Standards when printing for an exhibition

[MilesL]

I’m currently preparing an exhibition of my work and would really appreciate some input from those of you with more darkroom and exhibition experience.

The plan is to print both 35mm (2:3) and medium format 6×6 negatives on fb paper, primarily in 8×10 and 16×20 inches. I like the idea of having variation in print sizes across the exhibition, rather than everything being uniform.

Where I’m unsure is how to handle borders and aspect ratios.

Since 35mm doesn’t match the 4:5 ratio of the paper, there will naturally be white space if I print full-frame. Part of me really likes that — both visually and conceptually. There’s something honest about preserving the full negative and the original paper size. At the same time, I’m wondering whether it might look awkward or unresolved to have images “floating” on the sheet with uneven borders.

So I’m trying to decide between a few approaches:

- Keeping the full paper size and embracing the white borders
- Trimming the paper after printing to match the image

I’m also thinking about how this interacts with presentation. If the prints end up framed with passepartouts, the paper size becomes less important, but if they’re shown more directly, the borders will play a much bigger role.

One additional thing I’ve been wondering about is measurement consistency. The paper sizes are in inches, but I sometimes find it more intuitive to think about image size and borders in centimetres. Is it generally considered poor practice to mix units like that when planning prints, or is it something people do without much concern as long as the final result is consistent? I'm thinking about printing a 16x24cm image on 8x10 inch paper.

So I guess my questions are:

- Are there any commonly accepted standards for border sizes in darkroom printing, especially for exhibitions?
- How do you approach consistency when mixing formats like 35mm and 6×6 in the same exhibition?
- And are there any strong opinions or conventions around working in inches vs centimetres when sizing images and borders?

I’m aware that this ultimately comes down to personal preference, but I’d really value hearing how others think about these decisions, and if there are any standards.

Thanks in advance.

 

[Paul Howell]

The other option for 35mm is file out the negative carrier so that when printed there is black edge showing that the negative was printed without cropping, then printing the negative full frame trimming the paper to match the ratio of the negative.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Have you checked with the gallery exhibiting your work what would be best?

 

[Saganich]

I approach consistency by trying to get a minimum 2 inch (5cm) side border and a maximum 1/4 inch (0.5 cm) weight on top and bottom border (top is 1/4 inch less than bottom). For 6x6 I like to mat in portrait orientation with bottom boarder being roughly twice the top boarder (> 2 inches) and at lease 2 inches on each side. Over the years these dimensions seem to be the most pleasing.

 

[koraks]

- And are there any strong opinions or conventions around working in inches vs centimetres when sizing images and borders?

AFAIK there's no such requirement and you're entirely free to choose within the limits of what is artistically desirable and technically feasible.

The latter constraints also apply to your questions about borders etc, and even the question whether (or to what extent) consistency is needed.

You're in the driver's seat!

 

[jeffreyg]

As suggested check to see if the gallery has preferences. That said, I have been in group and one person exhibitions and that never came up. I would keep to same size frames but with more than one size. For example some 11x14 and some 16x20 and some 20x24. They can be grouped for the best presentation. For my last exhibition I had images that ranged in size from 4x5 pt/pd contact prints to enlarged prints to five feet and one to six feet. The gallery took care of the large frames and hung the show in groupings.
That said I don’t think those attending really care about the size of the frames but it’s nice to have a good flow. I believe today that galleries prefer larger prints. I prefer the content regardless of the size. Just my opinion.

 

[Nicholas Lindan]

Obviously, first see if the venue has guidelines.

I would visit galleries and museums and see what looks best to you.

As to height to width ratios they should be what best serves the image. Working to a fixed ratio is best left to cinematographers. That said we seem to be hardwired to best accept images that are in the 4x5 to 2x3 ratios, though I have one image that works best at 1x7.

 

[MilesL]

I approach consistency by trying to get a minimum 2 inch (5cm) side border and a maximum 1/4 inch (0.5 cm) weight on top and bottom border (top is 1/4 inch less than bottom). For 6x6 I like to mat in portrait orientation with bottom boarder being roughly twice the top boarder (> 2 inches) and at lease 2 inches on each side. Over the years these dimensions seem to be the most pleasing.

Thanks, I’ll try that. I feel like it’s a bit of a waste of paper not to print with minimal borders if I’m using a mat anyway - but I haven’t even decided whether to use a mat yet.

 

[MilesL]

I would keep to same size frames but with more than one size. For example some 11x14 and some 16x20 and some 20x24. They can be grouped for the best presentation.

Thanks a lot. Do you happen to have any pictures from an exhibition with these sizes? So I can get an idea of how they look in a room next to each other - or how they can be grouped.

 

[cliveh]

Whatever size of print and border size you select, I would have all prints made through a professional inkjet printer rather than darkroom prints. That way you will maintain consistency and exact duplication should you sell more than one copy of a single print.

 

[Vaughn]

So many variables to consider!

One advantage of printing on full sheets of paper is that excess border does help protect the image area from handling during processing and later in its life. You might print a couple well centered on the paper for showing unframed -- going through a collection of prints is easier if they are on the same-size paper...and if one does not have to turn the print 90 degrees.

I prefer to have standard size frames for each format (I contact print full-frame, so it is easy). For 4x5 and 5x7 I have found 10"x12" frames to be nice, for 4x10, a 12"x16" frame works, and so on...black wood frames with similar profiles. Similar frames help to bring the different size images together in a show. Smaller prints can have smaller borders, but with 8x10 and 11x14, I prefer the look of 3 to 4 inches of border.

What is important is how the show flows.

Keep to one measurement system for the tags and recording prints. The only people who are allowed to mix measurement systems are emulsion makers. Kodak poured their emulsions by the ml per square inch (as I do for carbon printing...at a rate of 1.2 ml per square inch.).

Have fun and good luck!

 

[jeffreyg]

Thanks a lot. Do you happen to have any pictures from an exhibition with these sizes? So I can get an idea of how they look in a room next to each other - or how they can be grouped.

I actually didn’t take any although it was up for two months. There was an interview on Vemo that has some glimpses while it was being hung. I can try to post a link if anyone is interested.

 

[GregY]

Miles, there are a number of approaches. Some mount all photos in the same size frames, but that gets expensive. Some galleries have frames they provide. If you are a darkroom printer, i would exhibit darkroom prints. Cliveh has offered his opinion as a hybrid worker.
IMO paper edge size matters very little, since it is most common to mount the print on mat board and use a bevelled overmat.
If you don't have much experience w framing/matting prints here's some useful info. When i started matting, i used Bruce Barnbaum's suggested sizes. Here's some info i found on line....maybe it will be helpful to you.

D Karp
"1. Here is what I do: 8x10 on 14x18 matboard (I like 14x17 too, maybe better, but have not found a 14x17 presentation case), 11x14 on 16 x 20 matboard, and 16x20 on 20x24 matboard. I have done 8x10 on 11x14 matboard, but I think it looks a bit too tight. I used to use overmats, but now cut a full window mat that leaves 3/8" around the top and sides of the print, and 1/4" or 5/8" at the bottom, to allow for a signature and date.

Here is what Adams suggests: Smaller than 8x10 on 11x14 matboard, 8x10 on 14x18 matboard, 11x14 on 16x20 matboard, and 16x20 on 22x28 matboard.

Here is what Bruce Barnbaum suggests in "The Art of Photography: Smaller than 8x10 on 11x14 matboard, 8x10 on 14x17 matboard, 11x14 on 16x20 matboard (although he prefers the proportion of a 17x20 mat), and 16x20 on 22x28 board (although he prefers 24x28). He also relates that Edward Weston used to mount 8x10 contact prints on 13-1/3x16 matboard because he could cut 6 boards from on 32x4o board. This book has a good chapter on presentation, and Barnbaum's method for mounting his prints.

2. I mount my prints with a larger bottom boarder, and I just eyeball the extra size based on how the print looks on the board. Sometimes the bottom border is noticably larger. Other times it is larger, but hardly noticable.

3. I use a laborious method to locate the print on the mat for drymounting. I roughly center it from side to side, and eyeball the bottom and top margins. Then I measure the sides and bottom with a clear ruler. The print stays in place because it is weighted with a bean bag that my wife made for me out of a very soft material. Once I am satisfied with the placement, I tack the print to the mat. This method is laborious because it every movement can throw the other measurements off. Things speed up when I do more drymounting because I am in better practice. Other photographers, like John Sexton and Bruce Barnbaum cut guides from matboard to help position the print. I tried it, but I so often trim my prints from the standard sizes that I would have to have a tremendous number of guides to be able to use them to mount prints in all of the various sizes. I guess if I had to set up an assembly line, I would figure out how to make some sort of guide.

Calumet makes a device using rulers with a zero point centered on a wooden board and a "T" square to mount prints. I have thought about devising something like this, but have not had a chance to do it yet. I think that this type of device (along with the bean bag) might be the best way to quickly and accurately mount a print"

 

[Pieter12]

I use Michael Kenna's approach: I print everything the same size, 10"x10" (I pretty much only shoot or crop square). The print is hinged with archival linen tape rather than dry mounted to archival mat board backing, with a 10-1/2" x 10-1/2" window overmat, leaving 1/8" white paper showing all around the image. The mat itself is 16"x20" to fit a standard frame. And I usually buy those frames from Ikea for a pittance, they look fine in a gallery setting and most collectors will end up reframing the prints to their liking and decor anyway (not that I have that many collectors buying my work, but this is what I have been told by gallerists).

 

[Vaughn]

I use Michael Kenna's approach...

It fits the balance of the square and has a simplicity that allows one to go from print to print cleanly and without distraction.

For years I matted and framed 16x20 silver gelatin prints 20x24...more to save a little money at a time when there was not much. It's okay, but (IMO) the image needs more space around it.

I tried 22x28 which works nicely for verticals, but not for horizontals (too much side mat relative to top and bottom), so I went 24x28, and that looks sweet. Full-frame 35mm enlargements probably work well with 22x28.

Example below...a quick iPhone image, its on my wall (Sheep Skull, Snow, Upper Mono Lake Basin, CA). Image dimension is actually 15x19 (from 4x5), the window 16x20, and the frame 24x28. The print is trimmed down to the image and dry-mounted with-in the window. Black wood frame. A very clean, nothing-hidden-by-the-mat, and mixes well with different size frames of the same type and matting style.

 

[Doremus Scudder]

The "traditional" West-Coast Photography School approach is to trim each print to the desired size (cropped, or whatever), dry-mount the print on museum-quality cotton rag board (usually bottom-weighted a bit), and then cut a window mat (passepartout) that is larger than the image size, again, bottom-weighted so the space below the image is a bit larger than the other three sides. The signature goes on the bottom mat board just underneath the image, and is visible because the window mat is a bit larger.

My approach using this method is to crop my prints to whatever aspect ratio I desire (rarely are any two exactly the same dimensions), but to mount them on standard-size mat boards. Prints made on 8x10-inch paper (which means the long side is approx. 9 inches) are mounted on 14x18 board, Prints made on 11x14-inch paper get mounted on 16x20-inch board. Prints made on 16x20 paper are mounted on 22x28-inch board (or, occasionally, 20x24-inch board9. That way, I only have three or four standard frame sizes.

Check out my website for an example. It's there somewhere. www.DoremusScudder.com

Best,

Doremus

 

[paul ron]

most important when having a gallery showing is lighting. your photos as printed in your darkroom and viewed with your room lights may not look the same in the gallery. check the gallery lighting and color temps.

as for mounting and framing, thats up to you as the artist.

 

[Rob Skeoch]

I have had a number of one man, and some group shows.
I would suggest everything from 35mm be printed the same size and everything from 120 the same size. Exactly, the same so you can get the matts cut all the same and the frames all the same.
That way you can reuse the frames for the next show. You don't want to end up with a huge pile of frames at the end that are odd ball sizes that you can't use again.
I learned this when I did my first show with the 4x10 camera. Now what will I do with those frames now that I don't shoot that format any longer.
Keep it simple and make everything the same,

 

[MattKing]

Now what will I do with those frames now that I don't shoot that format any longer.

@Rob Skeoch ,
Diptyches to the rescue!
The only qualification I would make to Rob's comment would be that I would choose the print size based on the aspect ratio - so 6x9 would get to spend time with its 35mm friends.

 

[Doremus Scudder]

The image size does not determine the frame size. Nor does it determine the mat size It's easy to standardize on a few common mat board and frame sizes (14x18, 16x20, 20x24...) and print images whatever size and aspect ratio you like. Then all you need is to have window mats cut specifically to each image.

If you want to use off-the-shelf window mats, there are standard sizes of those too. Then just work backward and decide what general size to print your image in order to fit window mat/frame sizes you like.

Personally, I print images at whatever aspect ratio they want to be. The image content and composition determines the final proportions. Small images get printed on 8x10 paper with a minimum half-inch border. That means the long side of those images are always nine inches and it's the short side that varies according to aspect ratio. Similarly, images printed on 11x14 paper have a long side of 13 inches; again, the short side varies with aspect ratio. Images on 16x20 paper have a long side of 19 inches... You get the idea.

I cut my own window mats now, but in the past (after dry-mounting the prints) would simply mark a bunch of boards with the proper window sizes for all the different prints I wanted to frame and then take them to a local frame shop to have the windows cut. If I brought in many, I would often get a volume discount. Window cutting was $5-$8 a board depending on size.

Best,

Doremus

 

[Vaughn]

Back in my student days I put signs up around the Art Department with signs reading "Will cut mats for beer"...usually paid in units of four-packs of Guinness. The faculty members paid in cash.

I still cut my mats, though lately I also have been getting them cut by online-ordering. By the time I order and pay for the matboard and shipping, I might as well have the holes cut in them, too. I buy the frames at the same place. Fed-X once threw my order of frames and mats over my 6' fence...packed well enough to survive.

I have been using 8-ply for the last 20 years or so...it just looks so sweet and not that much more effort to cut the windows (Logan and straight edge).