[alt-photo] Re: bottom-weighting mats

[Diana Bloomfield]

That's interesting.  I saw some work recently, where the images were  
really wonderful-- both the image content and the printing-- but I was  
so mesmerized by the weird matting choice -- where there seemed to be  
no rhyme or reason to the matting size/borders (and I know it wasn't a  
money issue as the person went to a professional framer to have it  
done)-- that I found it difficult to concentrate on anything else.   I  
was surprised that a professional framer would suggest something like  
that, and that this person would have agreed to it.  The framer  
probably mentioned the word "contemporary," so this person jumped all  
over that.  I have no clue, but they did a real disservice to this  
photographer's image presentation.

On Nov 30, 2011, at 12:07 PM, Jack Brubaker wrote:

> A second thought on matting is that some artists and photographers  
> want
> their work to seem so new that it is almost uncomfortable to the  
> viewer. To
> them it is important to not appear to be following conventions of  
> the past.
> They are less likely to bottom weight. Some of us want the observer  
> to be
> welcomed into the image and feel comfortable taking a moment to let  
> it sink
> in. Since I want to sell my work I go to what ever (within reason)  
> makes
> the viewer comfortable. At the present I still think that is a  
> generous mat
> with bottom weight.
>
> Jack
>
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 11:57 AM, Jack Brubaker  
> <jack at jackbrubaker.com>wrote:
>
>> The fashion is just that. There was a push during the arts and  
>> crafts era
>> to have massive bottom weight. So much so that a landscape format  
>> image
>> would go in a vertical format frame. There was a long period of  
>> rejecting
>> the arts and crafts style and its matting preferences. It became  
>> "modern"
>> to use even matting. Now it is up in the air. Arts and crafts seems  
>> to
>> touch on everything these days but I am sure there are some who react
>> against it. We are all on our own!
>>
>> Jack
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 11:31 AM, Diana Bloomfield <
>> dhbloomfield at bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>
>>> I typically bottom-weight my mats, with the top and sides the  
>>> same, and
>>> bottom-weighted typically anywhere from 3-5 inches more than top and
>>> sides-- though I suspect that's a lot more than what some framers  
>>> would
>>> suggest. There is some rule that suggests that if you bottom- 
>>> weight no more
>>> than about 10%, it's not really noticeable-- but offers a more
>>> aesthetically pleasing look, which-- at first glance-- no one  
>>> would be able
>>> to say why.
>>>
>>> If I have a square image, though, I often center it and have equal  
>>> space
>>> all the way around.  But I mostly prefer bottom-weighted mats.   
>>> Something
>>> about that seems much more satisfying to me.  I think it depends  
>>> on the
>>> image, too, and how much mat you want to have around it.
>>>
>>> I recently judged a local photography show, and I was surprised at  
>>> how
>>> stingy people are with their mat size and borders, and how  
>>> elaborate they
>>> get with their frame choices. I think a mat should be generous  
>>> enough to
>>> set off an image, and the frame shouldn't be the first thing you  
>>> see.  But
>>> that's a whole other issue.
>>>
>>> I  honestly don't know why these things go out of fashion, or who  
>>> makes
>>> that decision, but I'm guessing it's all about the bottom line ($$ 
>>> $).
>>>
>>> Diana
>>>
>>>
>>> On Nov 30, 2011, at 11:07 AM, Christina Anderson wrote:
>>>
>>> How many of you bottom weight your mats and if so by how much? I  
>>> have
>>>> been told that contemporary work has abandoned that practice, but  
>>>> uses mats
>>>> of equal size all the way around. Short of bringing a tape  
>>>> measure with me
>>>> to galleries, input on both sides of this issue much appreciated.
>>>> Christina Z. Anderson
>>>> christinaZanderson.com
>>>>
>>>> ______________________________**_________________
>>>> Alt-photo-process-list | http://altphotolist.org/**listinfo<http://altphotolist.org/listinfo 
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>
>>> ______________________________**_________________
>>> Alt-photo-process-list | http://altphotolist.org/**listinfo<http://altphotolist.org/listinfo 
>>> >
>>>
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Alt-photo-process-list | http://altphotolist.org/listinfo