Thin black border: Yea or Nay?

[abufletcher]

How do you feel about the thin black borders that some use on all their posted

photos? Personally I quite like this an am thinking of using it on all photos to

be either posted on line or printed with a surrounding paper base.

 

It's simply enough done in PS. Just make a new action: Select all > Stroke (2-

3 pixels) > Deselect > (if you want Save).<div></div>

[abufletcher]

................................................<div></div>

[abufletcher]

BTW, this is a 2 pixel width. 3 might be more comfortable.

[Karim Ghantous]

The Thin Black Line: all that stands between a work of art and a snapshot. :-D

[abufletcher]

,.,,.,.,<div></div>

[al_kaplan1]

The original reason for the thin black border was to say "Look! I printed full frame. No cropping!" You could also see the irregularities of the camera's film gate, the slightly rounded corners (or not), the difference in size with early production M3 bodies (larger) from newer Leicas, and even see the notches many photographers filed in the edge so they could tell which body shot which roll.

 

The worst thing going, in my opinion, is the "sloppy border" fad amongst wedding and portrait photographers. They're even foisting off "aged" prints on the public, complete with computer generated dust spots, scratches, and what looks like the kind of chemical stains you'd get from improper fixing and washing!

 

I'd like to think that we here in the Leica Forum are a bit above that. If a particular photo looks better with the border I print it it that way. Some photos don't. Some photos need cropping. I've never been tempted to add a "faked" border to a cropped photo although it's easy enough to do, even the "old fashioned" way.

 

It really comes down to whether or not a particular picture looks better with the border.

[sliu]

In the movie "closer", Julia Roberts took the picture of Alice with a Leica. In the exhibition later, it is a huge square format print with sloppy boarders. It was most likely shot with a Hassy instead of being cropped from 35mm. I can't believe nobody in the production team saw the discrepancy.

[matt_m__toronto_]

sorry al:) i love full rebate printing. my lab guy hates it too!

[Troll]

I thought it was to allow the photographer to show where the sky ended without having to print it down.

[lee_shively]

Black borders have become an affectation. The same with printing large format negatives with the film holder lips showing. It's too overused. I have a ton of prints I've made over the years with neat black borders and with sloppy black borders. Every time I mat one to hang on the wall, I cover up those borders.

[godfrey]

For presenting photos on the web, I usually add a thin border (one pixel white then one

pixel

black) as I feel it helps show the image on a variety of page background colors:

<br><br>

<center>

<img src="http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW4/large/brothers.jpg"><br>

<i>Brothers</i><br>

</center><br>

On a white background, it stands clear of the image; on a black background, the thin white

line delineates the image. Overall, I feel it to be unintrusive and not detract from the

photo.

<br><br>

I've used more complex framing too, but over time I feel it tends to look dated and/or

gimmicky. Once in a while for a particular grouping of photos, sure, but not as a rule.

When printing, I normally opt for a simple, wide white margin and a plain white matte to

match the paper's base white tone.

<br><br>

Godfrey

[abufletcher]

I'm not really asking about adding fancy frames and mattes or all the other kinds of faux edges available to PS uses today. I'm generally against anything that calls attention to the frame -- or corrupts the integrety of the frame such as "art borders." I don't want the frame to be part of my photograph.

 

I have been guilty of filing out neg carriers to "prove" I've printed full frame -- and doing the equivalent with my film scanner. But I've "gotten over" this. I still scan like this because I hate to "lose forever" even a millimeter of the original. But I now crop off the edge.

 

I'm just wondering about the thin black border as a way to make the edges of the print clearer on a screen (of on a white bordered paper print) whether I cropped the photo or not. BTW, Geoffrey's idea of using both black and white lines seems practical for web use.

 

Often if you have areas of pure white in a photo the edge gets lost on a white screen (like on PN). I don't think a 2 pixel wide black line is making any artistic statement. Any more than Ansel Adams regularly doing a edge burn on all of his "fine prints." And if people fine pure black to be objectionable maybe a shade of grey would be better (in a BW photo).

[abufletcher]

Sorry, Godfrey not Geoffrey!

[ray .]

Yeah. It's a simple matter of not having the image bleed into the

white background that's on these web pages. Once Robert

Johnson told me to always include it, I did. It's standard

procedure for clearly presenting images. One pixel width works

for me; does the job and doesn't draw attention to itself.

Occaisionally there are photos with darker tones across to all

edges that don't need it.

[frank uhlig]

Don't you think it is purely a matter of taste how much salt should be in a stew?

 

Same for edges, mats, frames, ... See what YOU like that day, experiment, make statements you will later revise. Some like it hot ...

some like it cold. Stay flexible and wonder at beauty.

[abufletcher]

"Hassy instead of being cropped from 35mm. I can't believe nobody in the production team saw the discrepancy."

 

Oh I'm sure the folks on the production team were aware of this. In fact, I'm sure it was done intentially for the same reason that in the movies, cameras whether it's a point and shoot or Leica M all make the sound of an F3 with motor drive. This is what the public has come to accept as the sound of a camera -- and in this case -- the "look" of fine art.

 

BTW, I once heard George Lucas talking about why his spaceships (moving through the vacuum of outer space) banked just like WWII fighters. He said the audience would never have accepted them if they had moved the way a spacecraft really would according to the laws of physics.

[jason_b.]

It's a visual crutch. It'll help hold a composition together that otherwise would be pretty

weak. As for "hey I printed full frame" stuff, that should only be a matter of interest to the

photographer. No viewer in a gallery needs that info to understand / appreciate a work of

art.

[mdanger]

Donald, yea for thin black border. Mary

[dan flanders]

Back in the days when the standard salon print ruled, we thought we were really avant garde submitting 'full bleed' high contrast 16x20s to compete with the low contrast contre jour prints that were becoming a cliche (we never won anything but 'protest' was fun!). I find the thin black line attractive when there is really something to enclose, but in most instances a simple plain border seems to compete less with the main image.

[brambor]

I usually enlarge the canvas (with black as background color) for the image by percentage 101.5% x 101%. I also liike the rounded corners of a slide so when possible I leave it there.

[andrew_hull]

Having black borders is a matter of artisitc taste, just like framing, composition, film, etc.

All anyone can give is their opinion. There are reasons more than the "see I printed full

frame" to have a black border, although that tends to be the reason that the "street/

documentary" types use it. If you like it, use it, if not, don't.

[derek_stanton2]

Never.

Either 'real' borders (the actual film frame, with a filed enlarger mount), or no borders.

 

Look at any well-designed classic photography book to see how the best art directors

honored the work.

[abufletcher]

I think another reason I line the thin black border on photos to be presented

on the web is that they lend a faint sense of depth to a painfully two-

dimensional monitor.

[abufletcher]

.,..,,<div></div>

[douglas k.]

I print every frame with the border as a form of "visual discipline" -- it keeps me striving to compose "in camera" and hence use the small 35mm frame to its fullest. And it also forms a nice visual boundary around light-toned areas of certain prints.

 

I've been doing this for so long, now, that I really doubt that many of my good shots could be much improved by cropping -- it's all done in-camera.