Why do prints have to be mounted?

[abennettphotography]

As a matter of interest, why do prints have to be mounted and framed in the same way for the print comps?

[Mike Farley]

My response to the same question which you posted on the club's Facebook page. I acknowledge that you stated there that you intended to place this enquiry in both places.

"Print paper is floppy and requires some form of stiffening for ease of handling and display.

"While officially judges should be commenting solely on the aesthetics of the image, framing should not be of consequence. That said, the framing can influence the way a photo is perceived."

[Peter Boughton]

There's no specific requirement to mount images all in the same way*, it's just that there's limited practical options.

Prints must be mounted on card, and the total size should not exceed 50x40cm, nor cause damage when in a pile.

(* for competitions; however the last few exhibitions have had restrictions on using matching frames for cohesiveness of the exhibition.)

[Mike Farley]

Prints must be mounted on card, and the total size should not exceed 50x40cm, nor cause damage when in a pile.[/i])

Club rules merely state that prints for internal competitions should be mounted on card and unframed; there is nothing mandated about size*. External competitions frequently do specify 40cm x 50cm mounts, so that has become the de facto standard for most. Some, such as the Surrey Photographic Association (SPA) for its biennial exhibition, go further and will disqualify prints which have any sticky residue on them**. Paper and card are fragile and easily damaged, especially when being handled in large numbers. I know of instances when prints have been returned from SPA unjudged for this reason.

Link to the club rules. Ignore the dates; the rules are still current and remain in place for this season.

http://croydoncameraclub.org.uk/WebSite ... nRules.pdf

* As Peter says, the exception is our annual exhibition. Prints are judged unframed in the usual way before being returned to entrants who then place them in black 40cm x 50cm frames for display at the gallery.

** It is recommended that prints placed in window mounts have some form of backing which both protects the rear of the print and provides further stiffening. Some methods used to attach the backing board are more susceptible than others to leaving some of the glue exposed.

[Peter Boughton]

Club rules merely state that prints for internal competitions should be mounted on card and unframed; there is nothing mandated about size ...

Yep, the wording I used was intended to convey that - in technical documentation, "must" is a requirement and "should" a recommendation - though of course that doesn't help if communicating to people not aware of this.


On the slightly off-topic subject of the annual exhibition, does the recent relaunch of Fairfield Halls have any bearing on future venue?
(I know there were mixed opinions with the initial move to Clocktower Cafe, but not sure what the current feelings are.)

[Mike Farley]

Club rules merely state that prints for internal competitions should be mounted on card and unframed; there is nothing mandated about size ...

Yep, the wording I used was intended to convey that - in technical documentation, "must" is a requirement and "should" a recommendation - though of course that doesn't help if communicating to people not aware of this.

I had been hoping to clarify the situation for the benefit of one of our newer members. As you point out, my use of the word "should" whereas the club rules state "must" could inadvertently have introduced misunderstanding.

On the slightly off-topic subject of the annual exhibition, does the recent relaunch of Fairfield Halls have any bearing on future venue?
(I know there were mixed opinions with the initial move to Clocktower Cafe, but not sure what the current feelings are.)

This has been the recent subject of some internal discussion. Our club moved away from the Fairfield Halls a few years before the refurbishment commenced. It was an expensive venue and did not receive many visitors unless there is a concert on. At the time of booking, we did not know if any concerts were scheduled so it was pot luck. Even if there were, people would only be looking at our images before the concert and during the interval. Croydon Council has just announced plans to develop the Fairfield green alongside in order to attract more people to that area of the town. Maybe that will change things, maybe not.

For substantially less than the historical cost of a week at the Fairfield Hall, we can hire the Clocktower gallery for four weeks. At present, that is the preferred option and we have booked the gallery for next year's exhibitions. The gallery is in demand, so early booking it ensures that we get the slot we want. There are not really any other alternatives in the centre of Croydon at present.

[Peter Boughton]

Fair enough - I'd forgotten about the large price difference, and thought the move was because the refurbishments were expected each year but kept being deferred (along with the limited & unpredictable exposure, which as you say may or not change in future). The lower cost allowing the exhibition to last four weeks instead of just one is a definite advantage.