rails' and pictures hanging from them on chains (for heavy jobs) and cord / string even for lighter jobs . When did builders stop fitting picture rails ? anyone know .

I think picture rails went after the war. The Victorian, 20's and 30's houses I have lived in have all had picture rails (or did originally). Post war properties my parents and grandparents have lived in did not. Not definitive but what I have seen.

A quick google has found this interesting site. There is no reference to the picture rail post-war. It suggests a gradual slide down the wall as time moved on. http://www.bricksandbrass.co.uk/design_ ... ldings.php

I'm with Steve re the even borders, all pictures I do for myself are even. Just look better to me. However, if customers ask and prefer weighting, or the setting is right, I am happy to do that too.

Thanks for that link - interesting site. The other thing i wanted to post was i havn't seen too many 'green ladies' on walls lately or for that matter ducks flying over the fireplace !!

AllFramed wrote:There is no reference to the picture rail post-war. It suggests a gradual slide down the wall as time moved on.

When it had slid down too far it became a dado rail.

O.k., I get my coat!

By the way one third down for me too, but a lot of older frames which customers bring in for re-framing seem to be one quarter down instead.

What I have found:

The 1.6/1.7m to picture centre looks good. My picture rails are at 2m so this means top edge of pictures are at about 100mm below rail.

All the pictures need to be hung with top edges at same height - irrespective of size.

Picture rail hooks push the hanging away from the wall by about 15mm (other style rail mouldings may be more or less than this) so if D-rings are too high up the frame the picture has a tendency to swing free of the wall. So a standard 1/3 of the way down the frame works well for most pictures - a full length wall mirror in our hall needed to be about 1/4 way down the frame.

Regarding mount board borders, I always make them unequal except for prints where I have, mostly, a 10mm border between edge of the print and the mountboard top and sides and 15mm at the bottom for signing and numbering which means the mountboard can have equal borders but overall is still wider at the bottom.

Richard