Tue. Jan 07, 2003
Philosophy of Framing
Philosophy of Framing – (via Dangerousmeta) Frames mean different things to different people. “Major living artists such as David Hockney and Howard Hodgkin still believe frames serve a purpose beyond the purely practical. ’They’re where the picture stops and the world begins,’ Hodgkin says. When he paints, he carries his brush strokes over from the canvas on to the frames themselves ’to make them part of the picture’.”
Obviously, this is an artist’s choice … where does their work end? Most artwork does not link the frame and the surface via the medium itself, like Hockney and Hodgkin do, but many artists are quite concered about the surroundings of their work, at least the part they think they can control; the frame.
However, most art is created for sale, and once it has a new owner, the artist’s marriage of frame and artwork is quite divorceable: “While those who reproduce art apparently take no interest in its setting, those who have custodianship usually think it could be improved. ’The frame is the only thing you can change about a painting,’ says Michael Gregory, managing director of Arnold Wiggins, a leading British frame dealer. ’Once you’ve bought it, that is the only way you can personalise it.’ ”
“In the 19th century, when exhibition organisers crammed paintings on to every available inch of wall, European artists developed what became known as the salon frame, its ever-wider border a way of keeping the competition at arm’s length. Now curators and collectors are constructing virtual frames of ’quiet time’ and ’breathing space’ around their cherished possessions.”
And that’s pretty close to my personal position. From my days oil painting in my youth, I can see how the choice of frame might be more aesthetically critical with a painting, as the artwork and frame are edge to edge. With photography, the print itself creates a “surround” (if you create 1-2” borders when you print it), and most people matte the photo for framing, creating a further separation between image edge and frame.
Once a piece of artwork leaves your hands, it must adapt to its new home. For example, if you manage to get your image of Atlanta hung at The Varsity, it will have a red frame. Or perhaps someone bought your print as a mate for two others in their home, and now it will be framed as they are. Or maybe they want something to match their couch. The variables of people’s needs and desires are endless.
Plus, framing isn’t cheap. Or rather, it’s very variable. You can get a $20 frame or a $200 frame. And this isn’t a totally moot discussion, as I’m in the midst of planning a “print store” for PhotoDude.com, so I’ve had ask myself these questions. What size prints will you sell, and are there frames commonly available for those sizes (who the hell came up with 11.7×16.5 inch printing paper?)? Will you sell your prints matted and framed, ready to hang (No)? Or will you allow people a lower print purchase price, and the option to matte and frame them however they see fit (Yes)?
But it is often very hard to “let go” of these creations we sometimes view as our children. We want them to be “just so” when they leave us, and never change. However, you must let your children go out into the world, even if it means strangers buy them new clothes so they “fit in” to their new home. They’ll still be recognized as your children.
Me, I’m sending mine out naked.
Published 06:17AM, Tue, Jan 07 2003
Category: Art
Previous: «« Assembling the Big Stick ««
Next: »» City of Brotherly Love, Part Two »»
Peanut Gallery
You're going to end up surrounding them with some sort of support for shipping (unless you're planning on a mailing tube..yuck), so why not go with offering mounted and matted images? It lends an air of artistry, large quantities of machine cut mats aren't too pricey if you want to avoid the hassles of handcutting your own, and it's a step you'll be able to take towards proper archival care of your image.
First, machine cut mattes won't work for probably 75% of my images ... I don't crop in standard formats, it's per image. Therefore, each matte must be custom cut. Plus, I don't buy the concept of a matte for image protection during shipping. Yes, should some shipping gorilla crush an edge, the matte board would be ruined, but the print would be undamaged. But the reality is, in terms of materials, the custom cut double matte board is more expensive than the print itself. So you must make a simple yet strong and reproduceable shipping container to protect the matte board. Which contains the print. You must pay for shipping the 16 x 20 (now at least 18 by 22 in a package) matte board. Which contains the print. Meanwhile, shipping a cover protected print in one of those yucky 3 to 4 inch diameter hard tubes is both cheaper and more protective of the print itself. But there is another point that does speak to the reality of matting, and that is common frame sizes versus common printer paper sizes. Seen any 11.7 x 16.5 inch frames lately? How about 13 x 19? The reality is that both of those print sizes must me matted to mate with a common frame size. Two of the prints sizes I'm considering offering would fit in common frames, but the largest, the 13 x 19, needs a matte. The question becomes, do I do that, with the attendant extra work and extra cost per print, or do I let the customer do that, based on their own tastes and budget concerns. For example, I'm betting you and I would take rather divergent approaches to framing a work for our home. It's a pretty subjective thing, and I'm just not the type who must dictate how his images will be hung. Between that, and the very real shipping issues, I'm leaning strongly towards selling unmatted prints, with the larger ones shipped in tubes, and some "advice" on how to settle them into their new home.
I'll buy tons of your "western trip" shots. (Grand Canyon, nationsl parks). They are awesome!
What sort of system do you plan on using to let people buy prints? Setup a seperate 'store' somewhere on your site? Integrate it into the current photo-log (a la Noah)? Just curious. Eventually I'd like to be able to sell prints from http://inconspicuous.net (I know it'll be a while. My photos are anywhere good enough to warrent paying for them. :)
Amy, I'm planning on "adding a wing" for the store. I'll likely add a link on Pixel Pile pages for those who might want a random image for a print, but I'll be selling a lot more than just Pixel Piles. As my brother-in-law notes, a lot of people want prints of the Grand Canyon, Monument Valley, Antelope Canyon, etc., plus I'll be adding a reworked Civil War Series, and I'll probably add some of the shots from Charleston, as well. And the images will likely look a bit different prepared for print than they do in Pixel Pile, prepared for monitor display. Like you, I've still got a lot to work out. It's likely still a couple of months away from reality.
Frames are evil! Frames must be destroyed! ...Oh, wait, you're not talking about HTML.
Recent Comments
- Reid (Republican Postmortem)
- elburro (Republican Postmortem)
- Jim (The Math Says No Lines In Georgia, And A Long Wait For Results)
- Reid (The Math Says No Lines In Georgia, And A Long Wait For Results)
- Jim (The Math Says No Lines In Georgia, And A Long Wait For Results)
- Jim (The Math Says No Lines In Georgia, And A Long Wait For Results)
ReidStott.com
Photography
by Reid Stott
A decade of web design experience. Two decades of photography experience. All available to you, and your project. View my portfolio online, then let's talk about your needs.ReidStott.com
Before getting the new Canon i850 for Christmas, I had the local photo store print some of my digital pics. A choice few, sent to family members, I had matted (which is no cheap proposition either). Once the new Canon was set up, I simply ran off a bunch of prints to give to friends. But I doubt many of those "just prints" will be found hanging on walls, while I'm sure the ones I had matted most likely will. Of course, people buying a print are already more inclined to display it.