Cost of framing a print - DPChallenge Forums

12/21/2003 10:23:14 AM · #3

*bump*

Nikon AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR II

12/20/2003 04:56:09 PM · #4

I found the Logan 301-M today - anyone know how good it is? I couldn't find it on the Logan site, but I did find a 301-S and it looked pretty similar...

dacrazyrn

Nikon D300

12/19/2003 06:03:31 PM · #5

I have made 3 of these. A large one and two smaller to do up to 8x10's. They work awesome and give very tight corners (cheap too). Now I need that V-nail corner driver from Logan. And a bigger shop! (C:

Message edited by author 2003-12-19 18:04:15.

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

12/19/2003 06:00:17 PM · #6

Thanks a lot Paul and Eddy!! This info is helpful and I've put it on the 'secret' list until after Christmas...

Thanks for the links to the forum threads also.

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

12/19/2003 04:38:33 PM · #7

Originally posted by EddyG:

Originally posted by GeneralE:
Big clamps are good.

And 90° Corner Clamps or framing clamps are really helpful.

Check out these two threads and the post below in particular:
//www.dpchallenge.com/forum.php?action=read&FORUM_THREAD_ID=35267

//www.dpchallenge.com/forum.php?action=read&FORUM_THREAD_ID=36465

Originally posted by conceptgraphics:

Here's a look at the progress on my test frame. I'm only using deck lumber for the first frame. I built the frame clamp according to the instructions posted in another thread, with a few minor changes in the hardware department. This is the link to the instructions.

The clamp seems to work fine.

EddyG

Canon EOS-1D Mark II

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

12/19/2003 03:58:52 PM · #8

Originally posted by GeneralE:

Big clamps are good.

And 90° Corner Clamps or framing clamps are really helpful.

Message edited by author 2003-12-19 16:03:38.

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

12/19/2003 03:03:12 PM · #9

Originally posted by tfaust:

JD, my husband intends to make frames after he opens his Christmas presents this year. His major wood working tools (that I can think of) are:

Router, Router table
12" Compact Miter Saw
Various Drills
Palm Sander

Is there anything else, tool wise, we'll need to make nice wood frames?

Thanks!

Big clamps are good.

Sony 16-50mm f/3.5-5.6 E-mount

12/19/2003 01:58:19 PM · #10

jmsetzler

Sony Alpha a6000

12/19/2003 01:48:00 PM · #11

JD, i was looking at the logan 450. Can you tell me the difference between the 450 and the 650?

smellyfish1002

Canon EOS-20D

Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0L USM

12/19/2003 01:40:08 PM · #12

I had two 'exhibitions' this summer. I about fell over when I found out the cost of having prints made, matting and framing them commercially. I bought an Epson 1280 printer, which will do up to 13"x44", a Logan 650 matte cutter, and I already have my own wood shop and make my own frames out of domestic and exotic hardwoods.
My costs went from $250 plus for matting and equivalent solid wood frames to about $25 to do it all myself. I have sold a few prints, but I am getting all kinds of orders for my hardwood frames. You just can't find the beautiful woods and the quality that I do in a retail shop. My 'photography income' is now coming from matting and framing instead of print sales. That is not what I intended, but I'm OK with it!! LOL

JD

12/19/2003 11:42:33 AM · #13

Originally posted by Spazmo99:

It is more work to setup and definitely takes more care to use, but it is significantly cheaper.

I agree completely. That's why I use a framed mat cutter now.

Message edited by author 2003-12-19 11:43:04.

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

12/19/2003 11:41:53 AM · #14

Originally posted by EddyG:

Gordon, you seem to imply that any type of "plastic" glazing (the technical term for the clear cover over framed art) is bad. In actuality, a lot of museums frame their pieces behind high-quality acrylic plexiglass because it has a variety of benefits over glass. First and foremost, glass breaks. If a picture ever does fall and the glass breaks, there is a possibility that the piece behind the glass could be damaged by the broken glass (scratched, ripped, etc.) Second, most glass typically has a very slight green tinting that comes from the iron content. There are some types of glass ("Perfect Vue") that are "water white", but you can achieve the same clarity with "normal" plexi. Third, glass is much heavier than plexi. This becomes especially important as the pieces get bigger.

Both UV filtering (98%, which is about as good as it gets) and "reflection control" plexi is available for a slight additional cost over standard framing plexi.

You are absolutely correct. But the cheap, plastic frames from hobby lobby and the like are terrible.

Spork99

Canon EOS M6 Mk II

Canon EF-M 22mm STM Lens

12/19/2003 11:24:48 AM · #15

Originally posted by Gordon:

A decent mat cutter will cost about $160. I made the inital mistake of paying $30 for a hand held one. If you want to do this seriously at all, avoid this mistake. Buy a decent framed cutter - it will save you hours of time, frustration, and crappy mats.

I have always gotten excellent results using my ~$20 Dexter mat cutter. It is more work to setup and definitely takes more care to use, but it is significantly cheaper.

EddyG

Canon EOS-1D Mark II

12/19/2003 11:01:07 AM · #16

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 17-35mm f/2.8D IF-ED

12/19/2003 09:33:52 AM · #17

Typically you get a choice of about 6 'glass' options

Perspex (plastic, warps, cheapest, tons of reflections)
normal glass
reflection control glass
UV protection glass
UV protection, reflection control glass
museum grade glass (most expensive, typically at least 5 times the price of 'normal' glass, and twice the cost of UV protection, reflection control options)

In non-specialist frame places, you are going to get either the perspex or normal glass options.
Without UV protection, prints will fade faster and generally suffer under direct light. UV protection just slows the process.

Message edited by author 2003-12-19 09:34:27.

Flash

Nikon D700

12/19/2003 09:18:30 AM · #18

Kevin,

If memory serves me, there is a difference in the glass used in more expensive frames, like at frame shops. A deterioration of the framed print can occurr if certain precautions are not done and some of the better frames have this "special" glass. I know that on one of my signed and numbered prints that I purchased, I simply couldn't afford to have it deteriorate due to poor framing materials, so I paid the 240.00 US to have it professionally done. In this case it was an investment in print preservation.

However, for simple photographs that I can reproduce from my files, I just go to a local department store and get frames/mats/ etc.

Season's Best.

Flash

dacrazyrn

Nikon D300

Nikon AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR II

12/19/2003 08:07:20 AM · #19

No Prob

kirbic

Canon EOS R5

Canon RF 24-70 f2.8 L IS

12/19/2003 07:52:44 AM · #20

Thanks dacrazyrn! Just the info I was looking for!

KevinRiggs

Canon EOS-1Ds

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

12/19/2003 07:47:17 AM · #21

Great ideas and I think I'll be investing in some new tools next year. For this go around I decided to order from American Frame. I got the frame, double matting, mounting board and hanging hardware for about $31 USD. I was able to upload a smaller version of my photo and see a representation of how it should look in the frame. Pretty cool little device and it cost about 1/3 of what a professional framer was quoting me. Thanks for that link.

Kev