Portfolios

[Black Dog]

I was wondering if all prints within a portfolio should be the same size and format -would it be ok to mix square and rectangular images for instance? Also is 20 images about the right number to show?

 

[bmac]

What type of portfolio are you using? I currently have two of them for different reasons. One holds 8x12 prints, and I have various side images on 8x12 paper in it. Looks clean enough for me. I use this one just to show latest work to friends, and keep it with me just in case someone asks about my work. My main one, the one I show to people serious about buying a print is actually a 16x20x2" archival box. All prints are matted to 16x20 and are in plastic sleves.

 

[ann]

salon printing is one manner . both vertical and horzital images are placed on a 16 X 20 board, but with all prints hanging vertically. this makes a show easier to hang. I suggest that my students use the same size board, images can be of varying sizes ; as the print should dicate the direction and size. This gives a nice unifrom look to the presentation. Then people do not have to turn the boards around to look at each print as each board is going to the same way.

 

[lee]

I, too, print small enough to allow mounting and matting on 16x20 board. Anything larger seems really hard to deal with. Like anything in photography the larger you go the more it costs. Plus, I like a lot of mat around the print. Like Ann said mount them so they are all verticals as it makes the hanging of the show easier. To Black Dog's (if that is really your name )question: Yes, 20 images seems to be about right for a small gallery show. Maybe 30/40 for a really large space. However, all the work should be strong and hang together, in my opinion.

lee\c

 

[roy]

I think it depends on the purpose of the portfolio. If it is to be carried around and shown for professional reasons, a standerd smaller size would be OK. If you are thinking of a presentation to be displayed, a uniform presentation in 20x16 frames (or mounts) has more impact. It is nice to see and I suppose to arrange, a display of constant size irrespective of the size of the image which would itself determine whether it would be landscape or portrait hung.

 

[Lex Jenkins]

We've been chattering about this issue on photo.net - how best to fashion a portfolio for gallery presentation.

There are some strong arguments in favor of using a single *paper* size for all prints. For example, a stack of 8x10s regardless of whether the print are itself is square or makes full use of the horizontal/vertical space.

Also, some say that a stack of prints, unmounted and with no tissue interleaving, is easier for a gallery owner/manager to sort through.

 

[c6h6o3]

Also, some say that a stack of prints, unmounted and with no tissue interleaving, is easier for a gallery owner/manager to sort through.

They should always be mounted and overmatted. Otherwise they are not finished prints. When showing them they should never have interleaving material in between. You want the gallery owner or curator to see as much of your work as possible in what is usually a very limited amount of time.

 

[FrankB]

Black and White Photography (Ailsa's mag) has recently run a small series on putting a portfolio together. Well worth a read...

 

[Ed Sukach]

salon printing is one manner . both vertical and horzital images are placed on a 16 X 20 board, but with all prints hanging vertically. this makes a show easier to hang. I suggest that my students use the same size board, images can be of varying sizes ; as the print should dicate the direction and size. This gives a nice unifrom look to the presentation. Then people do not have to turn the boards around to look at each print as each board is going to the same way.

I agree. Having "overseen" a "public" gallery (unique - in a building owned by the Town - anyone and everyone can have their own show) I have formed my own opinions about what seems to "work" and what doesn't.

The greatest "sin" of all - in my opinion is "over population"... stuffing (and I mean this literally) so many works on the walls, and tables, and windowsills - and leaning against the floor - that one cannot expend the energy to consider any *one* piece. The area we have for exhibition is about 20' x 30' - with 10' ceilings, and windows, and doors. The best "looking" exhibition I have seen has been about fifteen 20" x 24" framed works.

I have seen as many as 170 in an exhibition ...Far too many, in my opinion.

Having all works in a uniformly sized frames - including vertical - or horizontal orientation - while not critically imperative, does seem to suggest a degree of "seriousness" - professionalism in display ... sort of a well thought out,
"finished" presentation.

It is FAR better to have too few works in a show, than too many - a lesson far too many beginners have had real trouble trying to learn. It is one of the really valuable lessons learned in advertising; "White space can be an extremely effective element - especially when trying to sell high-end stuff."

I think the same holds true to portfolios. Mine is an 11" x 14" Panodia - with ten polyethylene pages -- each page holding two prints - twenty, in all. I am busily (along with everything else) engaged in re-printing everything in it on 11" x 14" paper - using whatever area I think "works" - probably in "vertical" format.

It is difficult to choose which images ones to include.

 

[Black Dog]

At the moment I'm in the process of putting together a portfolio to show to galleries-I'll probably use either one of those portfolio prints or an archival box with loose but mounted and sleeved prints. Whatever I go for, I'll also include some examples of published work (including 2 from Black and White Photography-good mag isn't it). Thanks for the above. Now all I have to do is finish building my darkroom...

 

[mvjim]

The most suggested form is the easiest to look at, loose prints in clear poly sleeves. Mounted and matted prints are generally a waste of money if presented to a gallery. Any gallery owner worth their money will know what the prints will look like when matted and many would rather not have the prints mounted for presentation. Always contact the galleries you are intending to show your work to prior to presentation to get their desired presentation method. Loose prints also allow the gallery to handel the prints freely for possible edit and arrangement.

 

[Michael A. Smith]

Lots of conflicting advice here. Mine is NEVER use those poly sleeves. To see the prints properly, they must be removed and for a gallery owner that is time consuming and unnecessary. Most will not bother to remove the sleeves--and hence, the work will not be properly seen. In that situation, there should be nothing between the print and the viewer.

Mounted and matted is best unless the prints are very large, in which case unmounted is fine.

And has been said: no slipsheets. Make it easy for them.

And no white gloves. They are insulting. If you feel a gallery does not know how to handle prints, why would you show them your work?

 

[gareth harper]

Hi I'm in the middle of putting together a simple portfolio.
It's going to be 12x16 inch prints which I'm having mounted.
It'll be carried around in a 23x19 inch art folder, the mounted prints placed in sleeves.
Now if you'll excuse my ignornace of these such matters, could somebody tell me what you all mean by matted, ie mounted and matted.
Thanks.

 

[lee]

Mats are the over mat that has the hole in the board and the mounted means it is stuck to a piece of mat board and the mat is on top of it all. The mat's function after making it look nice is to keep the photograpic image from touching the glass when it is framed.

lee\c

 

[gareth harper]

Thanks Lee.
I guess I'm getting mine mounted and matted then.