£150,000

But I am biased...

True that looks also pretty cool. I think in general its pretty hard which way you should go because on the wall it looks so different.

The frames look similar in the first picture but when u stand before you notice they are quite different, maybe not different enough for one. Thats why I dont mind the simple gold matt. But sure its all subjective.

Are you not concerned about the implications that oval matting might have toward the artwork? Perhaps you considered the risk that it poses and just though fuck it I’m just gonna enjoy the way it looks and not care. Personally I would’ve played the more cautious game when it comes to the investment side over the aesthetics... but I’m not a gambling person. I have to applaud your balls in such a decision.

Good point!

people also get tied up with using god awful ornate frames for banksy work.

they look good in banksy settings as they are intended to be kitsch and ironic and part of the show.
Not hanging like that in your semi detached next to your ikea floating shelves. He also has alot of these prints to fuck about with and mess up - you don’t have that luxury.

The main two are mount burn of the part of the print hidden by the mount or sun bleaching of the exposed part of the print.

❌

Exactly as Coach says. But light is not the only thing that damages the paper. It will oxidise over time as seen in the Rat prints that have had conservation mats placed over the edges causing uneven discolouration of the paper. The mount doesn’t cause this but it happens naturally over time but I’m sure your professional framer told you this. I’m only a casual framer but nevertheless I do my homework.

for the mount burn high quality acid free board and for sun bleaching a 99% filter was used but I guess that will not help completely. sun bleaching will always be an issue unless u store it in a dark room.

Acid free board and not cotton rag on something of this value?

To be clear there are even quality differences in acid free board. The buffering, backing papers etc. Not trying to ‘shitcan’ anyone but sometimes framers however long they’ve been framIng do not know it all. Ask which board. Ask which tape they used? Ask which glass they used? What backing board? What tape did they seal the back with?
Like mentioned this is possible a £200k piece of art... if it cost £5k to frame it to a high standard then so be it.

Focusing solely on potential light damage, you've already indicated 99% protection is not 100%. Consider the possible impact of the remaining 1%. Not over weeks or months, but cumulatively over years.

There's an important separate issue which many (including many framers) don't seem to appreciate:

That 99% protection offered by your glazing relates to UV light, and UV light only. It will not protect against damage that may be caused by visible light — which is also harmful, albeit to a lesser degree.

__________


Aesthetics aside, this is one reason why a significant number of seasoned collectors choose to float mount their works on paper.

If they actually wish to hang their art and be able to see it daily (as opposed to storing it in darkness), they cannot prevent at least some light damage from happening. But what they can do by float mounting is ensure that any light-related bleaching or fading occurs evenly, across the entire surface of the relevant piece — and therefore less noticeably.

__________


The point here is simply to ensure you've factored in and thought through all of the variables.

To state the blindingly obvious, if only for the sake of emphasis, an artwork like yours has a financial value that would be life-changing for the vast majority of the population. And so it would be regrettable if, say, in a decade's time, you were to look under the matt, only to find that a prominent oval shape had become distractingly visible on your prized collectible.


Whichever path you opt for, get your framer to put everything down in writing: the techniques applied, the detailed specifics of all the materials used, and the standard of the overall framing (e.g. museum level*, or merely conservation level*).

Thank you for all your comments and knowledge. this is why I posted the result - to learn on this fantastic journey.

I gave the instructions to the framer who insured me to meet all points. I think all of previous points are great advice, just wondering why some points in previous comments are not on the instruction if absolutely necessary.

The Conservation Level link I added says the following in relation to Conservation Level framing:

It should give virtually as high a level of protection as Museum Level framing and in many markets, for example the USA, no distinction is made between the two.


The two terms therefore seem synonymous in many national markets — but presumably not all markets.

In places where there may be a subtle distinction (e.g. slight differences in the quality and longevity of the framing materials used), a collector would be wise to insist on Museum Level framing for high-value artworks, and to get this confirmed in writing.

__________


My heavy emphasis on getting things in writing is so that there's a physical document everyone can fall back on in case of a later issue or dispute regarding the framing and purported framing level. Frankly, some framers will band about the term "conservation framing" without truly knowing what it means.

With respect to the specific techniques and materials used (including brand and product names), this information will potentially be very helpful to other framers, art conservators or restorers who may work on or with the piece in the future.

When I last had framing done by John Jones (before it shut down) in London, the company also prepared a very detailed report with photos on the condition of the print I had brought in. This offered peace of mind for both me and them.



A separate general point, which relates to psychological tactics, is that when people are asked to put things down in writing, they tend to be more careful about what they say and do.

Likewise, if I'm on the telephone speaking to a company representative about a question I have or a problem, I will ask for their name. That often seems to focus their mind. I sense they are less prone to bluffing or giving me the brush-off — knowing they are no longer anonymous, and that whatever they say and do (or fail to do) may well come back to them.