The Framers Forum

i took some pictures in today to get reframed the moulding used was plastic but the mounts inside were alpha mat boards from nielsen bainbridge.so its got me thinking many people use plastic moulding as a cheaper alternative to wood as they say wood is to expensive fair play to to them.but if that is the case why put such expensive mounts in if they are using cheaper frames why not put a cheaper mountboard in like daler or colourmount board i find it strange and would welcome peoples thoughts on the matter.and to let everyone know theres a nice wooden moulding and some bainbridge board being used in the re framing of the picture as you cant put a price on quality.

From the normal distance you'd view a picture from, many synthetic mouldings look every bit as good as the same thing in wood; many look like carp too, but then again, many wood mouldings do!

Also at normal viewing distance you shouldn't really "see" the frame ... but that's another thing.

Also, maybe the framer uses cheaper mouldings in order to reduce the cost of a package that still offers good protection and maybe also the framer gets such a good discount on artcare boards ...... and could also be on a Nielsen van route and so never pays carriage .... that it puts it on a par to, or even cheaper than, inferior boards.

I use artcare as default, the customer can downgrade the moulding but never the mount board.

Exactly. Put the money where it will do most good.

Plastic mouldings do not leak all the bad stuff that lurks in wood so maybe the framer was doing his very best to protect the artwork.

Some plastic mouldings are now not much cheaper than their wood equivalent. Soem plastics are very good to work withnow and give an excellent result that most people wouldn't know the difference. As others have said the framer has spent money on protecting the artwork so I would say hats off to him he knows what is important.

Daler is considered as cheap? What does everyone use as their 'standard' mountboard?

Bainbridge Alpha

Bainbridge Alphamat.

Arqadia Conservation Hayseed

BaBaZa wrote:Plastic mouldings do not leak all the bad stuff that lurks in wood

Wood doesn't either, not really. It's end grain that's the worry and end grain is what you get if you cut a plank at 90 degrees, so even a frame's mitre is not pure end grain, and that's not in contact with the artwork or the mount/spacer/whatever anyway. What's in contact is side grain, which is less of a worry/virtually no worry - if, that is, the rebate is unfinished; many are.

Really?

Never knew that.

That gives me an idea for a museum quality MDF backing board. Just comb the fibres during the manufacturing process so that they lie paralell to the surface and have no end grain exposed, apart from the cut edges.

Better still, why not cut thin wooden panels from the raw wood and use them as backing boards. Oh wait, hasn't that been tried already?

Your other theory is equally interesting: Take a stick of wood and cut across it at an angle other than 90 degrees and somehow, magically, less end grain is exposed.

The frame rebate is cut along the grain (side grain); not across it (end grain), at whatever angle, but the shallower the angle the less end grain, until it becomes no angle and there's no end grain at all, surely??) - the bits you cut across the grain (your mitres) don't come in to contact with the frame contents/artwork and if the side grain that would is a concern, you can seal it in many ways and would do that naturally if a (non-wooden) glass spacer was used - just the same as you would use an under-mount and a MDF - or even a plywood backing board, which would be more of a concern than something only in proximity to the perimeters.