| Author | Thread |
|
|
05/13/2004 12:32:42 AM · #1 |
In my last few photos, folks have commented on my borders and how they suck. Is there a rule of thumb for creating a border?
Thick?:
Thin?:
Faded?:
What works and why? Can anyone unlock the secrets of effective borders for me? Please?
|
|
|
|
05/13/2004 12:34:39 AM · #2 |
| First two are good but the I don't like the third one. The thickness of the frame really is image dependant. If I had to pick a thickness that would fit almost everything it would be somewhere between 1 and 2. |
|
|
|
05/13/2004 12:35:20 AM · #3 |
I have wrestled with the same question and have come to the conclusion that the best border is none at all.
I think in the case of all 3 shots you posted, they stand very strongly on their own. In each case, I felt the border was a distraction. Your work is so good - why do you think you need the border to augment it?
Dave
|
|
|
|
05/13/2004 12:38:45 AM · #4 |
It really depends on the shot, I tend to believe that thinner borders generally work out the best and are the easiest and most pleasing, in other words, less cluttered feeling.
|
|
|
|
05/13/2004 12:43:35 AM · #5 |
You know there's no formula ... I go with what strikes me for the individual image. I'm used to looking at posters and not affording mats and frames so I use borders a lot!
I also use them so my photos don't have to be cropped to a specific aspect ratio, i.e. sometimes they're more as "padding" for the print than as a design element. For DPC entries, a thinner border is usually better as the vast majority of voters want to see more image ...
I usually go more simply now than I used to, but sometimes will use a more prominent border (especially a faded one) to cover some unavoidable/uneditable defect in the picture, as in these
Blue Roses
 |
|
|
|
05/13/2004 12:44:03 AM · #6 |
I don't think there is any rule of thumb. As I'm sure you'll see by the responses you get here, it comes down to individual taste and the individual photo. When in doubt, do what you think makes it, it's your photo, your message.
|
|
|
|
05/13/2004 12:47:11 AM · #7 |
| Personally, I don't like the borders generally (there are always exceptions to the rule), but I try not to vote an image down because of the unless it detracts from the photo. |
|
|
|
05/13/2004 12:51:32 AM · #8 |
Originally posted by dsa157:
I have wrestled with the same question and have come to the conclusion that the best border is none at all.
|
Amen!
|
|
|
|
05/13/2004 12:52:17 AM · #9 |
I have noticed that many shots really 'pop' when they have a good border that simply separates it from the neutral background. In my first shot, I have a thick border, but that is flamboyant, I'm aware--but so is the image, so they seem to match. My examples above were for example only of the various kinds of borders that one can choose. There are many, many more types of borders as I'm sure you realize.
What I usually want is for the shot to 'pop' but that the border does not attract attention to itself (unless it should). I often think I achieve that until someone says they don't like it! Ah well...
|
|
|
|
05/13/2004 12:53:19 AM · #10 |
Borders are controversial - maybe even more so on this site than elsewhere. There are very diverse and strong opinions that vary widely. I doubt you will find a "consesus" of anything by asking the question. But if I have any "rules" - they would be:
a) First and foremost - the border should not COMPETE with the image. You want the viewer to stay within the image and not be distracted by the border.
b) If you feel the image does indeed look better with a border (after studying it both ways) - pick one that "holds" the image with as little attention as possible. Take a peek at the site "top favorite photographs" - the top 15, if they have a border at all, are almost unnoticeable. In fact most are very thin black lines.
c) From a "scoring" point of view, I have seen many,many comments about dedecting point(s) because of a "bad" border - but I can NOT recall a single comment saying "your image would look better if it had a border" or "I deducted a point because it needs a border."
I'm sure you will get many comments that contadict me - so just review them all - and flip a coin! Or follow your own artistic instincts.....
|
|
|
|
05/13/2004 12:53:45 AM · #11 |
This just in: I just noticed that of the 6 ribbon winners on the front page of DPC, only 1 has a border! Hmmm....
|
|
|
|
05/13/2004 12:56:22 AM · #12 |
| IMHO the best border is the one that you don't even realize is there! It's is an art unto itself I believe. Only on very rare occasions have I found myself saying 'Wow, I can't believe how much this border adds to the shot!' |
|
|
|
05/13/2004 01:28:49 AM · #13 |
A border is a frame for the image on the monitor. Everyone will have a different idea of what frame fits an image best, and a lot of that will depend on what the image is up against. Not just on the page it is viewed on, but on the rest of the screen and the room around it.
Since no two viewing areas are the same, the best border (or even just a good one) is going to vary greatly from viewer to viewer. I can not see myself ever adding a border to an image, unless the composition screamed for it -- but, in that case, I can not see the border framing the inside edge of the image, but the subject itself.
David |
|
|
|
05/13/2004 01:55:48 AM · #14 |
I always have the white inner thin line at .021 and the outer thicker black line at .3 or .4 (depending on the photo), thats before I resize the photo to 640. This works for me and improves a photo by providing a bit of contrast. There is always one person who will not like a border, but many don't mind it. Very Thick or faded borders just don't work in my opinion.
And of course, some photos work perfectly without borders.
Message edited by author 2004-05-13 02:01:52. |
|
|
|
05/13/2004 04:07:34 AM · #15 |
I like seeing pictures with borders as long as they arent to thick or rainbow in colors.....
I never get around to putting borders on my pictures.....
|
|
|
|
05/13/2004 07:56:02 AM · #16 |
My process - stolen, as with so much, from JJ really - is to add a 1 pixel keyline, and then a 9 pixel black border after all other work has been done to the photo, including re-sizing. The reverse would apply to high-key shots, if I ever shot any.
This I find gives a good separation from the grey world of dpc, and doesn't get in the way of the image. The keyline helps to differentiate dark areas of image from the actual border. It also helps to give your work a 'house style', which doesn't harm.
Ed
|
|
|
|
05/13/2004 07:59:42 AM · #17 |
| Of course it depends on all situation but for my opinon I like to have borders pretty thin and simple. |
|
|
|
05/13/2004 08:52:43 AM · #18 |
None. The photo should stand on it's own. Distracting borders gets -1 from me. ;)
|
|
|
|
05/13/2004 09:51:13 AM · #19 |
I like seeing pictures with borders as long as they arent to thick or rainbow in colors.....
I never get around to putting borders on my pictures.....
Like this :) 
My little joke when borders were 1st permitted.
I prefer a simple border. I normally do just a 4-8 pixel black border.
|
|
|
|
05/13/2004 11:40:39 AM · #20 |
The thick border looks like a fine art print, the thin one separates the image from the background grey, and the third one goes with the mood/style of the image although not the best faded/aged border I've seen.
Personally I like borders, I feel like it 'finishes' an image and basically look at it like a matt. Borders work differently for each image, and of course there are always some borders that are just hideous like the 10 different color types. Again, personal opinion, but borderless images can sometimes come across like a straight out of the camera 'snapshot'. Not all do, but some.
I dont think you'll find a border option that everyone will like, it's too much about personal taste. |
|
|
|
05/13/2004 12:12:56 PM · #21 |
The fine, subtle line of the default border distinguishes most images nicely on the monitor. High-key photos and those with a good range of midtones extending to the edges do, IMO, clearly 'pop' (as David calls it) with it.
Low-key images, and, sometimes, boldly contrasted ones, would either overpower such a border or render it imperceptible. When this is the case, an equally fine white key-line, moved slightly inward, would strike me as an effective and tasteful fix.
I should grant rare exceptions to this preference. Marbo's parody below could be one of those. Examples of other ones are here and even here. The last example, to my senses, does exhibit a border I'd consider excessive for most photos. Here, grigrigirl has managed to match it so seamlessly to the aesthetics of her image that I can no longer naturally perceive it as a border. It is, at least to me, an integral part of the image.
Some photographers are very good at this, apparently. ;-)
Message edited by author 2004-05-13 14:23:38.
|
|
|
|
05/13/2004 12:30:48 PM · #22 |
i think a small thin border looks nice.
i don't think people would say 'needs a border, i deduct a point' but i do think that a number of people would subconsciously add a point because they thought it 'stood out'.. where it wouldn't have 'stood out' without a border. I think the border should be subtle.
|
|
|
|
05/13/2004 04:48:14 PM · #23 |
Originally posted by dsa157:
I have wrestled with the same question and have come to the conclusion that the best border is none at all. |
I agree. Borders can sometimes add to an image but usually don't. The only time I seem to notice them is when they are distracting.
Rather than give an image with a bad border 1s, I just ignore it and score the image the way I see it. If I mention the border is detracting to an image in a comment I still do not let that affect my vote. The image is still what it is.
|
|
|
|
05/13/2004 05:13:53 PM · #24 |
Originally posted by stdavidson:
The only time I seem to notice them is when they are distracting. |
The point is that you only notice a "bad" border -- a good one just becomes a part of the overall picture-viewing experience. Rather like a well-done film score being one where you didn't notice the music ....
Message edited by author 2004-05-13 17:14:21. |
|
|
|
05/13/2004 05:49:00 PM · #25 |
Yes, I see what the General is saying. It's like I learned in dirver's ed.. your passengers shouldn't remember anything from the trip. Of course, you can take that a couple different ways, but his point way.. nobody remembers taking a smooth corner, they remember ending up in a pile in the back seat when you take it too fast.
That's great if you're photograph (your "art") is trying to do that. The General makes a good point and I don't disagree.
But I have to play devil's advocate and argue with my own point by also drawing a similie to the saying, "The customer's always right". Except the customer is not the viewer.. the customer is the photographer. Sure we viewers can offer our opinions or our "I would have's", but when all is said and done, the art of the photograph is determined by the person creating the image... the photographer... this includes depth of field, contrats, exposure, color, composition, angle, light, many many others, AND THE FRAME!
I'm sure alot of people thought Van Goh's self portrait sucked too. Too bad for them! If you're creating pretty art and don't want to rile the masses, go suble, sleek, and nice. But don't be afraid to do somethign VERY noticeable... as long as it's with good reason and is inline with the message/feeling/purpose of your work. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 06/10/2025 11:54:14 PM EDT.
