I've discovered that I don't have enough wall space

[flamin lib]

Last edited Fri Jun 30, 2017, 02:47 AM - Edit history (1)

After 40 plus years of taking pictures I finally framed and displayed some on my wall. By golly, looks pretty good too.

The reasons for so much procrastination have varied but the expense of mounting, matting and framing have been a major hangup. I know it seems odd to invest $2-3k in equipment and cringe at $100 or so to custom frame a piece is probably foolhardy but that's me. Part of the expense is that I shoot 4/3irds and nobody makes a 'standard' mat for that format for 16x20 frames so mats cost $15 and frames run $50 or so with non-glare glass. I gave in and bought a mat cutter so I can cut any size and any shape I feel like. Got the Logan 301 and it's just dead solid simple to operate.

Next was the framing. The love of my life introduced me to 'slum shopping'; GoodWill, Salvation Army and any other non-profit resale shops. It takes some picking through the flotsam of other peoples junk but I picked up three 16x20 frames with glass for $5 each. A little sanding and a can of satin black spray paint yielded like new appearance. Blank 16x20 matboard from Ebay at $1.53 each and the three 13x17 prints matted to 16x20 set me back less than $20! The $90 Logan mat cutter has paid for itself already.

Now as I look at almost a half century of images I find there isn't enough wall space in my house for even a small portion of the good stuff. That said the plan is to accumulate enough framing to periodically rotate displays. Already working on seasonal themes, B&W classics, various size clusters and combinations. This is gonna' be fun . . .

Edit to add the pictures shown above.

[KT2000]

1. beautiful photos!

amazing actually

[iluvtennis]

3. + agree, beautiful

[montana_hazeleyes]

2. Thank you. Absolutely gorgeous.

I especially like the second one. Looks like they are sharing a laugh about something!

[flamin lib]

6. Those are immature fledglings waiting to be fed.

If I were to caption it,"I eat first!", "NO! ME!".

[Callalily]

4. Your photos are great!

I too use my own photos to adore my walls. That was I have a reminder of a vacation, a hike, a paddle, etc. And it's easy to switch out the photos and keep my walls interesting.

[flamin lib]

7. I've had some early B&W on the walls but nothing

more recent than the late '60s. This is the first color to display. Wildlife lends itself to color almost exclusively although the two vertices hold up remarkably well.

Seeing them on the wall really gets the blood goin'. Makes me want to frame 'em ALL! RIGHT NOW!

Like I said, not enough wall space . . .

[alfredo]

5. You need a bigger house for your photos.

I like the idea of rotating the photos. They are beautiful and need to be displayed.

While rotating the pictures you will find which ones speak to you and deserve a permanent place.

[flamin lib]

8. Glad someone else agrees with me about the wall space.

As a fellow 4/3 shooter you know that the aspect ratio is almost perfect for 'traditional' paper sizes, i.e.: 4x5, 5x7, 8x10 etc. That's great 'til ya' get to 16x20 and up. Consumer wide-frame printers only go to 13 inches wide and that means a print size of 13x17. (Don't get me started on why printer prices go from $500 to $2000 for an extra 3 inches carriage width--but that's a different rant.)

NOBODY OFFERS A 13X17 MAT FOR A 16X20 FRAME! 13x19 yeah 'cause that's 35mm aspect ratio--which looks awkward in a 16x20 frame-- but not the 'conventional' aspect ratio.

Okay, rant off . . .

Can't wait to see hard copies of the stuff I shot last weekend in Fredericksburg. Got some interesting texrure/contrast compositions from the Civil war era buildings.

[alfredo]

9. I just stick with the 8X10, it makes life easier.

[TreasonousBastard]

10. Very nice. I used to hang my stuff until I ran out of wallspace...

but time change.

Where i am now i have some extra wallspace, so perhaps the hangings will begin again.

If more of your stuff is this good, it should be out in public.