• Welcome to the Framer's Corner Forum, hosted by the Professional Picture Framers Association. (PPFA)
    You will have to register a free account, before you can SEARCH or access the system. If you have already registered, please LOG IN
    If you have already registered, but can't remember your password, CLICK HERE to reset it.

CPF Test - insight from those who have taken it?

I think this is a really valuable thread, though we might want to rename it since we have drifted pretty far from Andrew's original question.

I am with Jim on using simple hand tools. I think you should be able to complete a job without electricity. Can you imagine the gratitude of a customer for whom you created a job during an extended power outage?. Talk about positive word-of-mouth advertising. It would be the talk for years.

I cut my first frame--and many thereafter--on a simple wooden block mitre box I bought from a hardware store. I joined with a jig made from scrap lumber. If you are familiar and comfortable working with wood, this is not as challenging as it first seems.

I know there are many framers who still use the Stanley miter box like the one Jim describes. The challenge is to consistently cut the lengths of the rails to the exact size. There are a number of tricks that help with this. (One is to stack the two rails when cutting them.) I have seen some nice set-ups using hand-made stops and guides. I could still make a frame this way, and consequently think anybody can.

Another trick is to keep your hands very steady while making the cut. This is a matter of practice. I found that I still had some variations on some mouldings, but this was easily solved with a "shooter," a jig made of scrap lumber to hold the cut moulding steady while you "shoot" it by a sanding block. I think my corners may have actually been a little better then. (To see this and other useful hand-made tools, look at How to Build Frameshop Worktable/Fix & Jigs By Paul MacFarland, CPF, GCF)

If nothing else, experimenting with these tools and methods will give any framer a better sense of the heritage of the profession. You will learn to know just what is happening when a saw blade isn't giving you perfect cuts or the chopper is breaking out the back of a moulding.

Whether these things are an important part of the test for MCPF exams is something for others to decide. But I think a part of being a well-rounded framer is to understand the basic tools and techniques, and so always encourage folks to try the old ways. In the same vein, I start training employees with a straight line cutter before I let them use the CMC. (I also like my vehicles to have "road feel.")

I like the idea of a graduated exam, similar to the CPA exam. Besides all of the other advantages, it takes away some of the stress. Great craftsmanship and great speed are to my mind mutually exclusive. Some great framers could probably not succeed in an environment that from all reports ramps up the stress to significant levels. While I suppose there is some value in measuring an individual's performance under stress, I think that this stress plays a more important role than it should in the current MCPF exam. But then I haven't taken it so I can't know for sure.

What I do know for sure is that a great deal of thought & compromise went into the creation of the exam, and we have to have faith that it is the best tool we have at present. Revising a testing vehicle is in some ways more difficult than creating it and it is unlikely to change anytime soon. The fact that the credential exists is a giant step forward.
 
Since at present there is no Advanced MCPF accreditation or Certified Frame Designer award, the Fine Art Trade Guild has the three Advanced Accreditations. Why spend all the time developing three new PPFA accreditations when the exams are already there, just run by a different organization.
Kai, you are suggesting that the content of MCPF specialty qualifications would be similar to the GCF Advanced Accreditations, but advanced MCPF specialties probably would be quite different.

There are a few similarities between the GCF program and the PPFA credentials, but there are many differences, and very little equivalence. I have reviewed the promotional materials for the GCF Advanced Accreditations. It appears that the MCPF exam, as it stands now, is already a more comprehensive and detailed test than the GCF offerings.

FATG has done an excellent job of defining matboard (mountboard) standards with their five levels of framing. On the other hand, some generally accepted practices in the UK would be substandard in the USA. For example, hanging by cord and MDF backings come to mind.
 
Customers do not really mind whether a framing exam specializing in conservation framing is run by the PPFA or FATG. They will be impressed regardless.
Actually, the PPFA credentials are not designed to impress customers. They are designed to help framers who want to improve their skills and knowledge. Some CPFs and MCPFs successfully promote their credentials to consumers, but the primary benefit of the learning process is in the back room, not in the customer's perception.

Even if the PPFA is to run a separate module on conservation framing, then the format will be similar to the accreditation run by the FATG.
A separate module on conservation framing? Kai, your knowledge of the CPF and MCPF programs is suspect, since both of those programs focus mostly on preservation framing methods and materials. Your assumption that further PPFA credentials would be similar to FATG credentials is difficult to understand.

I wouldn't mind traveling to North America and examing candidates for any of the four FATG exams in conjunction with a trade-show.
PPFA probably would not be interested in that proposal, but you could contact the FATG leadership about your proposal. Louise Hay and Martin Harrold are well acquainted with the WCAF organizers, and might be able to pull it off for you.
 
I guess that I was right on when I brought my hand held glass cutter to the MCPF. At our shop I cut my glass by hand. There's no room for a board/glass cutter. I felt by bringing my trusty Fletcher glass cutter, it was one less piece of equipment to learn in a short time. The beauty of the exam is showing that you can adapt to any situation under pressure. A five year old can press the buttons on the keyboard and cut a decent mat. I feel for the MCPF that a framer should know how to cut a mat without a CMC.
 
I guess that I was right on when I brought my hand held glass cutter to the MCPF. At our shop I cut my glass by hand. There's no room for a board/glass cutter. I felt by bringing my trusty Fletcher glass cutter, it was one less piece of equipment to learn in a short time. The beauty of the exam is showing that you can adapt to any situation under pressure. A five year old can press the buttons on the keyboard and cut a decent mat. I feel for the MCPF that a framer should know how to cut a mat without a CMC.
I sat the CPF in Australia over 30 years ago with 29 others. 27 passed including Ormond Williams whose name I see in this forum. There was one failure in Queensland and one in Victoria. The pass rate was 93%. The sad thing is the person who wanted to control picture framing training in Australia failed it on an earlier occasion. Neville Crawford Recherche Specialty Picture Framing
 
Back
Top