I am thinking of getting some of those reproduction painting masterpieces where chinese artists cheaply repaint the classics; the paintings are under $300.
I’m not sure whether to merely have these paintings stretched on canvas and mounted that way, or to have them framed traditionally.
What are the ‘rules’ of when to frame paintings? Is it just a matter of taste? Does it make the painting look better?
No intention of snark meant, but I can’t imagine why you would not just do whatever you liked the look of best.
If they were of much greater value, I can imagine the way you display them would take on a much greater significance, especially with regards to preservation.
Are you going for a stark “poster” look or a fine art look? Really that is the difference.
I find that because of my personal history of art classes and museum exposure, anything ‘classical’ [like Mona Lisa, or Van Gogh or Monet] looks just plain odd unframed, but a modern like Warhol or Mondrian is fine just stretched.
I suppose it really is up to your aesthetics ultimately, though.
Oh, and the style of frame matters as well - The more ‘classical’ the art, the more it calls for something other than that thin strip of wood type frame. “Christinas World” would be more the type of art for the modern frame, Mona Lisacalls for ornate.
[if you look, Christinas World is actually in the thin wood frame as I described, doesnt it look somehow appropriate?And the Mona Lisa in a more ornate frame would look odd in the thin wooden frame to my eyes. But everybody is different so get what you like :)]
The ones I want aren’t classical but romantic, 19th century reproductions.
Would these, or say an impressionistic painting, be suitable for just stretching? You’re right the Mona Lisa would look odd unframed.
If you frame it you will probably want to stretch it first anyway. You can just get it drymounted but unless there is some specific reason for doing that (such as damage to the canvas) the usual process is to stretch it then put the stretched canvas in a frame. You could get it stretched for now and see how you like it, then put it in a frame later if you think it needs a more formal presentation.
You may want to check out the cost of framing as well. A painting a friend did for me ended up costing ~$900 to frame when it was all said and done. Granted, it was a large painting, but a custom frame won’t be cheap.
the frames on the websites that sell repros are very cheap – 90 dollsr for a 24x20, 140 dollars for a larger one.
And the stretching is done so that the sides of the painting are on the sides of the stretcher bars; whereas the framed version should not have that. (Is this correct)?
The canvas is stretched over the stretcher bars and then the whole thing goes inside the frame. If you have it done locally the framing might cost a bit more than it does on the website. But you will probably have a larger selection to choose from. You might also save some money on shipping if it’s not framed.
Ah but they don’t charge extra for shipping the frame.
I meant that the unframed version they sell has the PAINTING ITSELF (not the black edges of the canvas) the sides of the stretcher bars, so that when put on a wall, you only see the painting (3-d effect?); whereas when it is stretched for going into a frame, they stretch it so that the painting is entirely on the surface, and the sides merely have blank canvas, so that none of the painting is hidden.
Ergo, if I have it right, you cannot merely drop a stretched “3-d style” canvas into a frame without losing an inch from each side of the image.
OK, I think you are talking about a gallery wrap so yes, it would have finished edges. But I’d argue that if part of the image is wrapped around the side of the stretcher bars it is effectively hidden, or at least it is not still part of the image as it was originally intended to be viewed. YMMV.
Usually, everything looks a hundred times better in a frame. Even amateurish stuff.
