Terrible.

Just plain irritating.

I don't love it. Perhaps if they were just 3D elements, some sort of plaster cast, etc., and not framed art it would have worked better.

Isn't art supposed to be seen? This is only a good idea if you're 7'8".

No.

it doesn't feel taboo - it just looks silly. like catspajamas says - art is supposed to be seen. if you cannot see it, why hang it at all? it looks a lot like "oh look! we are so original!!"

i hate it.... the high curtains already draw the eye up.

This is exactly how I have hung all of the art work in my house too. Other people hang their art work differently?

If most of time in a room is spent standing, the art should be placed at eye level of an average height person. If most of the time in a room is spent sitting, the art should be approximately centered on the wall for viewing or approximately 10-12" above the back of a sofa or other furniture. Placing art as high as it is in the photo is to say the least distracting.

I'm going to have to go against the grain and say I'm surprised by how much I do like this idea. However, I think the type of art used would be kind of key--none of the pieces in the picture look to be really serious "art" to me. They're not really images that look like they belong in a gallery, it almost looks like they're dried, framed plants. As such, they don't look like they'd bear a lot of standing in front of and contemplating.

Actually, to me, they look more like filler, if that makes sense. Almost like pictures for the sake of having pictures, rather than strong pieces to anchor a room and draw attention. I think an understated series of pictures that exhibit fairly strong continuity and don't scream to be looked at are what makes this idea work. In the space pictured, the pictures are just pops of texture/colour to break up the potential bareness of the upper part of the room, and add a another element of balance in an already balanced (in fact, pretty much symmetrical) space.

I can definitely see myself riffing on this in my own home, though my apartment is sort of oddly shaped throughout, and I wouldn't use it as an element to add symmetry, but more as a quirky way of drawing attention to a focal wall in a space-- or I might give the idea a bit of a twist and try a row of pictures along the top of the half wall at the top of the stairs. Inspirational food for thought, anyway!

I think it's another way to add architectural interest. And if you have a set of similar artwork like that, why not?

I'd like to see it with maybe longer, horizontal frames too. I think it's nice to see a traditional element used in a different way.

i like it... it reads more as a border than as art. i think this would work especially well with plates from vintage horticulture/biology/ornithology/etc books

i also think this would go well with an old library feel with curated collections, terrariums, globes and so forth

I really like this. The repetition of the framed elements (they're not really art in this context) helps to tie the four walls of the room together into a whole. In fact, I think it even gives a nod to the inner dome of the Pantheon in the shape and repetition of the elements. I think this idea draws more from architecture and landscape architecture, and less from interior design. It's important to bring cross-disciplinary elements into design, if nothing else to show that not all of the 'rules' of a specific discipline are set in stone. Having personally transitioned from architecture to landscape architecture, I can definitely say that the relative design 'rules' of each discipline do not always match up, and designs can benefit tremendously from cross-disciplinary pollination.

I don't get it at all. Why do that? It is very distracting.

Tracy @
http://www.dailydecorator.com

I enjoy seeing the art I've hung ~ that's why it's there...to be looked at, and sometimes I find myself stopping to examine something. I cant imagine needing a ladder to appreciate artwork.

I think if one treats the prints as almost a border, it's not as bad. They're hardly "art." So maybe it doesn't matter if they are seen or not. And I'm not saying I like it, either.

What I really can't stand about this room is the oppressive symmetry...ick!

oops...can't.

my first instinct is no.

but, it gets me thinking about meta-art and how the untraditional placement is an art form itself, a self-commentary, maybe?

or maybe it's way past my bedtime and i'm not thinking straight....

I'm with the ones thinkig of these frames as a decorative border, nor art. I don't like the symmetry theme carried out through the whole space, but I appreciate the idea. It could bring symmetry to a room that has none.

Hanging art in clusters is in fashion right now; don't tell me it's to see the art better. You want poeple to appreciate your frames, you put them alone somewhere. Clusters are beautiful because they add a visual interest to the room, but as a group, not as single piece of art.

In that respect, I think that the "we can't see the art" comment is a bit odd; when we hang art in clusters, even at eyes level, we cannot see it either, unless we come really close and look at one picture after the other, which, let's face it, most visitors don't do. I've never seen museum hanging arts in clusters.

I'm sure many of the AT Art-At-Average-Height-Eye-Level proponents must have had cardiac arrests when they saw that picture, LOL.

I don't like this for the same reason that I don't like the art-at-average-eye-level look, because it's disproportional to the room as a whole.

It just looks wrong. The whole room also looks extremely dated.

I really like it -- I agree with those that are saying it's really more of a decorative border rather than "art." Not sure about the rest of the room, but I like this...

I really like artwork hung up by the ceiling if it crosses over the tops of windows and goes at least from wall to wall or circles the entire room. My sister has vintage vogue prints in her bedroom that she's done that with and they look fantastic over the window. That space is so awkward, and artwork looks awesome there. In our past two places I actually wished I had more room over the window to put up prints!

I think this can make sense in the right context -- if you have a large color-field painting that doesn't need to be seen up close, for example. The framed pieces in the photo look like "decor art" to me. They match the space but don't really make a statement. They look like they were chosen to complement the other things in the room, not because their owner loves these particular framed pieces (I'm obviously just speculating here). As that, I can understand hanging them high. If their owner doesn't love them, why would I want to examine them closely?

I'm with the border people as well. If you have some simple frames with simple prints, or in this case, it looks like dried floral, I think it's a nice idea. Lengthens the room, cleans up the walls for things like really great lamps or globes or just open spacing. I wouldn't do it in every room, but I think it works here. I recently hung some small photos at eye level...when you're sitting on the couch on the half wall separating the kitchen and living room. I say, once you know the rules, they're meant to be broken! :)

the thing about decor and especially wall decor is you can do almost anything with the right pieces. it's all about balance and it is possible to hang art high so long as the room as a whole is balanced. however i haven't, until recently, been in a home with architectural elements that pushed me to hang art high.

Still high, but a little lower (say one or two picture frame's length lower than present height) would work better in my opinion.