Selling prints - to mount or not to mount?

[Ed Richards]

I notice that some folks only sell mounted and matted prints, and other sell naked prints. What are the pros and cons?

[Stephen Willard]

I do both.

Most of my galleries I sell to buy just the prints and then they frame and matt according to their customer taste. I have one outlet that I sell pictures on consignment and everything there I frame or matt myself. I would prefer not to be in the framing or matting business because it takes money, time, and space, but that one outlet out sells all my galleries combined so I do it.

[Kirk Gittings]

Ed, I am always concerned with how my prints are hung, mat size color etc. By selling a print window matted in an archival mat, I increase the chances that they will be presented properly and archivally. This of course is not a guarantee but most times it works, clients just go out and buy a frame. The mat is price is worked in to the print price of course.

[robc]

I think this question crops up once someone starts to actually think about how they are going to manage selling prints from a web site.

Matted and/or framed prints create very different requirements for shipping than do unmatted prints. For example, it is simple and cheap to ship a large inkjet print rolled and placed in a tube which is inherently rigid. A matted print creates a different problem because it is susceptible to bending, so packaging has to be considerably more bulky. A framed print will be rigid but it has glass.

If your prints are inkjets I would offer unmatted as standard with an expensive option for framing which provides the rigidity and plastic glass or no glass. The "expensive" is to disuade the request for framing. You have to be commercially minded about this as matting and framing are expensive and time consuming as is the extra shipping.

If they are silver gelatin, then rolling them is probably not advisable so matting and framing will be the only option unless you have a sure fire method of packaging to stop damage through bending.

But then again, just count yourself lucky if you actually sell something and give them what ever they want.

[Capocheny]

This posting sort of relates back to the thread entitled, "11x14 on 16x20 or 20x24?" in that everyone can have different ideas as to the way they prefer their images to be presented.

I think Kirk has it right in that he presents his images in the size/color matt that he deems appropriate for the particular image. Ultimately, the consumer can still change the matt but I suspect they would most likely just take the matted image to a framer and have it framed as is. Why? Because most consumers probably wouldn't want to pay twice for matting a print.

And, building the cost of the matt into the price point makes perfect economical and business sense to me.

This would definitely be the route I'd take... but this is just moi! :)

As for shipping, each method would certainly have different requirements in order to ensure their safe arrival to the consumer. When I bought Clyde Butcher images back a few years ago... it seems to me they used a stiff backer board. But, the images always arrived unscathed and unbent! Whereas, I've also purchased prints that were sent in those traditional mailing tubes. I can recall one package arriving that looked like the shippers had used them as swords in the days of King Arthur and Sir Lancelot. The packages were bent and battered... and they tried to tape the thing straight again, which was a feeble attempt! It was a good thing the package was insured. :)

So, these days, whenever I buy images... I ask for matting AND backer boards AND insurance!

Cheers

[Kirk Gittings]

Let me qualify my statement by saying that I don't print large, rarely to 20x24, usually 11x14 or 16x20. Size matters in this thread.

[Charles Carstensen]

Next, lets say we matt. Is it best to use standard sizes, e.g., 5x7, 8x10, 11x14 openings and the next standard larger size matt? Or, would you recommend custom sizing the picture to your individual taste, and always use a standard size matt like 11x14, 16x, 20x, 24x etc. Some artwork I see has small pictures framed with large matts giving 4"+ borders. Or, is this detail really a can of worms?

[Kirk Gittings]

I for one cannot use standard size openings as no two images are the same. Some people like Michael Smith get away with that but I never have.

[Ed Richards]

What about overlapping the image with the mat? Do you have a little overlap, or do you leave a little white border between the image and the mat? If you sign below the image, do you cut the mat so the signature and some border shows?

[Charles Carstensen]

Kirk, therefore, do you cut your own mats, or use a company such as Light Impressions?

[Merg Ross]

My method is similar to Kirk's and for the same reasons. I cut my own mats on a Fletcher 2000 and they vary in size from print to print. Pre-cut mats have never worked for me, although I did try them years ago.

[Kirk Gittings]

No I usually cut my own windows unless I am really pressed for time. I use standard size LI board. At least if you buy it cut down their cuts are very square giving you a reliable exterior rectangle to measure from.

I generally prefer no overlap of the image with about a 1/2 inch window around the print either with silver or on ink.

[roteague]

I sell sizes 11x14 to 40x50. Sizes below 20x24 I only sell mounted and matted. All my prints are on silver, either Fuji Crystal Archive or Ilfochrome. I never sell any print in ink.

[Jim Jones]

Printing, mounting, and matting all photos to a standard size is convenient for photographer and customer. By cutting the mats in one size, it is an easy and routine job, and economical for the buyer in this rural market. I offer both framed and unframed photos, and usually sell about half of each. Yesterday, in a persistant drizzle, I sold nine photos, all framed, from open racks in an outdoors arts & crafts fair. Because of the weather, only a third of the available stock, all framed, was on display. This cut sales to about half of previous years. If photography was merely a business instead of a passion, a different approach would be appropriate.

[David_Senesac]

With my current fine art business I put my large robust Fuji Crystal Archive prints in sturdy 3mil polyethylene bags then roll them up to fit in 4 inch diameter Uline cylindrical tubes. Extremely sturdy unlike the cheap poster mailing tubes most are familiar with and still have low cost. I've framed some prints for years and it is just a can of worms doing the tedious framing and unpleasant packaging for shipping. I'd decided to let customers get that done themselves by going to the framing shop pros. Shipping in tubes is not without problems. As you call them, nekid prints are easily damaged. Most of those shipping tubed prints don't seem to help or warn their customers about things such as creasing the media aka crinkling. Also many customers are likely inhibited at thought of having to deal with framing. My website comprehensively addresses both those issues and time will only tell whether that makes a difference.

...David
http://www.davidsenesac.com

[Jorge Gasteazoro]

The best method I have found to ship prints is to use thin plywood. I use 3mm plywood duct taped all around. The package looks good, it can stand the mishandling of the mail system and the prints arrive flat and in perfect shape. I am in the process of shipping some prints so I will take some pics and post them so you can see what I am talking about.

[Charles Carstensen]

Jorge, that would be great to see some pics. Question, that is like 1/8 inch plywood. Do you cut it yourself to some standard size, or have it cut. What size do you consider minimum to ship that way?

[Jorge Gasteazoro]

Jorge, that would be great to see some pics. Question, that is like 1/8 inch plywood. Do you cut it yourself to some standard size, or have it cut. What size do you consider minimum to ship that way?

It is a little bit thicker than 1/8, more like 3/16. I have it cut, a sheet of plywood costs me $8 and they cut for free for me, so I get enough to ship 4 16x20 or about 10 8x10.

I have shipped 12x20 prints in 20x24 mats to Hong Kong this way and they arrived perfectly.

[Charles Carstensen]

I just researched ULINE, page 67 of the current catalog has STAY FLATS listed up to size 22x27. Cost is .50 to 1.86 each (I know you have to buy 100 or 50) sounds pretty cheap and secure. Secure, especially if you 4 ply mount and have a 2 ply backing board. My decision will be to custom cut my own matts and backing. Pack that is Light Impressions archival envelope. Ship with insurance only. Thanks to all for solidifying this issue. Now, if only I could find a customer!

[Bill_1856]

As a former collector of high end photography, let me throw in that I preferred neatly packaged pieces. Prints DRYMOUNTED on museum board, with overmats.

[Jorge Gasteazoro]

As promised, here are the pics for the way I pack the prints.

[Brian K]

My prints are all dry mounted and overmatted, I will not sell prints unmounted.

As for shipping prints, I use the 16x20,24x30 and 30x40 shipping boxes available from LI, Archival Methods, etc. I first place a sheet of 1/8" pegboard on the bottom, then a layer of 1/4" foam packing material, then the art work (sealed in acid free plastic bags), then another layer of foam then I top it off with another layer of 1/8" peg board. I used to use plywood inside the box but that requires saw cutting and I have to then store large quantities of pre cut plywood which tend to warp and curl, also the splinters from the plywood are sharp and can damage a print. The advantage of the pegboard is that I can easily score it with a blade and snap off pieces, it rarely warps, it does not produce sharp splinters and it is much lighter than the plywood. Large home centers sell the pegboard in 2x4' pieces which makes storage and handling easier. I have been investigating the use of Coroplast which is super light, but have been unable to get it in the thickness that I want.

With the combination of the shipping boxes, which are quite durable on their own and the pegboard, the prints are quite safe.

[Diane Maher]

I've received a number of prints from Jorge and they all arrived safely and in great condition.

[photographs42]

I notice that some folks only sell mounted and matted prints, and other sell naked prints. What are the pros and cons?

Assuming we are talking about fine art prints, here is my opinion.

The advantage of selling only mounted and matted prints, as has been touched on by several posters, is primarily one of control. With the exception of the frame, I control the way the finished image looks. My customers never see a print that has not been mounted and matted. Well, they do on my web site, but I think that’s a little different. So, I control the size and color of the mat (my images are all B&W and my mats are all LI Westminster Bright White) and in 25 years I have only had one customer who insisted on a different way and I don’t want to go there. The name of the image and my signature is on the mount in pencil and it becomes a package deal. The negative side of this method is that it is a lot of work.

I sell them framed or unframed, but I offer only one style of wood cap molding frame in Black, Natural, Walnut or Cherry. Some people don’t like my choices and furnish their own frames. That’s OK, but I seriously doubt many people re-mat them.

I don’t personally know any photographers that sell “naked” prints. I think any photographer that takes any pride at all in their work would cringe at this prospect, but that, of course, is only my opinion. If you did this, the advantages would be; low overhead (no mat board, foam board, glass or frames to stock). Cheap shipping. Less equipment required (no mat cutter, no glass cutter and no space required for storing and working with same). And most important, a huge saving of time. The only disadvantage I can think of is on the buyers’ end.

Who are these photographers that you refer to selling naked prints?

Jerome :)

[Jorge Gasteazoro]

I have sold and still sell naked prints packaged the way I have shown for a few reasons. For one, the print is a comodity the client has bought to do with it as he/she wishes. Who am I to impose on them how the print should be matted and framed? While I would hope they trust my experience in print conservation not all the people who buy prints are collectors or wish to have the white mat, lets face it, many are buying just for decoration and as such they have the right to present the print in the manner they like.

Second, many who collect (I am one of them) are perfectly capable of mounting and matting a print themselves at significant savings. For example in my case importing mats and mouting and matting a print is a very expensive proposition, if I buy 100 mats this would be $300, shipping is $200 and then I have to pay 30% import tax on the total order including shipping. This bring my total cost for a 100 mats to $650 or $6.5 per mat. Shipping a mounted and matted print in 16x20 4 ply board is $20, so for me I have to charge at least $50 extra for a mounted and matted print to account for the materials and time. If the person lives in the US, then they can do this for $15 or less.

I would rather keep a client and have him/her come back and purchase more of my prints than antagonize them by insisting on having the print mounted and matted my way.

[Oren Grad]

I don’t personally know any photographers that sell “naked” prints. I think any photographer that takes any pride at all in their work would cringe at this prospect, but that, of course, is only my opinion.

Well, I would cringe at the prospect of buying prints glued to a board (i.e., dry mounted). I would not mind a matted print if it were mounted reversibly with corners so I could remove it if I wanted to.

To each his own...

[Bruce Watson]

I sell sizes 11x14 to 40x50. Sizes below 20x24 I only sell mounted and matted. All my prints are on silver, either Fuji Crystal Archive or Ilfochrome. I never sell any print in ink.
I hate to tell you this, but there's no silver in a finished Fuji Crystal Archive or Ilfochrome print. The final image is composed solely of dyes.

[Brian K]

..... For one, the print is a comodity the client has bought to do with it as he/she wishes. Who am I to impose on them how the print should be matted and framed? .......
I would rather keep a client and have him/her come back and purchase more of my prints than antagonize them by insisting on having the print mounted and matted my way.

I'm curious Jorge do you also let them choose how you dodge and burn a print as well? Or let them pick the print contrast? I don't say this to be confrontational but a print is just as greatly affected by the mat around it as the tonal manipulations within the print itself. When I print an image, and even many times while I am composing an image, I take into account and even use the white mat board as an element of the image. The proportions and size of mat area also has an affect on the composition and the way in which the image is perceived. Bottom line is that you are already dictating what the print looks like, why leave the final aspects of the tonal values of the entire print/mat to a buyer who may not have the sense to use the right materials and the right sizes/proportion.

As for framing, here is where I agree with you. A frame has less effect on the print than the mat does, but far greater affect in the way it works with the color of the wall, or wall paper, and the other colors and textures within a room. This is where the client can tailor the art to fit their room.

Personally I hate mounting and matting prints but it is a requirement for most serious collectors and galleries. I can understand that there are costs involved with mounting and matting and that may make it more inconvenient for you to m/m the print but you can always add that cost to your print price. After all it's a cost your client will still have to deal with after they receive the print from you, and they will also have to bring the print to someone who may or may not be good at matting, whereas people without much experience can frame a print themselves.

[photographs42]

Well, I would cringe at the prospect of buying prints glued to a board (i.e., dry mounted). I would not mind a matted print if it were mounted reversibly with corners so I could remove it if I wanted to.

To each his own...

Somehow I knew right after I posted that statement that it would come back to haunt me. I shouldn’t have put it that way. Sorry to have offended anyone.

I don’t know how you determined how I mount my prints because I didn’t say (you are right by the way). I mat and mount my images the same way AA did it because that is the look I want. (Please don’t think that by that statement I am in any way trying to place myself in a league with AA because I’m not). Also I’m not looking for an argument or even a discussion on this issue because I have already done that with collectors, museum curators, gallery owners and more than a few photographers. After considerable thought and research I decided to do it that way and after 25 years I still think that is the right way for me. Others disagree but there is no right or wrong here, only opinion.

We do agree on this: To each his own…

Jerome :)

[Jorge Gasteazoro]

a print is just as greatly affected by the mat around it as the tonal manipulations within the print itself. When I print an image, and even many times while I am composing an image, I take into account and even use the white mat board as an element of the image

Here is where we disagree, the print should stand on it's merits regardless of what it is around it. If the mat is an important part of the print as you beleive then it is taking away attention from your print. I have yet to see a good print where the mat takes away or adds beauty to it.

I also disagree with you on the collector's demands, as a matter of fact I would say that most collectors who will wish to store a print will demand that you send it unmounted inside and archival bag.


The proportions and size of mat area also has an affect on the composition and the way in which the image is perceived.


I apologize for being blunt but I think the above statement is BS, mostly an effort to try to make things sound more esotherical and mythical than they are.

Bottom line for me, I hope my prints stand on their own merit regardless of how they are matted and framed, if they dont then I have failed on making a good photograph. Like everything in life we all have our own opinions, to me thinking that the mat makes so much of a difference is ridiculous and somewhat arrogant.

[kjsphotography]

I just researched ULINE, page 67 of the current catalog has STAY FLATS listed up to size 22x27. Cost is .50 to 1.86 each (I know you have to buy 100 or 50) sounds pretty cheap and secure. Secure, especially if you 4 ply mount and have a 2 ply backing board. My decision will be to custom cut my own matts and backing. Pack that is Light Impressions archival envelope. Ship with insurance only. Thanks to all for solidifying this issue. Now, if only I could find a customer!


Hello Charles,

I use 1/8" Masonite. It is around $7-8 for a 4' x 8' sheet. I then cut it with a skill saw to the size I need. For example I mount my prints to 13x15 and then cut the masonite to 15x17. Then I use duct tape as Jorge does and it is bullet proof.

As far as mounting I like to drymount my prints. I did sell a few in the past loose but it doesnt really show my work the way I want it to. To me a mounted print looks just outstanding. Loose just looked to me a little sloppy.


Kev

[kjsphotography]

Here is where we disagree, the print should stand on it's merits regardless of what it is around it. If the mat is an important part of the print as you beleive then it is taking away attention from your print. I have yet to see a good print where the mat takes away or adds beauty to it.

I also disagree with you on the collector's demands, as a matter of fact I would say that most collectors who will wish to store a print will demand that you send it unmounted inside and archival bag.



I apologize for being blunt but I think the above statement is BS, mostly an effort to try to make things sound more esotherical and mythical than they are.

Bottom line for me, I hope my prints stand on their own merit regardless of how they are matted and framed, if they dont then I have failed on making a good photograph. Like everything in life we all have our own opinions, to me thinking that the mat makes so much of a difference is ridiculous and somewhat arrogant.

Jorge I have to agree with you 110%.

[Brian K]

[/B]
Here is where we disagree, the print should stand on it's merits regardless of what it is around it. If the mat is an important part of the print as you beleive then it is taking away attention from your print. I have yet to see a good print where the mat takes away or adds beauty to it.

Jorge you might not quite understand the way human perception works. The area that surrounds the print has a direct effect on how the print is perceived by the eye. If you put a print on a dark background the print will appear lighter, conversely if you put the same print on a light background it will appear darker. If you put the print on a cold toned board, the print will appear warmer, if you put it on a warm background it will appear colder. A print that you viewed in your darkroom against say a light background will appear much lighter if your collector mounts it against a black board, it may well appear washed out.

These are not aesthetic or subjective factors but are based in human perception. The human eye is easily tricked. If you look online you'll find countless eye tricks and optical illusion samples. I have attached a simple example of the eye being fooled by the tonal value of the background. The attached jpeg contains 2 squares one being pure white the other being pure black. Contained within each are 2 smaller rectangles of the same dimension and are exactly a 90 percent gray.


[/B]
I also disagree with you on the collector's demands, as a matter of fact I would say that most collectors who will wish to store a print will demand that you send it unmounted inside and archival bag.

Well maybe we just have different collectors, because all the galleries that represent me, and they also represent some very highly regarded artists, all want mounted and matted work.


[/B]
I apologize for being blunt but I think the above statement is BS, mostly an effort to try to make things sound more esotherical and mythical than they are.

It's not esoterical or mythical, it's design 101, one of things you learn in your first year of art school.

[/B]
Bottom line for me, I hope my prints stand on their own merit regardless of how they are matted and framed, if they dont then I have failed on making a good photograph. Like everything in life we all have our own opinions, to me thinking that the mat makes so much of a difference is ridiculous and somewhat arrogant.

Ridiculous and arrogant on my part? Is that comment really necessary? Some things in life aren't a matter of opinion, they are based in fact or science.

[kjsphotography]

Brain,

I am wondering what types of prints you produce. Are they Silver or PT/PD / Alternative?

Not trying to stir a argument just seriousally curious.

I only ask that if you do sell PT/PD / Alternative, do you drymount them and if so how does it look compared to a silver print mounted?

Kev

[Brian K]

Brain,

I am wondering what types of prints you produce. Are they Silver or PT/PD / Alternative?

Not trying to stir a argument just seriousally curious.

I only ask that if you do sell PT/PD / Alternative, do you drymount them and if so how does it look compared to a silver print mounted?

Kev


Kevin, I produce silver gelatin prints and they are dry mounted. Personally I haven't printed any PT/PD prints, however I have some first hand experience with them in the finishing phase having spotted quite a few of them for Irving Penn. They were mounted on aluminum pin registered boards. I'm not certain if they were dry mounted or glued.

[tim atherton]

I also disagree with you on the collector's demands, as a matter of fact I would say that most collectors who will wish to store a print will demand that you send it unmounted inside and archival bag.

I was at one institution when major acquisitions arrived a few days apart from Robert Frank and Lee Friedlander - probably a couple of hundred thousand dollars worth of prints. Both were delivered as loose prints unmounted (both, incidentally, also delivered in a variety of old Kodak, Agfa and Ilford paper boxes)

Well maybe we just have different collectors, because all the galleries that represent me, and they also represent some very highly regarded artists, all want mounted and matted work.

which galleries are they?

My experience is certainly institutions and major corporate collection generally want prints unmounted, as do many collectors (I also have a number of conservator friends who make a tidy sum from dealing badly mounted photographs....!)

[Charles Carstensen]

Bill, could you elaborate on exactly what is an overmat? I am just learning. Kirk Gittings says he "overlays" his photographs 1/2 inch, which my understanding is the matt opening is 1/2 inch larger than the image size.

thanks,

[Jorge Gasteazoro]

Jorge you might not quite understand the way human perception works. The area that surrounds the print has a direct effect on how the print is perceived by the eye. If you put a print on a dark background the print will appear lighter, conversely if you put the same print on a light background it will appear darker. If you put the print on a cold toned board, the print will appear warmer, if you put it on a warm background it will appear colder. A print that you viewed in your darkroom against say a light background will appear much lighter if your collector mounts it against a black board, it may well appear washed out.

These are not aesthetic or subjective factors but are based in human perception. The human eye is easily tricked. If you look online you'll find countless eye tricks and optical illusion samples. I have attached a simple example of the eye being fooled by the tonal value of the background. The attached jpeg contains 2 squares one being pure white the other being pure black. Contained within each are 2 smaller rectangles of the same dimension and are exactly a 90 percent gray.

This is all well and good, but we are not talking about squares. We are talking about prints and unless you are doing something radical like using black mats, you are talking about prints which will most likely be matted with a light board. Even so, as I said, the print should be should stand on its own regardless of the mat. Besides, if the person purchasing the print is a collector he/she should know better, if it is bought just for decoration and they like the way the print looks then it is still a good print in their eyes. I have read and tried your example, I know very well the small rectangle is the same tone in both, but as I said, this is not a print, the eye does not have to focus on one thing only, but on the many aspects that make the print.


Well maybe we just have different collectors, because all the galleries that represent me, and they also represent some very highly regarded artists, all want mounted and matted work.


The only reason a gallery asks you to send mounted and matted prints is because they want to pass the cost of labor and materials on to you, they want to slap a frame and hang it, plus this way they dont run the risk of ruining a print and having to pay you for it, not because collectors demand it. If you sell a print to a museum they will ask you to send a naked print well packaged. I would never dream to tell a museum curator he has to take the print the way I want.....


Ridiculous and arrogant on my part? Is that comment really necessary? Some things in life aren't a matter of opinion, they are based in fact or science.

Sorry, once again I am going to be blunt, but much of what passes for "science" in art schools is very deficient. Psycology and perception is part science and part art, physiological response can be measured but perception is an entire different thing alltogether and we all have different ways to perceive the world around us. Tests like the example you presented may fool you, but they might not fool other people. The moment you try to piegeon hole people into "this is right because I was taught about it in art 101" and it is science you are in the wrong path. Dont assume that what you like and you feel is correct it is the way other people see as well.

I dont mean that you as a person are arrogant, I mean that some of the arrogance taught to you in art school is spilling over. So far nobody has been able to define what is "art", until someone does and at the risk of still being too blunt, you are nobody to tell other people what they should or should not like.

If somebody wants to buy one of my prints, mat it with burgundy velvet and frame it with a rococco gold leaf frame, if that is what they want more the power to them. Hopefully my print will still be strong enough that it is still the center of attention even with all the distractions surrounding it. Then again I am sure your art teachers would disagree.........

[Brian K]

Tim, first we should get one thing straight, the vast majority of fine art photographs sold in the world are not sold to hardcore collectors or museums. They are mostly sold in 2 ways, first, through art consultants, interior designers etc, for use in corporate offices, hotels and private residences as decoration. And second by non hardcore collectors seeking art to decorate their homes. This first group prefers the art mounted as the work is intended to hang on a wall. Then you have the hardcore collectors and museums who may individually have amassed large collections, but are dwarfed by the sheer numbers of the other type of purchasers. For space saving they may choose unmounted prints then again they may not.

Tim, was it a gallery, a collector or an institution? Museums seeking to archive prints prefer them unmounted but over matted with a hinge or corner mounts. Your mentioning that the prints were delivered in old photo paper boxes could mean that the institution intends on doing some conservancy type work to the prints as photo paper boxes are not acid free. And to be fair very acclaimed artists like Freidlander and Frank don't have to mount their work, they can do whatever they want. They don't have to be bothered with mounting prints. If you can afford their prints you can afford to have Cookie Vasquez mount and mat it for you. However neither Jorge or myself are at the level of Frank and Friedlander.


If you want to see what galleries represent me feel free to view my web site. But if you just want a few quick names try AfterImage Gallery, Fay Gold, Photographers Gallery (LA), Photographic Image Gallery.....

In the past I have also been represented by Edward Carter Galleries (NYC), Fahey Klein (LA) and JJ Brookings (SF).

As for your conservator friends who make a "tidy sum from dealing badly mounted photographs" only goes to show that if you truly care about your work you need to mount them yourself or send them to someone that you know is qualified and not leave it up to some possibly unknowledgeable person.

[Jorge Gasteazoro]

I forgot to add, dont take my disagreeing with you as antagonism Brian. I admire your work and think you are one of the best "unknown" out there. I love Mt. Klifatinder, I wish I could afford it.... :)

[roteague]

I hate to tell you this, but there's no silver in a finished Fuji Crystal Archive or Ilfochrome print. The final image is composed solely of dyes.

I am aware of that, however, before processing they are silver prints.

[Ralph Barker]

While I'm certainly not in a position to argue the experience of others here, and can certainly appreciate the opposing positions, isn't the essence of what is being discussed really a matter of marketing? I suspect that most people, up to a certain point, do whatever their particular market demands.

The key point may be to recognize that different markets have different demands. If, for example, I were to offer 4x a photographer's asking price for a print, how many would decline to overmat their print with black velvet? ;)

[tim atherton]

I am aware of that, however, before processing they are silver prints.

ha haa - but a little hard to see... rather hard to market invisible prints

[tim atherton]

Tim, first we should get one thing straight, the vast majority of fine art photographs sold in the world are not sold to hardcore collectors or museums. They are mostly sold in 2 ways, first, through art consultants, interior designers etc, for use in corporate offices, hotels and private residences as decoration. And second by non hardcore collectors seeking art to decorate their homes. This first group prefers the art mounted as the work is intended to hang on a wall. Then you have the hardcore collectors and museums who may individually have amassed large collections, but are dwarfed by the sheer numbers of the other type of purchasers. For space saving they may choose unmounted prints then again they may not.
.

okay - then you/we are talking about very different things and different markets - basically fine art photogrpahs to match the wallpaper (and why, as Paul R has pointed out in another thread, it is now recomedned not to use the term "fine art" when referring to photography - as opposed to just art photogrpahy (however un-definable it is)

There's possibly a difference in perception between a corporate office that pays $5,000 or $10,000 for a print and one that pays say $500 or $1000 or so

[Jorge Gasteazoro]

While I'm certainly not in a position to argue the experience of others here, and can certainly appreciate the opposing positions, isn't the essence of what is being discussed really a matter of marketing? I suspect that most people, up to a certain point, do whatever their particular market demands.

The key point may be to recognize that different markets have different demands. If, for example, I were to offer 4x a photographer's asking price for a print, how many would decline to overmat their print with black velvet? ;)

Send check, have velvet..... :)

[paulr]

I've heard this debated a lot. I don't think there's one right answer. Any right answer will have to do with your own preference and the preference of the market you're selling to.

As Tim points out, there's more than one art market. We casually call them by the same name, but the museum/commercial gallery market, the hotel/interior design market, the art fair market, the local gallery/frame shop market, have little if anything to do with each other. And even within these markets, there probably isn't any real consensus.

Curators that I've talked to often don't care too much. If pressed on it, they'd prefer unmounted prints, because that's what their conservators like, and it gives them more options for display and storage. But they recognize that some artists consider the mat to be part of the work, and they respect that.

As far as private collectors, I've found them to be every bit as individualistic, quirky, opinionated, and hard headed as photographers. So for every one of them who prefers a mounted print, you'll find one who's willing to argue the opposite. maybe even fight about it. Just like here.

Personally, I consider the mat to be part of the display, not part of the print. And I think a major part of its role is protective. So i don't dry mount. I want somone to be able to replace the mat easily if it gets damaged. And they're easily damaged.

Those who disagree tend to consider the mat integral to their work. Or else they make very large prints and can't figure out any other way to keep them flat. Their answer to the damage issue is "don't damage it."

If you know where you stand on this divide, and what your market expects, you probably already have the answer to the question.

[Brian K]

Jorge, thanks for the very kind words, it's appreciated. If you really love Mt. Klifatindur ( I wish it had a better name) we can work something out.....

I've stated my opinion about matting not out of a need to stir the pot but because I feel that in most circumstances you do your work a disservice by leaving it up to others to decide what background to place your work on. Museums may prefer to store prints unmatted, but when it comes time to show it, they're matted. And what does the museum do with all the mats they cut for the exhibition when it's over? Throw them all out? So unless the sole purpose of a print is to be kept in a dark box in a cabinet, it's best mounted. Do you think the people who buy your work just put the print in the box and never take it out for a spin on a wall? I can think of no sadder end for a print than an existence like that.

You may feel that your eyes and the eyes of your audience are not affected by the relationship of the print to it's immediate environment but they are. The understanding that the background affects the image is not some new age idea but goes back many hundreds of years,even past the Renaissance. Even Ansel talks about background mat color in "The Print". It's not a matter of your work being able to stand up to whatever background it's on, a great image will suffer in a bad environment just as much as a bad print will. If you have taken the time to carefully choose the print contrast, meticulously dodge and burn tones why then allow the perception of those values to be altered?

This is not some made up psuedo science, there is a way that the cones and rods in your eye, the vitrious fluid, the lens, cornea and the brain deal with light. Just as a camera lens has characteristics so does the eye. Look online for optical illusions or eye tricks and you'll see how easily the eye is affected by these things.

These are not just art school theories, in the 25 years I worked as an advertising photographer I had the opportunity on many occasions to work with some of the best photographers, graphic designers and design firms in the world. They understood the affects that shape, tone, color and proximity have on the eye and even the pyschology of the viewer.

Paul if the mat is easily damaged and needs to be replaced then how does selling the work unmatted make it any safer? If I damage a print while mounting or matting, and it does happen, I throw the print out. If your buyer has a third party damage a print while mounting or matting, they're stuck with a damaged print. I know when I mount a print it's properly mounted on archival buffered board using buffered and removeable dry mount tissue. I use a floating overmat to keep the overmat from touching the print surface and to prevent environmental acids from leaching into the overmat and then directly transferring to the print. As most people who buy prints are not white gloves, put them in an acid free box and in the cabinet types, I am providing them with a properly matted print. Is the cost of matting and mounting included indirectly in my price, yes. A cost that they are most likely to have anyway. If an institution requests a print of mine unmounted and I know they are savvy about prints, I'll sell them unmounted. But how many people here routinely sell to museums versus selling to the general public?

BTW there is a similar discussion in the Darkroom, film processing, printing forum and some good points are made there.

[paulr]

Paul if the mat is easily damaged and needs to be replaced then how does selling the work unmatted make it any safer?

I sell them matted, just not dry mounted. Although I have had institutions ask for unmatted work ... places that would probably just toss out my mat anyway.


But how many people here routinely sell to museums versus selling to the general public?

I don't routinely sell much, but when I do it's a lot more likely to be a public institution, corporate collection, or serious private collector than a casual buyer looking for decoration. In other words, folks with white gloves. And with people at their disposal who know more about matting and archiving than i do.

I've never sold anything to a hotel or to an office that's looking for interior design. Different market altogether.

[QT Luong]

For me, it's a business decision rather than an esthetic one. I sell only naked prints for efficiency. However, if I found out that I would sell significantly more prints if matting and/or framing was offered as an option, I'd certainly consider it.

As far as image protection during shipping or mounting, since my prints are not handmade (like most current color prints, and from what I hear, quite a few B&W as well), it's not a big deal to replace any damaged print. In fact, I insure the packages myself rather than buying insurance for them.