Oh. Matting.
Don't need no stinkin' mattes! They just attract fingerprints and blood and are great backgrounds for displaying pieces of dust.
Personally I like the classic look of canvas and frame alone, especially on the big, big pieces. So do my clients. The whole prissy matte + glass thing only applies to paper prints, I was so glad to let that stuff go.
If you really want big white spaces around your image use 2 to 5 inch wide linen liners. Which are basically flat frames covered with cloth. Hint the oatmeal variety will show off the dust a little less than the pure white type. If it's good enough for Peter Lik, it's good enough for us. Please note that is not me, at all, and I consider that a small piece.
Peter cheats for his shiny delicate chemical prints and puts plex either in front of the matte or between the print and the liner.
See here's my booth at the first of my two recent back-to-back Art Fairs, the one where I DIDN'T catch the Swine Flu, as opposed to the second one. You dudes can laugh all you want at my classic antique gold mattless frames but please note that I sold 41 large pieces and took 12 more orders and that washed out wonder at upper left won Best of Show at one of the top shows in the country, in direct competition with $10,000 original oil paintings. Which all goes to prove that what we photographers dote upon and what John Q. Public is moved to buy are different critters entirely. Ignore the chair, it's not my fault.
[attachment=18194:BillT_Weems_Booth.jpg]