What is considered the "usual" mat size for a 16" x 20" print? I used a 24" x 28" size mat and frame and it takes up to much wall space and dominates the photo. It seems that a 20" x 24 would be better?
Of course the real answer to the question is probably; what do you like? I haven't seen anything else that I can remember.
Before I re-size I will appreciate some feed back on what most of you use? Thanks, Steve
Dear Steve,
Attached is a PDF illustrating my basic requirements for any mounted and matted image, since this document hangs above my framer's work station, and where these dimensions are adhered to no matter what size the image happens to be, and although everyone makes their own esoteric choice, I use this template for consistency across all my images...
I find that my images always look balanced within a frame...
I hope it helps.
jim k
Steve, check out these 20"x24" pre-cut mats for 16"x20" prints.
They are made by Archival Methods.
I just received a package of 5 from B&H. They look very nice and are not expensive.
B&H#16202024
Steve,
I recommend following Jim Kitchen's advice. For the very best look, avoid using stock frames as the dimensions tend to be a bit off for good proportions or they result in borders that are too narrow. I've seen many of Jim's images and I'm an admirer of the high level of craftsmanship he brings to his art.
If the dimensions that Jim's document suggests make the frame too large for your wall, adopt the same scheme of keeping the side and top borders the same and the bottom a bit wider and narrow all as appropriate - but not too much.
A better plan, where the the image and frame are too large on the wall, it is to print a smaller image for that wall and have everything, wall, frame, mat and image in good harmonious proportion, rather than having one element out of step.
Cheers,
Bill
I think 20x24 appears a little cramped, and prefer 22x28. A few years ago I surveyed web sites of some well-known people that sold prints, and 22x28 was the most-used size for a 16x20 print. Bob Kolbrenner was an exception, using 24x30 mats.
I cut my own mats, but even then, when you go from 20x24 to 22x28, the prices per board go way up.
John Clark
www.johndclark.com
20x24 would be too small for my tastes. 24x28 would be the smallest size that I would use for a 16x20 print.
At our frame shop we use a optical center formula.
heavier at the bottom , top and sides equal.
2's and 3's
3's and 4's
4's and 5's
and you can go in-between
You get the idea larger print can handle larger matt but not always the clients consideration.
rarely will we dead nut center an image in a matt.
In the long run for framing a standard size will save you lots of money.
22x28.
Depends on the frame.
Take your pic, mat and frame into PS keeping the proporitions and play with it to see what you like.
16x20 (15x19 print with .5" white borders) matted (8-ply) to 20x24 is quite clean and nice looking in a thin black frame
Dear Bill,
Your finished images were not shabby either...
How the heck are you?
jim k
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks