Family photographs demand of us that they be treated right. They seem ubiquitous in modern life, spread throughout the home. They are also enjoyable. Yet these everyday casual objects are nonetheless demanding. For some reason, photographs should not be thrown away. They are given and received, transmitted hand to hand and home to home, but rarely disposed of. In this paper, we investigate the importance of the framing of photographs rather than their content to this sense of obligation. We suggest that the range of ways of materially contextualising photos (which we call 'framing') in the home map out a family's collective intention to share memories in future with assorted relatives, friends and acquaintances, and to do so in a socially appropriate way. The framing of photographs helps make manifest what Gell might call a "network of intentionalities" (1999 p163). An appropriately-framed photograph seems somehow Good, denoting a moral home which neither isolates itself, nor imposes on others, but shares rightly. Remembering with appropriately-framed photographs means materialising the intention to share memories with others at a future date. As the digital revolution develops, photographic practices are changing (Frohlich 2004). Even since our fieldwork was conducted, a new generation of mobile phones is revolutionising the sharing of images and as technological developments advance, so does the need to understand the social dynamics surrounding photographs.Contemporary discussions of photographs in anthropology have built on earlier treatments of their aesthetics and technological aspects, and moved towards the dialogues between photographs, social action and personhood. Susan Sontag wrote that photography "makes reality atomic, manageable and opaque" (1977, p23), illustrating how it appears to capture memory and make it material. Stewart (1984) argues that such material souvenirs come in time to be more significant than the fleeting events they commemorate.Over time, she suggests, the object comes to be seen as a point of origin of experience and memory, more so than the event itself. Other more recent investigations which focus on the subtle ways photographs can materialise memories of the past include Hirsch (1997), Ruby (1995) and Kuhn (1995).-2 -Yet these objects are surrounded by relationships and social processes. A seminal work in this direction on how photographs are culturally and socially embedded is Pinney's (1997) work on India, which has fed into the rich recent work on how art, technology and personhood interact, by Gell (1998) and Strathern (1999). Such considerations have enriched and given fresh impetus to ethnographies of photographs, their materiality and substance, not only their visuality (Edwards and Hart 2004, Edwards 2001). The attention of these studies to a processual viewpoint on materiality and sociality can appear to have a certain circularity, in so much as certain photographs are for example family photographs because they are shared, and the family is constituted by, among o...