Before the rush

Before the rush
by evan-pak

Submit your Photo
Hall of Fame

Please participate in Meta
and help us grow.

Photography Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for professional, enthusiast and amateur photographers. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

I learned about this in primary school; but that is some years ago so I do not recall exactly how it was. I understand there is no correct way to do this – but anyhow we learned the "correct way". :)

I remember something in the direction of:

Having a picture of X × Y the mat should be some formula high, and some formula wide (if creating frame as well as mat). We also learned, as I recall, that the mat opening should be a tiny bit above, or below, centre; one border should be slightly thicker. This to drag the eyes downward, or to weight the picture down.

What is the standard way to measure this? I understand there is no correct way to do this — but as we learned some concrete numbers to work with — and they gave good results and would think there is some basic guidelines for this.

My most important question is which border should be thicker – and by how much.

I got really confused finding this post on eHow (see step 5), where they state the width should be greater. I definitely remember it was either top or bottom.

share|improve this question
Related (about digital borders): Is there any guideline for photo frame width? – mattdm Nov 28 '12 at 17:40
up vote 3 down vote accepted

As I have learned it, the bottom border should be thicker than the other borders.

As with almost any rule of design or layout, this is not a strict rule to follow, just a guideline for what's balanced. If you want a different effect than a neutral, balanced frame, you can cut the mat any way you like.

share|improve this answer
Thank you for your reply; I came to the same conclusion as you have learned by testing some layouts. I also added a guide for one method that I guess is pretty "standard/classic". – Luca Stein Nov 30 '12 at 17:39

Looking around, this is one of the more frequent methods I've found; same applies for both portrait and landscape: (Made a little guide as it is easier to read (picture from

traditional mat guide

Giving us a result like this:

mat result

By calculating one could do – my geometry is a bit rusty so there is perhaps an easier way; but by taking advantage of angle by tan of opposite and adjacent side to the right triangle we get something like:


a: mat width
b: mat height
c: image width
d: image height

We get

S: sides
T: top
B: bottom


S = (a - c) / 2

    a(b - d) + c(b - d)
T = -------------------

B = b - d - T

Alternatively B by:

     (3a - c)(b - d)
B = ------------------


a = 21, b = 30, c = 17, d = 24

S = (21 - 17) / 2 = 2

b - d = 30 - 24 = 6

T = (21 * 6 + 17 * 6) / (4 * 21) = 2.71

B = 30 - 24 - 2.71 = 3.29
share|improve this answer
This photo is small enough that it's probably fair use, but it'd be better to choose something that's either yours or already licensed CC-BY-SA (the Creative Commons license used on this site). – mattdm Nov 30 '12 at 18:15
@mattdm; OK. Thank you for that notice. I'll remember that. – Luca Stein Nov 30 '12 at 19:25

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.