# Square frame for a square picture?

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page
Page 3 of 3 First 123
• 08-31-2010, 03:23 PM
Ulrich Drolshagen
upper margin = (width of mat + height of mat - 2*(dimension of print) / 4

Sounds complicated, but is is simply the mean between the left/right margin and the value of the upper/lower margin if the picture would be placed vertically in the middle of the mat. Thus the larger lower margin does not get so prominent.

Example:
width of mat ( w) = 40cm
height of mat (h) = 50cm
dimension of print (d) = 29cm
upper margin (u) = (40cm + 50cm - 2*29cm)/4 = 8cm

Or the long way:

left/right margin = (lr) (40cm - 29cm)/2 = 5.5cm
upper/lower margin if picture is placed in the middle (ul) = (50cm - 29cm)/2 = 10.5cm

u = lr + (ul - lr)/2 = 5.5cm + (10.5cm - 5.5cm)/2 = 8cm
lo = ul + (ul -lr)/2 = (10.5cm + 2.5cm) = 13cm

Ulrich
• 08-31-2010, 03:31 PM
RalphLambrecht
Ulrich

I believe that's the same equation used in the link posted above. Good stuff!
• 08-31-2010, 04:30 PM
Ulrich Drolshagen
Quote:

Originally Posted by RalphLambrecht
Ulrich

I believe that's the same equation used in the link posted above. Good stuff!

Interesting link, I didn't notice. But it can not be the same equation. I'll try it out. May be it will give even more pleasing results.

Ulrich
• 08-31-2010, 09:59 PM
DWThomas
Quote:

Originally Posted by Ulrich Drolshagen
Interesting link, I didn't notice. But it can not be the same equation. I'll try it out. May be it will give even more pleasing results.

Ulrich

I think maybe you are assuming a square print? The original effort accepts rectangular images. I note he also has improved it quite a bit since I downloaded a copy for safekeeping a while back. Cotrell's implementation does some warning checks and offers vertical centering or top and sides equal as options too. Plus he now has input for the frame overlap. I had started to hack a copy of the old one to do that, but as usual the project of the moment didn't allow time to play with the tools!

(There is a lot of Javascript in there!)
• 09-01-2010, 01:21 PM
RalphLambrecht
I didn't understand the need for the frame overlap. Since it is uniform all around and typically very small, what's the use?
• 09-01-2010, 02:05 PM
DWThomas
Quote:

Originally Posted by RalphLambrecht
I didn't understand the need for the frame overlap. Since it is uniform all around and typically very small, what's the use?

Enh, maybe just for the sake of completeness. I also believe there are some frames where that number approaches a half inch or more. That would be noticeable in the case of a relatively small frame and/or narrow mat widths.
• 09-01-2010, 06:32 PM
jovo
Quote:

Originally Posted by RalphLambrecht
I didn't understand the need for the frame overlap. Since it is uniform all around and typically very small, what's the use?

That feature is quite new on the site. I don't understand it either since it's depicted as if it were a frame in 3D (shadow sides and all), instead of just a "crop" of the mat size. I hope he tweaks it, 'cause it's confusing.
• 09-01-2010, 07:33 PM
DWThomas
Heh, it's like all software -- never done, and always adding new features whether necessary or not. Those changes were new to me too, and I haven't really digested them, but I think the frame "moulding" gets wider, as it might with larger overlaps. I agree a nice simple solid color would be more than sufficient -- but then, I usually use small profile gallery frames and may be biased. :D

On the old version he had a comment about allowing for overlap, the main problem being you could adjust the "mount" dimensions to make the allowance, but then you had to add the overlap to position the image from the mat edge when putting things together. The new version appears to do all that for you.
• 09-02-2010, 02:33 AM
2F/2F
Nice pic, DWThomas. I think it looks good in its current frame, but that it would also look good in a square frame.
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page
Page 3 of 3 First 123