Phil Rose
Veteran Member
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.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.
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