Framing advice needed

[PeterAit]

I am about to mount and frame a small show. Color prints are all in the 16 x 20 inch size range but vary slightly because some are full-frame and some are cropped a bit. For example, there's a 15 x 21 print, a 14.375 x 21.5 print, a 15 x 17.5 print, and so on. I have 2 choices, it seems:

1) All prints in the same size matte and frame - matte border sizes will vary slightly.

2) All prints with the same size borders, matte and frame sizes will vary slightly.

I am tending toward #1 but would like to hear if anyone thinks #2 would look better.

Thanks,

Peter

[mikeseb]

I vote for #1. Whether it's a DIY framing job or you're having it done, standardization will make thngs easier and less expensive. The works aren't vastly different in size; you can take that into account when you hang the show to sequence  them so that they flow smoothly to the eye.

[Panopeeper]

I am tending toward #1 but would like to hear if anyone thinks #2 would look better.

Peter,

I have zero competence in answering your question from the perspective of the "producer". On the other hand, my thinking is, when I go into an exhibition, the first impression is made without the details of the individual pictures but with their appearance all toghether. This impression (on me will not be changed by the small differences in the effective image sizes and the mattes. The frame sizes, and even more, the arrangement would matter more (probably the bottom edge of the pictures will look like arranged by a drunken craftsman if the sizes are different.)

Again, take this as from a potential visitor, not from a competent exhibitor.

[Tklimek]

Although not nearly qualified to answer, my preference would be the same as yours.  Keep the standard frame size (so long as they are fairly close, as indicated) and simply change the mat border size.

Cheers and best of luck on your showing!

Todd in Chicago

I vote for #1. Whether it's a DIY framing job or you're having it done, standardization will make thngs easier and less expensive. The works aren't vastly different in size; you can take that into account when you hang the show to sequence  them so that they flow smoothly to the eye.

[bill t.]

The wider the borders in proportion to the images, the less any difference in matte width will matter, assuming you maintain the same outer frame size.  Basically, you could pick a constant frame size so that no matte border is less than say a self-important 3 inches wide and you should be OK.  Whatever you do, please don't have any 1" matte borders!

But really, just having the same framing style will give your show a strong sense of cohesion, wouldn't worry too much about variations in size.  In the end people are there to view the images.  More than once I have seen a great show then couldn't remember how the pieces were framed, and I usually pay a lot of attention to framing.

[JimBobTX]

Purists (especially more from the paint perspective) will tell you to go with #2. However, given the economy, the probability of not selling all your prints (and therefore being able to reuse "standard" size frames, I'd go with your choice of #1.

More to the point, I've just finished the first weekend of a major exhibit at a fine art photography gallery--25 pieces in all. I tried to standardize a number of 18 x 24 frames and 22 x 28 frames for exactly the reason I just stated. On the other hand, I did use specific sized frames when they just wouldn't work as well aesthetically--20 x 28, 21 x 32, 22 x 32. When the variance in size of the mat is as small as you suggest, going with #1 should not be a problem.

One of the questions you also have to consider is whether you are going to have a border around your image before your mat. The standard is generally 1/2, with 5/8 inch at the bottom if you are signing the photography, as opposed to the mat.

Hope this helps. I have not had any negative comments about my matting or frame sizing.

Jim Heupel

[neile]

1) All prints in the same size matte and frame - matte border sizes will vary slightly.

Both

#1 is great for two reasons:

1) It will speed up the framing process on the front end a bit as you can quickly chop all of your frames, mats, backing, and glazing to the standard frame size. Depending on where you get your frames it may cost lest as well, as many framing wholesalers offer discounts on quantities of the same size frame
2) It makes things much easier to hang on the wall

The downside to #1 is each of your mat window openings is a custom size. You can reduce this pain if you tweak your image area sizes as much as possible to get consistency (sometimes just adding 1/4" or 1/2" to the image size is enough to make it match another image, and doesn't hurt the asthetics).

If you do go with #2, there is one advantage:

1) You can ensure a consistent mat width for all your photos, which makes cutting the windows MUCH easier if you have stops on your mat cutter.

I recently framed 7 images to hang in my office and took a mixed approach. Four of the images are in a standard 11x14" frame and hung neatly as a series on one wall. The other three images, which vary in size from 6.5x20" to 15x17.5", are hung in frames that are custom sized to allow a 3" border. Hung with the center lines at the same height it looks great.

Neil

[Steven Draper]

I'd try and standardise your frame size. A bigger matt will absord the odd inch or two of difference in matt window size.

However you may find that some images just go out of balance and a second or third size may be required.

In my recent exhibition I did mix the size up a bit but I had some square format images and some 'widescreen' style ones. I also mixed up the size slightly in order to provide a couple different price points.

[PeterAit]

Thanks for all replies. Same-size frames it shall be!

Peter