There's been a lot happening on the subject of framing standards this year. Just yesterday I sent the final draft of our new PPFA Comparative standards for Matboard - A Comprehensive Guide of Classifications and Specifications. The document is being sent to the printer today, and we hope to have the standards available at the PPFA Convention / WCAF Expo in Las Vegas later this month.
For the creation of this standard, the 2013 PPFA Guidelines Task Force consisted of William Parker, David Lantrip, and me, plus a list of fourteen others invited as consultants; all of whom are experts directly involved in the matboard industry.
It has been quite an interesting project, with several drastic turns in the early stages. Literally, we had to start from scratch. For example, one of the first questions was, how many classifications do we need? Most people tend to think of standards as being dictatorial, or at least intended to prescribe product specifications. However, PPFA has no policing authority; no testing capability, no intention of expecting, inspecting, or attempting to tell any manufacturer what to do. As noted in the May 8th post above, our standards are comparative. That is, we want to accurately describe all of the various products available on the market - in this case, matboards - and classify them according to their suitability for certain levels of framing.
Note that our standards are associated with specific products, and not with framing assemblies. Of course, classifying finished framing according to our standards could include only the materials and methods for which standards have been developed. So at this stage, there is no way to classify finished framing, but as we progress with more standards, that could become a practical benefit in the future. For example, a framer could design and build a frame using Class I matboard and moulding, Class II glazing and mounting, and Class III decorative features and fitting/finishing. In that case, the finished frame would be called Class III, determined by the lowest class of materials and methods involved.
Right from the beginning, our intention has been to develop standards for all sorts of framing materials and some framing methods, but the standards have to be developed in workable chunks. The matboard standards are only the first. Now that we have established the process and format of the documentation, subsequent standards should proceed more quickly. Glazing standards are next, which may be done by mid-year. Eventually, we hope to develop workable standards for various mounting techniques, adhesives, fitting/finishing, moulding, and perhaps other framing materials and methods, as well. As these standards are developed, they can be accumulated in a three-ring binder. That loose-leaf form also would be useful when it is time to revise the standards in the future.
If you have suggestions about which materials and methods ought to be classified in PPFA standards, or suggestions about which standards ought to come next after matboards and glazing, please let us know. Your input would be welcome.
