Opinions Wanted What do you know about F.A.C.T.S. ?

Are the existing ISO standards which are used in some areas of Europe and other areas of the world for board to be considered in the formation of the new/updated suggestions for board from FATG/FACTS or will they be away on some self serving mission.
 
Are the existing ISO standards which are used in some areas of Europe and other areas of the world for board to be considered in the formation of the new/updated suggestions for board from FATG/FACTS or will they be away on some self serving mission.

If you wish to make sarcastic comments about the very people who strive to make this industry better, then instead of hiding behind a mask, can I ask you to identify yourself, and where you are based?
 
1: Yes
2: It hasn't
3: Nothing
4: No

No matter what "standards" our industry develops, they will never become the standard in the industry except in a courtroom.

There are thousands of picture framers in the U.S. and the rest of the world who are going to do things their way, standards or not. Some will love the idea of standards, but few shops will base their entire operation on such standards.

The only thing the document known as FACTS will become is "proof" of a set of standards that all framers should be expected to adhere to, 100%.

That is never going to happen unless federal regulators step in and force it down our throats through licensing and testing.

Picture framing is an enjoyable occupation for just about all in our industry. Most framers are independently minded people who think their way of doing things is the best way. That can run all the way from cranking out poster specials, to taking archival framing to the extremes. Most framers are somewhere in the middle ground.

Should a framer find himself in a courtroom, and it is proved that he/she/it is aware of the FACTS document, they can pretty much figure on losing whatever the case against them is, unless they followed every item listed in FACTS to the letter. Few, if any, framers do that.

The FACTS document is more of a tool for attorneys than it is for picture framers.

Then the other thing that really bothers me about the whole concept of FACTS is the group of zealots who get behind such overbearing nonsense, and through intimidation and pressure, try to jam it down everyones throats.

There always seems to be groups of people who think everyone should be in lock step with themselves. This craft we all enjoy is not engineering, yet some, for some inexplicable reason, demand that it become so.

No, I do not hide behind anything. My name and how to contact me is always clearly spelled out at the bottom of every post I make.

John
 
I should add that attempting to disguise the word "standards" with the word "guidelines", will do little or no good in protecting anyone from an aggressive, silver tongued attorney.

I should also add that even though I have never liked the concept of such standards, I did admire the effort and work that went into it. I also contributed financially to that effort. The material is excellent, but it should be presented like any other book on framing, as an information manual only. It should not be presented as guidelines nor standards to our industry.

John
 
Thanks Keith for you comments, however you did not answer my serious question about the ISO situation, will the ISO standard for board be addressed in the revised offerings from the FATG/FACTS

I cannot see where I’m located has to do with the serious question I have addressed a and for the life of me I cannot see how you found my question sarcastic, a difficult question non the less, which is perhaps the reason you are having difficulty with it.

BTW I have also contributed financially (not a huge amount of money never the less I did contribute) to support FACTS in the past as I stated and have attended one of their last meetings that I’m aware which was held in Atlanta a number of years ago.
 
If you wish to make sarcastic comments about the very people who strive to make this industry better, then instead of hiding behind a mask, can I ask you to identify yourself, and where you are based?

Are these people who are "striving to make our industry better" aware that our industry is one of the few left that is not buried up to it's necks in rules and regulations? Are they aware that most of us in this industry have built our reputations based on the quality of our work and the customer satisfaction that we have garnered through our own efforts?

If it can be claimed that picture framing is actually an "art" would not a long list of pseudo regulatory procedures hamper rather than help an artist? Must we all be confined by the desires of our betters to get in step with the way they expect things to be done?

Kieth, I know you mean well, but please, stop trying to resurrect this dead horse. Most of us, outside your group of dedicated professionals, do not want anything that smells of regulations in our businesses. We have enough to deal with as it is now, we do not want more.

John
 
Thanks to all who contributed to this thread.

I have been asked to make it clear for those not familiar with the abbreviation F.A.T.G. - it stands for Fine Art Trade Guild, as this is the better known name in U.S.A and Canada.

3 meetings have been held - Las Vegas, Birmingham and Bologna. It was generally agreed that a merging of the 2 standards, to create one world standard will be the best way forward.

The work will require some funding, and it is planned that this will come from the mat board mfgs. No contributions will be expected from any framers or trainers/lecturers.

FACTS are open ... CCI Notes are open ... PFM supplements and articles are open ... TPFG is open ... FATG standards are closed to members only ...

It seems to me that if there is merit in developing / enhancing recommended practices then they should be open, not only to framers but also to the public. If the public cannot see what is being advocated as a recommended practice how can they know that they are being accorded appropriate treatment?

Further if the funding for the work is coming from matboard manufacturers then in effect the work is subsidized by all framers through profits made on the sale of product to all framers.

In short, it would seem logical that a key objective of this initiative should be to ensure that any and all developments are made freely accessible to all. What is the current thinking in this regard?

I would also suggest that if the objective is a 'world standard' that attention be paid to global influences not just Europe and North America. Are there any thoughts concerning China or Japan, for example?
 
Most of us...do not want anything that smells of regulations in our businesses.

John, it seems a bit paranoid to suggest that framing guidelines/standards/recommendations from any source could ever result in regulations. First, how could any body get a large number of framers to agree? Second, who could enforce them? Third, why bother trying to manage framers who already know everything they want to know?

FACTS and PPFA (I'm not sure about FATG's position) have consistently offered their framing guidelines and standards as suggestions for better framing, and nothing more. Nobody associated with either of those groups has ever hinted that their recommendations could or should be taken as regulations.

...if the objective is a 'world standard' that attention be paid to global influences not just Europe and North America. Are there any thoughts concerning China or Japan, for example?

Andrew, we probably agree that a comprehensive "world standard" would be unlikely. I suppose any body could proclaim their recommendations suitable for the whole world, but that would not make it so. The generally-accepted framing practices in Europe and the UK are significantly different from those in the USA. Australian practices vary, but USA practices seem to prevail there. In Central and South America, Asia, and the Middle East, who knows?

When PPFA developed the MCPF program, we talked briefly with FATG about working jointly to develop a single credential for these two professional associations to administer worldwide. It didn't work out, and both groups developed their own credential programs. If FATG or PPFA truly wanted to develop framing recommendations to promote world-wide, then these, the only two professional framing trade associations in the world, probably would have been talking sincerely with one another by now.
 
FATG standards are closed to members only ...

Not correct !

If you go to the Fine Art Trade Guild website you can access the standards, but first they will ask you to register for free.
They only want to capture your info. presumeably to try and sell you their magazine or membership.
 
FATG standards are closed to members only ...

Not correct !

If you go to the Fine Art Trade Guild website you can access the standards, but first they will ask you to register for free.
They only want to capture your info. presumeably to try and sell you their magazine or membership.

In which case the site is confusing ... the banner heading 'Privileged Information' etc., as inserted below.

It was completely lost on me that 'vital trade information' for free was the same as the 'privileged information' (i.e. the 'standards') for a fee.

A direct link to the material (as with FACTS, CCI Notes, etc) would be simpler and better for framers and the public at large. Further, the cumbersome registration process is an impediment to the free flow of information.

Privileged Information

Guild Member? Log in to access privileged information. If you have logged in but can't see content you expect, have you renewed your membership? Contact the office with your payment - call +44 (0) 20 7381 6616 to pay with credit or debit card to gain immediate access, or send a cheque.

Not a member yet?JOIN NOW

Not ready to join yet? Register FREE with this site to access vital trade information
 
FACTS are open ... CCI Notes are open ... PFM supplements and articles are open ... TPFG is open ... FATG standards are closed to members only ...

It seems to me that if there is merit in developing / enhancing recommended practices then they should be open...

Yes, "open" recommended practices would be nice. Trouble is, developing and maintaining the information costs some money. Somebody has to pay. Corporate sponsors? OK, but then questions of bias and favoritism come up. Personally, I would prefer to have framing recommendations researched and developed by framers, and promoted by neutral publishers, such as the now-defunct Columba, or by a non-profit entity such as PPFA or FATG. Even our trade magazines are pretty good publishers of recommendations, although that is not their main province. They make no pretenses about the opinions of their writers, or about the motives of their advertisers.

Kudos to FATG for offering their framing recommendations free.

PPFA publishes books of guidelines. PPFA Guidelines for Framing Works of Art On Paper was rewritten in 2008 by PPFA member-volunteers. Rewriting of PPFA Guidelines for Framing Canvas Paintings will be finished soon by the same Guidelines Task Force. PPFA Guidelines books for objects, digital images, and textiles are in the works, as well. These are good books and worth the price, I think.

CCI Notes are not "open", but I suggest buying them because they are uniquely comprehensive and a good value. Here's what the CCI web site says:

The full set of CCI Notes in a three-ring binder is available at a cost of $122.00. If you prefer to purchase only selected Notes, they are available for $2.50 each (if purchasing less than 10), $2.25 each (for 10-19 Notes), and $1.50 each (for more than 20 Notes).

That pricing is for sales outside of Canada, but in Canadian funds.

While some PFM articles are "open" for free download, most are available as reprints for sale, upon request. I'm not sure, but I guess Decor has a similar policy for article reprints.
 
CCI Notes are not "open", but I suggest buying them because they are uniquely comprehensive and a good value. Here's what the CCI web site says:

The full set of CCI Notes in a three-ring binder is available at a cost of $122.00. If you prefer to purchase only selected Notes, they are available for $2.50 each (if purchasing less than 10), $2.25 each (for 10-19 Notes), and $1.50 each (for more than 20 Notes).

That pricing is for sales outside of Canada, but in Camnadian funds..

Nope ... CCI Notes are now free online. This from a recent CCI email:


Electronic copies of CCI Notes in English and French are now available FREE to everyone on the CCI Web site. Print copies will no longer be available for purchase.
CCI Notes deal with topics of interest to those who care for heritage objects and collections. Intended for a broad audience, CCI Notes offer practical advice about issues and questions related to the care, handling, and storage of heritage objects.​
 
Back
Top