To Frame/Not to Frame--THE BIG ????

  • Thread starter Thread starter Beth
  • Start date Start date
What do you think? Are frames a distraction? What do you do? Please
share what you know about frames and their esthetics on web photos.
I'm glad Beth posed this topic. A few months ago I held off posting my reservations about using 35mm sprocket-frames and most other types of simulated framing.

Those simulated-film frames were very well done technically, however I ended up with negative feelings (no pun intended) about their use. My opinion is that the simulated 35mm sprocket-frame sends a subconscious (self-conscious?) message from the photographer. To me, such a frame almost shouts: "I fear my digital image is inferior to one from film, but perhaps I can get you to overlook my digicam's deficiencies by using a film-like frame."

On the other hand, I believe that a very simple border can be effective to help define the image area--or to make viewing more comfortable. Digital (and film) images are often presented on a bright-white medium (paper or monitor), and therefore certain areas of an image with very low density may tend to "bleed" away into the surrounding paper or monitor area. To better define the image area, I use a simple black line (a "stroke", about 3 pixels wide) around the edges of most of my images. At times I've printed a wide, medium-grey border (matte-like) extending to the edge of the paper in order to eliminate the harshness of the surrounding (white) non-image area.

But as to the various 3-D mattes and frames--I consider those to be largely a distraction when used with images that are presented on a monitor or on portfolio sheets.

Phil
 
Beth,

If a photographer's images are not being sold, then it is really a question of what the photographer likes. If the images ARE being sold, then it is a question of what the customer likes. I have added frames (digital matting) to all my "keepers" because the response I get from my customers is that they like it better. The fact that I like it better too is a bonus. :-)
Charles
 
I guess I should weigh in as it was my comment that started this thread.

I matt and frame prints for the house. For general viewing I never frame. For customers I would not matt and/or frame UNLESS it was part of the package.

For showing in galleries I tend to avoid frames. For me, frames are a personal touch and by my applying a frame that appeals to me, I may sway someone's like or dislike of an image BASED on the frame and not the image.

Where does that leave me? For hanging stuff, matt and frame to finish the image. For professional work, depends on the understanding of the client and photographer. Everything else is generally as is.

Of course, different folks have their views and there are no right or wrong answers. Only answers that fit our needs and desires.

Thanks,
Beth wrote:

A comment by Tony has encouraged me to post this question. I post
on PhotoSIG and often use frames shared by DianeB which I love. I
often get comments that the photo would be nicer without the frame.
Other times I get comments that the frame really ADDS to the shot.
Can't win for trying!

I know that when submitting photos to many POTD places, frames are
unwelcome.

What do you think? Are frames a distraction? What do you do? Please
share what you know about frames and their esthetics on web photos.
Beth

--
Olympus E-10, TCON, MCON, WCON and Fl-40
Gallery: http://www.pbase.com/galleries/cokids
--
TonyK
 
I frame my pictures most of a time. I like a wide white matt, and use a black thin double line around the image.
If you like, look me up in Photosig, I am under name Mikhail Steinberg.
You will see how I solve this.

Also I looked at your pictures and your frames are just fine. I like one of them so much, I will make one like this for myself!

But I do have cheesy Photoshop ready-to use wood grain frames, that is true. But you have nothing to worry about- I think.
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top