More On Framing Photos

As the title says, it’s about frames. The whole thing started when I saw THIS POST. And then I saw THIS POST. If you happen to click on either of those, you notice that the photo is “framed” by itself. 

After exchanging a few comments with the author, I tried a few things and explained the process in THIS post. 

But, what I really wanted was to do wood frames. The opportunity came up to go to an art center and take a few photos of Koa wood pieces. I’ll do a short post about that soon, but meanwhile, I took this photo . . . 

Then, I took this photo . . . 

. . . and I wanted to see if I could use the method described in the post about framing to put a nice wood frame around the photo.

I purposefully picked what I thought would be a difficult subject to frame because of the texture and colors of the photo.  

This was my first attempt . . . 

I don’t think that’s all that bad, but the frame seemed a little thin . . . 

Notice something about the frame . . . because I shrunk it about the center and because the frame is not square, the sides are thicker than the top and bottom. I could have spent more time in making sure the perimeter was consistent all the way around but I was in a hurry.

Oh, OK . . . I didn’t notice until I did a few of them and I didn’t want to go back and fix it. Note that the issue is more noticeable the thicker you make the frame. 

Anyway, even with the larger frame, the eyes can play a trick where the photo appears closer than the frame. Meaning, not so much a photo in a wooden frame as a photo on a wood plank. 

Oh, what is this old engineer to do?! Why, matting, of course. In fact, double matting. 

The process is exactly the same. If you begin with the wood frame, the first matting is a smaller layer atop it but with shading that will make it seem as if it’s below. Then, a smaller frame for the second matting, and finally the photo which — I think — now looks more properly framed (i.e. as if it’s in a frame). 

Note that the matting frames are just layers filled with whatever color you choose. Different colors better match the subject matter, but they can vary. 

So, once I have that setup, I can just bring in a new photo, apply the effects to it and . . . 

You know I didn’t stop there, right?

Did you notice the numbers? Yes, there be a poll at the end. You get to vote for your favorite. You don’t win anything but it will perhaps let you know how well you fit in with the rest of the readers of this blog. 

Since I’m shooting for a diverse group of intelligent and amazing people, and since, usually, fewer than ten people vote, my goal is for each framed photo to get one vote. 

BUT . . . no peeking before you vote; if one wins it all, so be it. It’ll mean you all think alike. 

Here’s what I did . . . I looked for very diverse — and perhaps interesting — photos to put in there. Feel free to compliment the crap out of my choices (use the comments to do so). 

Oh, I can hear it now!

“Hey, Disperser, you poor excuse of a sentient being! Those are the same subject. Do you even know what ‘diverse‘ means?”

Well, as it so happens, they are the same but with very different treatments. That counts, at least in my book. If I had a book. And, if I counted anything in it. 

This next one holds a special place in my soul . . . wait . . . I’m soulless! Nevermind.

Now, people who have actually seen The Chicago Bean will note that it’s scrunched up a bit. That’s because I got lazy. It was easier (in that instance of time) to just scrunch the photo a bit to make it fit. Same for this next version.

Later, I realized it was just as easy to cut the size I wanted and discard the leftover portion of the photo. I learn as I go, folks. 

For this next shot, I dug back a number of years to when I was playing with Still Life subjects. 

This next shot is from last year; the result of one of my playful moods.

I got to wondering about using a B&W photo and I thought I should change the matting. I think it would have been better with more of a charcoal black and not the absolute black I used. 

I also think that particular choice of wood is too “bright”. Perhaps something with more red and darker would work better with B&W. Something to explore in the future. 

So, there you go . . . ten choices to prove your individuality. Cast your vote now. 

Here’s the gallery of the above.

That’s it. This post has ended . . . except for the stuff below.

<><><><><><><><o><><><><><><><><><o><><><><><><><>

Note: if you are not reading this blog post at DisperserTracks.com, know that it has been copied without permission, and likely is being used by someone with nefarious intention, like attracting you to a malware-infested website.  Could be they also torture small mammals.

<><><><><><><><o><><><><><><><><><o><><><><><><><>

Please, if you are considering bestowing me recognition beyond commenting below, refrain from doing so.  I will decline blogger-to-blogger awards.   I appreciate the intent behind it, but I prefer a comment thanking me for turning you away from a life of crime, religion, or making you a better person in some other way.  That would mean something to me.

If you wish to know more, please read below.

About awards: Blogger Awards
About “likes”:   Of “Likes”, Subscriptions, and Stuff

Note: to those who may click on “like”, or rate the post; if you do not hear from me, know that I am sincerely appreciative, and I thank you for noticing what I do.

. . .  my FP ward  . . . chieken shit.

Finally, if you interpret anything on this blog as me asking or wanting pity, sympathy, or complaining about my life, or asking for help and advice, know you’re  likely missing my subtle mix of irony, sarcasm, and humor.