So what would you do?

Rock

CGF, Certified Grumble Framer
Joined
Jul 15, 2004
Posts
172
From
Frankfort, IN
I recently put this on the hitchikers exchange, but it didn't go thru for some reason, so I'll ask my fellow Grumblers.

Recently I replaced the glass on a Thomas Kinkade limited edition print that UPS managed to break.(which scratched the print also, but that's another story) While taking it apart, I noticed the print was attached to the mat with ATG tape on the white border on the front of the print. It came this way from the Thomas KinKade company. Now I realize this is not the way to do things, but why would the company sell a framed print this way and not use hinging? Has anyone else had one of these apart to know if all prints come that way from Kinkade? It looks to me that doing this would only reduce the value if you could not reverse the results.
What are others thoughts?

Rock
 

Ron Eggers

SPFG, Supreme Picture Framing God
Joined
Jul 6, 2001
Posts
16,932
From
Wisconsin
Is it one of the ugly signed and numbered prints or one of the ugly open edition prints?

I imagine they do it that way because it's fast and cheap.
 

jframe

SGF, Supreme Grumble Framer
Charter Member
Joined
Jan 1, 1997
Posts
4,251
From
Fort Worth, Texas
:eek: Would TK stick a customer with THAT kind of framing? :eek:

In a heart beat!

Fast and Cheap just like Ron said.
 

Val

PFG, Picture Framing God
Joined
Nov 21, 2005
Posts
6,729
From
Carson City, Nevada
Same thing here.Said she "Paid a lot of money" for it. Glass broke enroute. Took it apart and found it backed with corrugated cardboard (!!) and mounted with ATG. The mat was also ATG'd all the way around and some stuck to the top of the print. Heckuva mess.. A label on the back dust cover stated:"This authentic Thomas Kincade print has been professionally framed with archival materials". Was that acid-free cardboard? I think not. Acid-free ATG? Probably not. Acid-free staples? There we are! The staples went through the cardboard and out the front of the mat. I called the customer to come back in and take a look at it before I "fixed" it (Un-Do'd the ATG off,uv glass, acid-free foam core, hinged, etc). Never found out what the outcome was, but she was plenty unhappy and talked about putting in a claim, and not only to UPS!
 

Sister

MGF, Master Grumble Framer
Joined
Apr 18, 2004
Posts
945
From
Alabama
Originally posted by Ron Eggers:
Is it one of the ugly signed and numbered prints or one of the ugly open edition prints? . . .
I see once again we are in agreement. And don't forget the ugly 100% pure resin "sculptures" that match the prints :rolleyes: .
 

Framerguy

PFG, Picture Framing God
Joined
Apr 12, 2001
Posts
7,261
From
Destin, Florida
"This authentic Thomas Kincade print has been professionally framed with archival materials".

Back in the old days this was considered fraud, now I guess they simply call it "creative marketing"!!
shrug.gif


Framerguy
 

Bob Doyle

SPFG, Supreme Picture Framing God
Joined
Jul 14, 2002
Posts
19,504
From
South Berwick, Maine
This brings up the question of ethics. Do we, framers as a whole not just Grumblers as a group, have somewhere we can go to police ourselves?

Is there a regulatory body that can come down on a framer or business that claims to use "conservation materials" yet so obviously doesn't? I think it looks bad on us as framers when these fraudulent acts go unreported or unpunished.

Framing done to the best of our knowledge is one thing, but such fraudulent behaviour as mentioned above is just wrong.
 

Bill Henry-

SPFG, Supreme Picture Framing God
Joined
Aug 17, 2002
Posts
20,884
From
Boondock Bowerbank, ME
Business
Retired from the grind
Bob,

I think the simple answer to this is, “no”.

Most professional associations have something like ethics committees that police their members. But, picture framers are not obligated to join the PPFA, and, so, are not obligated to adhere to their standards.

As abhorrent as the treatment of this “valuable” Kinkaide is, other than demanding restitution from either the seller or through the courts, I doubt that there is anyone else to whom this customer can turn.
 

Val

PFG, Picture Framing God
Joined
Nov 21, 2005
Posts
6,729
From
Carson City, Nevada
I really lost my respect when I saw T. Kincade toilt paper! Wonder if that was acid-free???
 

Bob Doyle

SPFG, Supreme Picture Framing God
Joined
Jul 14, 2002
Posts
19,504
From
South Berwick, Maine
Originally posted by Val:
I really lost my respect when I saw T. Kincade toilt paper! Wonder if that was acid-free???
Ouch, I hope so!

I wonder if the TK "stamps" from the '60s are acid free! OOh if you took TK Acid what would you see? BAD TRIP in the land of light!
 

Jeff Rodier

SPFG, Supreme Picture Framing God
Joined
Jul 28, 2005
Posts
19,217
From
Myrtle Beach, S.C.
Originally posted by Bob Doyle:

Is there a regulatory body that can come down on a framer or business that claims to use "conservation materials" yet so obviously doesn't? I think it looks bad on us as framers when these fraudulent acts go unreported or unpunished.

Framing done to the best of our knowledge is one thing, but such fraudulent behaviour as mentioned above is just wrong. [/QB]
-------------------------------------------------

The Federal Trade Commission has jurisdiction in this matter. False claims are a large piece of their work in consumer protection.
 

J Phipps TN

SGF, Supreme Grumble Framer
Joined
Jul 14, 2004
Posts
1,423
From
Kingsport TN
How many of you use to be TK dealers?

I am just asking because, there was a story in one of the larger papers about his dealers having a law suit against him.

Does anybody know if this is true or was it just a rumor?

I'm sure this is an old story, I'm jsut that far behind.

Jennifer
 

Meghan MacMillan

SGF, Supreme Grumble Framer
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 22, 1999
Posts
2,017
From
Baltimore, MD
Originally posted by Framerguy:
"This authentic Thomas Kincade print has been professionally framed with archival materials".

Back in the old days this was considered fraud, now I guess they simply call it "creative marketing"!!
shrug.gif


Framerguy
Is it okay to say that if there's an alpha-mat with regular glass and corrugated backing? Sort of like it's okay for manufacturers to put "Product Not Tested On Animals" when the separate ingredients are tested on animals. Maybe the label that said "This authentic Thomas Kincade print has been professionally framed with archival materials and some other materials which aren't as good" was too big.
 

BUDDY

SPFG, Supreme Picture Framing God
Charter Member
Joined
Sep 16, 1998
Posts
11,501
From
Mandeville,La. USA 130 Blue Heron Dr.
Jeff and Bob I have read most of the suggested FTC sight and I am pleased with what I have seen so far.However I haven't read and studied it in it's entirety .

Can you tell me if you undersatnd from it that the FTC will prosicute for you and will it take a case from someone other than the deceived party?

The reason for asking these questions are that it is my undersatnding that in certain cases were the harmed party is unable the Federal prosicuter may litigate the case for a copyright holder .However they will only do so if the original holder files suit and is unable to litigate their claim.

So this may be even stronger deterants if these two provisions are changed.

BTW associations aren't Industry Police for reasons like those stated above and because they also might be caught up in the never ending investigations and litigations of what even this Sight listed as Misunderstood claims as is stated in ;

"The Commission generally will not pursue cases involving obviously exaggerated or puffing representations, i.e., those that the ordinary consumers do not take seriously.42 Some exaggerated claims, however, may be taken seriously by consumers and are actionable. For instance, in rejecting a respondent's argument that use of the words "electronic miracle" to describe a television antenna was puffery, the Commission stated:" and the segements that immediately follow because of the burden this can place even on an agency such as the FTC.
BUDDY
 

Rick Granick

SPFG, Supreme Picture Framing God
Forum Donor
Resource Provider
Joined
Jun 30, 1999
Posts
20,551
From
Cincinnati, OH
My anaolgy to this is, when it says on the pizza box "Made With 100% Real Cheese", does that mean all the cheese is real or that some of the cheese is "100% real"?
:cool: Rick
 

Jeff Rodier

SPFG, Supreme Picture Framing God
Joined
Jul 28, 2005
Posts
19,217
From
Myrtle Beach, S.C.
Buddy,
Here is the complaint form. Notice that the site states that they do not handle individual consumer complaints. They primarily work on the behalf of the general public and punish offenders in order to stop a pattern of practice that is deceptive.

Here's a link to the complaint form which may be submitted anonymously.

https://rn.ftc.gov/pls/dod/wsolcq$.startup?Z_ORG_CODE=PU01
 

5675

True Grumbler
Joined
Jan 18, 2006
Posts
56
From
Corona California
Well, if you buy kool-aid you know its pretty much liquid candy, yet you can buy apple juice with 10 "real" juice so maybe the TK is really just 10% art and therefore framed with 10% conservation!
 

Ron Eggers

SPFG, Supreme Picture Framing God
Joined
Jul 6, 2001
Posts
16,932
From
Wisconsin
I think the term "professionally framed with archival materials" is vague-enough that no government agency is going to be going after TK or any other hack any time soon.

FACTS has made a good stab at it, but there are no generally recognized standards in our industry.

To address the original question, here is what I would do. I would roll my eyes and curse softly to myself. I would complain on The Grumble and I would show the customer what a mess there is inside that frame.

I would be cautious about offering to undo any damage from ATG but would offer to connect the customer with someone qualified.
 

belinda

CGF, Certified Grumble Framer
Joined
Oct 21, 2005
Posts
146
From
Midwest
One way I combat this is that whenever I am taking an order for a reframe, I take the package apart WHILE I am helping the customer.

That way I know what to charge for

IE: was it hinged or glued to the backing/etc?

And I can point out any damage/misgivings that happened in the past.


I work in the back at my shop and I tell the other framers constantly to make sure they take the package apart while the customer is there to assess anything that may need to be done- it drives me crazy to find things messed up when I have to take it apart myself.
 

Dave

SPFG, Supreme Picture Framing God
Joined
Jun 11, 2004
Posts
13,355
From
Edwardsburg, MI
Belinda,

I always try to take the work apart also, especially if it is in an old frame and the customer wants to reframe the work. It's difficult if not impossible to choose a new mat and frame design without removing the old and starting with just the original artwork.

What if you take something apart, work up a design with a quote and the customer decides they don't "want to put that much into it"? Do you reassemble the frame package for them? Do you charge for this service if you weren't wise enough to mention ahead of time that you would have to charge a re-fit charge if you take it apart?

I had a lady bring in four 16X20 frames with browned paper mats and faded cheap prints in them. Disassembled one to choose new matting and frames, etc. for the four. Spent about 45 minutes looking at new designs. She then decided she like the old frames best (yuk!) and picked out new double mats.

I was to take out the old, touch up the frames and dents, cut new double rag mats, clean (scrape) the old glass, sand the old gunk off the back of the frames and refit with acid free backing and new hardware.

I quoted her $ 50.00 apiece and she was horrified. At that point I told her I'd be happy to reassemble the old frame for her. I touched up all four frames (no repair) and cleaned the old one up and reassembled the frame with new AF back. Cleaned the front of the glass on the other three, etc...took about another 45 minutes on them.

I didn't charge her a dime and considered myself lucky I didn't get the job anyway as I should have actually quoted more.

She just built a new ($400,000.00) home on the waterfront and she's balking about two hundred bucks to revitalize these "special prints that hung in our home when I was growing up"? She actually intends to hang them as is???

Don't worry, I was quite graceful...

fire.gif
:(
cry.gif
shrug.gif


Back to the original question...do you charge for re-assembly if you remove an old print and the customer decides to not go forward?

Dave Makielski
 

Val

PFG, Picture Framing God
Joined
Nov 21, 2005
Posts
6,729
From
Carson City, Nevada
Another interesting sticker on the back of one yesterday. 3 tiny 2"x2" silk embroideries in a 3-opening white (not archival) mat that looked like it was cut with a steak knife. Taped into the frame with brown packaging tape, no dust cover, the "mounting board" was just that...a piece of wood! BUT...the sticker on the wood, above the frame shop's sticker, said "Acid-free barrier paper has been added to separate the backing from the art, thereby protecting it from any potentially harmful acid vapors". The silk pieces had yellowed and were taped to the back of each mat opening, a piece of one-ply barrier paper(maybe?)taped behind them, smaller than the backing, and the backing up against that, a thin piece of wood!
Customer brought it in to have the cracked glass replaced, because she was afraid the acid-air might get in and harm the silk! After a brief lesson in the-wood-is-the-culprit-and-the-acid-is-sealed-in-there, she was mortified, and agreed to let me use archival materials and reframe it. I thought it was pretty bold/stupid that they put the name of their frame shop on there with that ridiculous sticker! Where's their conscience??
icon45.gif
 

Ron Eggers

SPFG, Supreme Picture Framing God
Joined
Jul 6, 2001
Posts
16,932
From
Wisconsin
I expect it's normally a matter of ignorance, not evil.

Future framers may look back on our common practices of today and say, "I can't believe they did that."

Many of us tend to think of ourselves as Olde World Craftsmen (and women) and believe that what was good-enough in 1907 is good-enough today.

That's still no excuse for the stuff that TK peddles.
 

Steph

SGF, Supreme Grumble Framer
Joined
Mar 27, 2005
Posts
2,880
From
NY
Originally posted by Bob Roy:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Val:
I really lost my respect when I saw T. Kincade toilt paper! Wonder if that was acid-free???
I wonder if each sheet was numbered and signed... </font>[/QUOTE]...with his DNA
 

Bob Roy

CGF, Certified Grumble Framer
Joined
Dec 13, 2005
Posts
142
From
Ottawa, Ontario
Originally posted by BUDDY:
"The Commission generally will not pursue cases involving obviously exaggerated or puffing representations, i.e., those that the ordinary consumers do not take seriously....
I guess claiming that a run of 18796 (how do they come up with these numbers anyways??) prints is a limited edition falls under this eh...
 

Jeff Rodier

SPFG, Supreme Picture Framing God
Joined
Jul 28, 2005
Posts
19,217
From
Myrtle Beach, S.C.
The intent of the act is very clear in these statements as it pertains to the art collecting community.
------------------------------------------------

"Second, we examine the practice from the perspective of a consumer acting reasonably in the circumstances. If the representation or practice affects or is directed primarily to a particular group, the Commission examines reasonableness from the perspective of that group." -------------------------------------------------

Art collectors take our claims literally. Conveying the message of conservation framing implies that the art is fully protected. Level of protection (Alpha vs. Rag) is not the issue. Art buyers believe that the entire work is protected.

-------------------------------------------------
"Third, the representation, omission, or practice must be a "material" one. The basic question is whether the act or practice is likely to affect the consumer's conduct or decision with regard to a product or service. If so, the practice is material, and consumer injury is likely, because consumers are likely to have chosen differently but for the deception. In many instances, materiality, and hence injury, can be presumed from the nature of the practice. In other instances, evidence of materiality may be necessary.
-------------------------------------------------

A collector paying significant amounts for the TK pieces are under the impression that their investment is already being preserved. The collector would have protected their investment had the "conservation material" use not been stated.
 

Bob Doyle

SPFG, Supreme Picture Framing God
Joined
Jul 14, 2002
Posts
19,504
From
South Berwick, Maine
Originally posted by Steph:
I wonder if each sheet was numbered and signed...

.with his DNA
yuck! There's a visual I could have lived without. Actually two! one of the signature "spot" and a second of him unrolling and rerolling MY roll of TP!
 

belinda

CGF, Certified Grumble Framer
Joined
Oct 21, 2005
Posts
146
From
Midwest
Originally posted by Dave:
Belinda,

I always try to take the work apart also, especially if it is in an old frame and the customer wants to reframe the work. It's difficult if not impossible to choose a new mat and frame design without removing the old and starting with just the original artwork.

What if you take something apart, work up a design with a quote and the customer decides they don't "want to put that much into it"? Do you reassemble the frame package for them? Do you charge for this service if you weren't wise enough to mention ahead of time that you would have to charge a re-fit charge if you take it apart?
When I take it apart, I tell them that if/when I put it back together, there will be a charge. I've never had a customer decide to change thier mind about having something framed, but if it were as simple as merely pointing it back in and repapering it if someone decided they absolutely didn't want to reframe it after bringing it in, I probably wouldn't actually charge them.
 
Top