Frame and panel question

what I do

Adam Cherubini

>First, there is no rule of thumb that I can detect. For small doors, I try to use the column orders. Just for the sake of discussion, let's talk in decimals:

Now I like a door whose periphery follows golden section.

So a door with a given height h, the width of the door might be h*golden section (hereafter gs). So that makes the door .618h wide.

I like the raised panel golden section of the width wide. In this case, by definition, golden section of golden section is 1-gs, so the panel would be .382h wide (.618 * .618h).

That makes the side rails (stiles) (.618h-.382h)/2 or approx .12h wide each.

Like you sometimes I use this right round the door. But when I'm feeling fancy, I impose the column orders to get the upper and lower rail sizes.

The upper rail would correspond to the column's capital. So that upper rail would be .13h high which is so close to .12 that I usually just keep the .12.

The lower rail would correspond to the plinth which woulod make it .2h.

Now I think this makes a good looking door. I'll bet if you lay this out you'll agree. Like all period woodworkers past or present, I don't slavishly adhere to this or any rule. Sometimes the stock under my bench designs the piece. But the formula, if nothing else, gives you a starting place. I hope you find it helpful.

Adam

I make a drawing

Steve Elliott

>It's pretty easy to make a full-scale drawing of a frame and panel door, and for me making it "look right" is the only rule.

I just measured the frame of a door I made years ago for a wall cabinet I have always considered one of my better designs. The stiles and top rail are 2" and the bottom rail is 2-7/16.

Re: Frame and panel question

Pam Niedermayer - Austin, TX

>My rule of thumb is no more than 50% wider than the top rail; so that's where I start, reducing the bottom rail gradually until it looks right.

BTW, I learned this principle in studying how to frame and mat photography and other art.

Pam

Re: Frame and panel question

dick cummings in very southern mississippi

>You can do a lot of math....Golden Mean/PHI/various series etc. Or, you can make the bottom rail 1/4 inch wider than the top for an "average size door. This is noted in many articles/guru discussions/books etc.

Sort of depends on what you want to do. The whole idea is to give a more pleasing perspective to a viewer. Sort of like the columns on the Parthanon...they are not the same size at the top and bottom.

dick

Re: Frame and panel question

Clay C in Miami

>I put a too-wide mock rail flush with the stile bottoms, then lay a piece of poster board/paper/something across the TOP edge of the mock rail. Mark the mockup at 1.5 times and 1.25 times the stile/toprail width (measuring, again, up from the bottom edge of the stiles), and slide the board/paper up and down between those marks until a place looks right - it is a small span, but choosing one extreme or the other definitely changes the door. (And, you can't do this by using the paper to cover more or less of bottom edge of the whole door, or you change the stile lengths at the same time, changing the whole look.)

I'll bet that, since your daughter told you that, you've been noticing it everywhere - most every matted picture you see has the wider bottom - and you're wondering what ELSE you look at every day, but don't see? That happens to me allll the time.

Clay

Re: Frame and panel question

Warren in PA

>I always like to see how people handle this in their work. If I see all even stiles and rails I don't much like it. Common dimensions for a cabinetdoor might be 2 1/2" for top and stiles and maybe 3 1/4" for bottom, say 30 percent larger.

I think if the panel is rather square the bottom rail can be not much wider,and a long narrow frame looks best with a much bigger difference sometimes more than 50 per cent. Sometimes dimensions out of the ordinary can be really striking. Enjoy yourself, I don't think you'll ever look at a frame in the same way again.

Re: Frame and panel question

Bob Hutchins in central TX

>Howdy Bill!

I don't know the rule (if there is one) but I do know that the practice of weighting the visual center above the vertical middle point is common across many disciplines. In copy preparation, editors make a wider margin at the bottom; you mentioned artists and picture frames; architects have long done it on windows and doors (look at interior doors that have multiple 'lights' (ie, 12-lite french doors, et al) and you will see that the bottom rail is much wider than the top rail), columns taper toward the top; etc.

Maybe someone who has formal design training will jump in and spread some light on the principles involved.

BobH, who finds this topic very interesting.

Re: Frame and panel question

Steve Kubien

>I know I won't look at frame and panels the same again. I didn't know they were different sizes (top and bottom rails). Hmmm, maybe I should make something with f & p doors?

Steve Kubien

Well....yes indeed!

bill tindall

>I woke up this AM, looked at a pictures we had framed several years ago, and observed that the framer had put the mat in upside down. The thick part was on the top. One more thing to add to the to do list.............

Thanks to all....

bill tindall

>for the stimulating insights. I guess there is no shortcut to making the decision. Its mock- ups or the drawing board.

Re: Frame and panel question

Tom in Tipp

>I have a process I follow that is close to the one Adam explained. I'll take a look at the opening I have to fill with a door and say to myself, "I think I'll make the stiles about (here you have to picture my index finger and thumb in a measuring mode) this big. And then I say, 'And then the rails (again, digits in measure-mode) about this size. OK, so it is nothing like Adam's method but it seems to work out alright.

On a 20" door the rails are 2", the bottom rail is 2 1/2" and the top rail is 1 3/4". Yes, I make the rails different widths. It has to do something with the fact that I like 'em like that.

We all have a different aesthetic on what is the more correct method for determining the component widths but I think a wider bottom rail is much easier on the eye.

Tom

Esthetics and classicism

Adam Cherubini

>One of the things I find most fascinating about classical proportion "rules" is that they have been so internalized. So the guys (and I've heard this before) who say something to the effect "oh I just make it till it looks right" end up with something very similar to the theorhetically "perfect" proportion.

I suspect this is true because things like golden section aren't just esthetic, they are physics or how your face is shaped, the proportion of the human head to the body, height of your knee, waist etc. Despite the variations in human beings, we tend to have these things in common. Ditto for trees shells, leaves,etc.

So there is no either or here. Generally, there is no competing esthetic. The only question is whether you are as lazy as I am and willing to "eyeball" stuff instead of getting out a calculator or divider. But either way, the columns orders are our natural tendency.

If you measure the things you like in your home, and especially the things you made, you will find classicism. Remember that favorite photograph you took on vacation? The horizon line is probably gs from the top or bottom. Try it.

Adam