Should figurative art have a mat—and how did Gerhard Richter transition from figurative realism to abstract art?

Gerhard Richter’s shift from figurative realism to abstraction in the 1970s—marked by his Abstract Paintings series—began with deliberate blurring and scraping of photographic source material, a method that dissolved representational boundaries. His later squeegee technique, applied to wet oil paint, erased figuration entirely. The decision to mat figurative work follows a similar logic: it clarifies intent by isolating the image.

The mat’s functional role in figurative composition

A mat serves three purposes: optical separation, physical protection, and archival stability. For figurative prints—particularly those with fine detail or subtle gradations (e.g., Richter’s early Photo Paintings)—a 5–8 cm (2–3 in) border of acid-free cotton-rag matboard (4-ply, ~1.4 mm thick) prevents the frame from competing with the image. The Fine Art Trade Guild defines this as standard for works on paper under 70x100 cm (28x40 in).

Larger pieces (A1/59x84 cm or above) may omit mats if the framing style demands minimalism, but the trade-off is increased UV exposure at the print’s edges. For pigment-ink giclée prints on 310 gsm cotton-rag, a mat also absorbs ambient moisture, reducing cockling over time.

When to exclude a mat: scale and intent

Oversized figurative works (e.g., 80x120 cm/32x47 in or larger) often forgo mats to avoid overwhelming the print’s presence. Richter’s later abstract canvases, for instance, rely on edge-to-edge tension—a mat would disrupt this. The same applies to high-contrast figurative pieces where the frame’s inner lip acts as a sufficient border.

Exclusion requires compensatory measures: UV-protective glazing (99% block, such as museum-grade acrylic) and a sealed dust cover. The American Institute for Conservation notes that unmatteed prints demand stricter environmental controls (45–55% RH, 20–22°C) to prevent edge degradation.

Material specifications for figurative prints

For prints under 50x70 cm (20x28 in), specify these materials:

• Matboard: 100% cotton-rag, 4-ply, acid-free (pH 7.5–8.5), 1.4–1.6 mm thickness. Avoid lignin-based boards.
• Glazing: UV-filtering acrylic (e.g., Optium Museum Acrylic) or low-iron glass (2.5 mm thick) for prints over $1,200. Standard glass suffices for editions under $800.
• Hinging: Japanese paper hinges with wheat-starch paste (reversible, per Tate’s conservation guidelines).

Expect framing costs for a 30x40 cm (12x16 in) print to range from $280–$450, depending on mat width and glazing choice. Larger formats (70x100 cm) start at $600.

Resolving the complication: a decision framework

The underlying concern—that framing choices might distort intent—is addressed by adherence to proportional rules. For figurative art, follow these thresholds:

Hang the framed piece with its center at 145–150 cm (57–60 in) from the floor, adhering to the two-thirds rule above furniture. This aligns with the Metropolitan Museum of Art’s installation standards for works on paper.

Richter’s relevance: figuration as a stepping stone

Richter’s transition—from his 1960s Photo Paintings (e.g., Ema (Nude on a Staircase), 1966) to the 1980s Abstract Paintings—demonstrates how technical constraints shape presentation. His early figurative works, often small-scale (40x30 cm), were matted to emphasize their photographic origins. Later abstractions, some exceeding 300 cm wide, rejected mats entirely.

The lesson for collectors: the mat’s absence or presence should mirror the artist’s relationship to the picture plane. Richter’s shift wasn’t stylistic whim but a response to material limits—just as framing should be.