how important are frames?

[Wayne]

Its been a few years since I displayed prints anywhere (OK maybe more than a few) and for some as perennially broke as I am the question of how much to spend on frames always comes up. I have little artistic sensibility about frames; when I look at art I don't look at the damn frame. If I were to consider buying art, which I never do, I would just buy a new frame if I didn't like the existing one.

But I also realize other people are likely to be far more concerned with things that I consider superficial and unimportant, and "other people" are who would be looking at my prints. Obviously if I was invited to exhibit at MOMA (I haven't checked my mail yet today!) I would probably invest in quality frames. Aside from that, I'd like to hear from experienced exhibitors and successful sellers about their opinions on the importance of frames. Is it adequate for a frame to merely not be an ugly, annoying distraction? Or does it need to add some elegance (keeping in mind I can't afford elegance)?

 

[Ian Grant]

Frames are important, ideally you should look at what others are using and make your own choice. Yo need frames that don't distract the viewer but look good. My current set were made for me the frame-maker getting the wood profile cut specifically for me, I bought about 80 frames and he later made some extras.

Ian

 

[eddie]

I think they're important. Quality framing allows the viewer to see your work as a finished product, and also shows them that you have enough belief in your work to invest in it.
Depending on the venue, though (if an art festival/flea market), framing some, while having matted/bagged prints in bins is a good option.

 

[Luckless]

Frame styles also really depend on the style you're marketing to. Personally I'm a fan of fairly simple black wooden frames with about an inch and a half on face width, and a good sized white mat around the image. This is of course a question with no real easy answer.

 

[Wayne]

also shows them that you have enough belief in your work to invest in it.

I have belief, just no money.

 

[eddie]

Do you have a specific opportunity to show your work? If so, what sort of venue? What size are the prints? How many?

 

[Wayne]

Frame styles also really depend on the style you're marketing to. Personally I'm a fan of fairly simple black wooden frames with about an inch and a half on face width, and a good sized white mat around the image. This is of course a question with no real easy answer.

I would just be showing them in small local venues, maybe cafes, occasionally the local art gallery or the local artists club gallery that gets visited by tourists. The art club's gallery is what I have my sights on right now, because I've done the others in the past and just want to try something different. My work is not ever going to be popular with the tourist crowd because its more abstract or obtuse than scenic and most tourists want scenic. But I also think it will stand out a bit for that reason. Once that wealthy patron finds me of course I'll have to upgrade my frames, but then I'll be able to afford it.

 

[eddie]

Check for sales at your local art supply store, like Michael's. They usually have pre-made frames for 30-40 percent off. Make your prints to fit standard sizes, so you won't need custom frames.

 

[Wayne]

Do you have a specific opportunity to show your work? If so, what sort of venue? What size are the prints? How many?

I have many small-time opportunities, listed above, but nothing imminent. I just want to start getting my prints out there again. The artist club is my current interest, and all you need to do is join for small fee. Its probably worth going there and looking at what people are using, but there are few photographers and no analog photographers in the club. Part of what brought this question up is talking to a painter friend who is in the club about her frames. She and another painter I know said they buy "cheap" frames, but when I asked what that meant she said the cheapest ones for her smallest work were in the 30's. That's way out of my price range, unless I only hang one print.

When I exhibited 10+ years ago I used the nicest looking (to my undiscriminating eye) cheap black aluminum frames from Michael's. They look fine from viewing distance but up close you can tell they're cheap. I don't think I ever spent more than $12-15 on a 16x20 frame for 11x14 prints. I also bought a stack of painted black wood document frames for 8x10 prints when they were on sale, but I later had doubts about whether I should use them and I don't think I ever did. I still have all of these.

Although I've showed my work a number of times, I've never sold a single print to a stranger. A well-off friend of mine has bought a number of my prints, and reframed them to hang in his office. Its probably more the fact that my work admittedly doesn't have mass appeal rather than the frame quality, but these things get you thinking...some I do too much of already.

 

[calebarchie]

Just peg it up on a clothes line. Terribly trashy and unappealing with no appreciation for ones own work, but hey its cheap!

 

[eddie]

Check Craigslist. I often see people selling framed art inexpensively. It's not unusual to find 11x14's/16x20's for around $10.00. You can swap out their art for your prints.

 

[removed account4]

target and wally's often times have extremely affordable pre made frames.
i worked at a frame shop years ago and learned how to glue /assemble "sticks"
if you have a corner vice and wood glue, eyelet screws, framer's wire a brad tool
and a bunch of brown craft paper you can approach a frame shop
and a make your own i did that 20-25 years ago, it was fun, but time consuming
i've opted for other ways to present now
using store bought frames ( like target ) and print to the size of the frame.
i "plak mount" some of my work now, too.

 

[Wayne]

Check Craigslist. I often see people selling framed art inexpensively. It's not unusual to find 11x14's/16x20's for around $10.00. You can swap out their art for your prints.

That still leaves the question: what makes a frame good enough, or what kind of frame isn't good enough? I don't trust my eye or my (lack of) "frame sensibility", so merely finding cheap frames doesn't tell me whether they are "good enough" although I can certainly detect "total garbage" (I hope!)

 

[eddie]

My work is not ever going to be popular with the tourist crowd because its more abstract or obtuse than scenic...

Not knowing your work, it's hard to say what sort of framing would be appropriate. If it's extremely abstract/obtuse/conceptual, you can always do something extreme, like using mat board/saran wrap/tape (like the Starn twins).
Another option is to work backwards. Find cheap frames, then decide what sort of print to put in them. If you get a deal on an ornate gold-gilded frame, it may not be appropriate for a modern abstract, but it could work for something like gothic architecture. Likewise, they'd also work for a soft focus, sepia toned landscape.

 

[Wayne]

No my work isn't that far out, it's just not the commercial pretty pictures of sunsets, fall colors and lighthouses that tourists around here gobble up. Simple frames are all I think I need, I just don't know what the average viewer thinks is too simple or too cheap. My whole premise is that I am not smart enough to know where the lower limit for an appropriate frame that doesn't detract from the work lies.

 

[calebarchie]

Invest in some very nice, high quality standard frames any color as long as it is black. These frames can just be for display purposes, offer to sell matted only as buyers often want a frame to suit their own space anyway. If they want the frame as well then add on the $$$.

Re-use. re-cycle and repeat for all your works.

Can't go wrong no?

 

[Wayne]

Invest in some very nice, high quality standard frames any color as long as it is black. These frames can just be for display purposes, offer to sell matted only as buyers often want a frame to suit their own space anyway. If they want the frame as well then add on the $$$.

Re-use. re-cycle and repeat for all your works.

Can't go wrong no?

I like the idea. I don't have the "invest" part right now. But it may be worth saving for a couple.

So what would qualify as "very nice, high quality standard frames any color as long as it is black"? Link to examples?

 

[eddie]

Simple frames are all I think I need, I just don't know what the average viewer thinks is too simple or too cheap. My whole premise is that I am not smart enough to know where the lower limit for an appropriate frame that doesn't detract from the work lies.

Wood or metal. Avoid plastic frames, even if they mimic the look of metal/wood. Basic black metal frames are always good.

 

[MattKing]

So what would qualify as "very nice, high quality standard frames any color as long as it is black"? Link to examples?

A lot of people seem to be very happy with APUG advertiser Frame Destination: http://www.framedestination.com/picture-frames-metal.html

Certainly their participation on the forum seems to be evidence of a good focus on customer service.

 

[calebarchie]

I like the idea. I don't have the "invest" part right now. But it may be worth saving for a couple.

So what would qualify as "very nice, high quality standard frames any color as long as it is black"? Link to examples?

Really up to you, if you want to make your life easier there are a range of standard metal (alu) profile frames for exhibition. Go to any local framer and ask around I suppose.

Nielsen is a common one for this kind of thing.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

Just my 2c worth on framing - it's been said before, but bears repeating: the frame should not distract from the work. My personal philosophy on framing is that the frame should exist to provide protection to the work, visual separation of the work from the wall, and visual separation of the work in the frame from the other works displayed adjacent. It should be clean, appropriate to the work, and not call attention to itself either through excess (gererally baroque gilt frames are not a good match for photographs, but any choice can be justified) or shoddiness (don't ever use cheap frames that make your work look cheap, and if your frames or the glass are getting scratched/dented/marked and dirty, replace it immediately).

I'll tell you a story about a photographer whose work I saw at a group art show. He was a budding wedding photographer. He selected works to exhibit to try and promote his wedding business. The work itself was middle-of-the-road, competent but not exciting. He opted to frame on the super-cheap - he used those black plastic "borderless" frames (the kind that you put the photo in and snap the glass in place on top of the photo), but instead of putting the glass back in, he put matted prints in the frames, no glass. The mats were not precisely cut, so they did not fit well in the frames. The windows on the mats looked like they had been cut with children's safety scissors instead of a proper razor mat cutter. The presentation was so atrocious that the quality of the work was very hard to remember, and spoke very poorly of his pride of workmanship- I would never hire him to photograph anything because I would be concerned about the quality of product he would deliver.

I'm not suggesting that you would do anything so thoughtless as the aforementioned slob. However, if you are on a limited budget, my recommendation would be to spend more per frame and frame fewer pieces. Just hang three or four nicely framed pieces. Make those pieces be the show-stoppers of your body of work. Have a website of some other way to refer people to your catalog of images (at least a postcard with your contact information on it!) that you can display along with the work for interested buyers to see more. People want to buy work that says "high value" to them. If you don't suggest that through your presentation, then they're not going to buy unless you're selling so cheap you lose money on the transaction.

 

[BMbikerider]

In my world of photography I would not think of hanging a print unless it was properly framed behind glass (or at least Acrylic). Giving it protection like that, will ensure the extended life and stop atmospheric polution affecting the image. Then there is the effect that a frame has in divorcing the image from it's surroundings and ensuring it stands out to it's best advantage.

 

[Wayne]

I like the idea of getting a few good quality frames. It best addresses the problem, which is basically my insecurity about not knowing which cheap frames are "good enough" to not distract from the work. If I know I have good quality frames instead of cheap ones, I remove that worry completely and that's what I want.

It also will be well-suited for the club gallery I'm looking at, because I really don't think they have wall space for more than a couple framed prints. Plus I really don't have much show-worthy recent work, only a few. I don't have great desire to dust off my old Cibachromes and show those again. The point of showing again is to provide a kick in the rear to produce more show worthy work. Lately I've gotten in the bad habit of just making half-assed prints that could be made better, and tossing them into a pile of half-assed prints.
If I have to show it forces me to put more effort into quality prints and presentation.

While I think black works for 99% of what I do, I have one image that is almost completely black. Its a solarized contact print "positive" made from a lumen print "negative". Its all black except for the flower, which is various shades of gray and white. I don't know if that would work best with a black frame or not. Maybe a black frame, but with an oversized mat? (like mount it in a 16x20 mat/frame)? I dunno-most of the aesthetics of matting/framing still escape me. Seems like an art form of its own.

 

[paul ron]

Depends on who is buying.

 

[Wayne]

Depends on who is buying.

Nobody is buying, that's partly why I asked the question. Not that my frames are necessarily the reason for my sales record, it could be the junk I put in them.

Anywho, today I went to the art institute, Michaels and Target. I looked closely at all the frames on all the art, something I've never done. One photographer used thin, silvery aluminum that I don't think I'd use but they looked OK. On close examination the corners weren't very well machine-matched but few people would notice it. Another photographer had a large exhibit of B&W prints in large, medium-width (1") black wood frames with an occasional white one. I have to say the white doesn't do much for me. The frames looked nice, well made, perfectly cornered, clean and unremarkable. They didn't ooze "expensive", and since he was showing dozens of large prints he'd have to be wealthy in order to afford that many expensive frames so they probably weren't. They were not a distraction, they were functional. I liked that width.

On to Target and Michaels, this part will be short. Even the most expensive frames they had on display looked cheap, and almost all looked like plastic or some plasticky susbstance. I didn't see if the frame shop offered anything better.