In a waiting room recently, I notice that the pictures had been framed with non-glare glass.

The reason usually given for using non-glare glass is that it prevents reflections on the glass.

The question to ask is: Why are you framing what you are framing?

The goal of framing any thing, as it should be in other aspects of life, is to make it the best it can be.

Non-glare glass distorts what is framed when you look at it.

There fore, it lowers the bar for why some thing is framed.

If some thing is of enough merit to be framed, is it not of merit to frame it the best it can be?

As stated in my book: If you insist upon using non-glare glass for framing, you should only view it through eye glasses with scratched lenses.

Non-glare glass is an no, no, no for aesthetics.

Of course, there will always those people who insist that minor aspects trump the quality of the whole.

The best quality of glass I have found, thus far, is museum glass which solves all of the problems of using glass for framing and presents the framed object at it’s clearest best.

It is generally more expensive, but if you are going to do it: Do it the right way.

Food for thought.