Digital BW, The Print

Michael,
Then we are in compete agreement.  It never occurred to me that anyone was still
dry mounting images because of the conservation problems that might occur.  But
for all intents and purposes, the Kennerly print is signed on the 'paper'
itself, as it was dry mounted and is now 'one' with the mounting board..

Perhaps I did not make myself clear, on my previous post.  What I was trying to
get across was the importance of having an identifiable unique 'mark', (usually
a signature) on the same piece of paper that the image will *always* be attached
to.  It does not matter, as far as I am concerned if the print is signed on the
'live image area' (the picture if you will), on the substrate border, or the
back of the print.

Harvey Ferdschneider
partner, SKID Photography, NYC

>  Harvey,
>
> Yes, Michael Kennerly dry mounted his print on Museum Board.
>
> Mike
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "SKID Photography" <skid@...>
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Monday, February 11, 2002 8:37 PM
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Signing a matted print...
>
>
> > Michael Kravit wrote:
> >
> > >  Over the past 6 months I purchaed two silver prints. One by Michael
> Kennerly
> > > and by mark Klett. Both are signed differently. Mark Klett writes the
> > > title,date and his signature in silver ink along the bottom of the print
> in
> > > the image area. Much like the old photographers of the early 1800's. He
> also
> > > signs and dates the back of the print in pencil.  Michael Kennerly
> signed
> > > his print on the front bottom right on the mounting board.
> > >
> > > Mike
> > >
> >
> > Mike,
> > Was the Kennerly 'dry mounted' to the mounting board?
> >
> > Harvey Ferdschneider
> > partner, SKID Photography, NYC
> >


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]