Digital BW, The Print

Eberhard Faber Ebony soft pencil makes a fine signature on HPR. I think 
signing a matte is dumb - the new owner can always re-matte and re-frame a print.  
Signing on the back is fine, except when hung in an exhibition, the viewer 
cannot unframe and un-matte the print to know the artist, date, title, 
edition,etc.  I don't like it. Traditionally, all prints: etchings, lithos, etc are 
signed, dated and numbered on the paper just below the image. Whether darkroom wet 
prints or inkjet prints...they are prints and should be signed as such. IMO.
              Arlene

ArleneLoveL@...
www.arlenelove.com


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

Well, Arlene, if it's so Dumb, why have some of the greatest 
photographers in history signed on their mats?
Sounds to me like you don't go to enough galleries.  Get educated.
Peter G.

On Feb 23, 2005, at 4:57 PM, ArleneLoveL@... wrote:

>
> Eberhard Faber Ebony soft pencil makes a fine signature on HPR. I think
> signing a matte is dumb - the new owner can always re-matte and 
> re-frame a print.
> Signing on the back is fine, except when hung in an exhibition, the 
> viewer
> cannot unframe and un-matte the print to know the artist, date, title,
> edition,etc.  I don't like it. Traditionally, all prints: etchings, 
> lithos, etc are
> signed, dated and numbered on the paper just below the image. Whether 
> darkroom wet
> prints or inkjet prints...they are prints and should be signed as 
> such. IMO.
>               Arlene
>
> ArleneLoveL@...
> www.arlenelove.com
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other 
> resources as they are often being updated.
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish 
> to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting 
> this same page.
>
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to 
> keep them short.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or 
> flames. Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from 
> the membership without notice.
> - Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital 
> B&W printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be 
> removed from the membership.
> - By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and 
> guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group 
> Owner and Moderators. See “Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines” in the 
> Files section:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/
>
> BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE 
> PRINT YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE “OWNER” 
> AND “MODERATORS” OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE 
> LIABLE TO YOU FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, 
> CONSEQUENTIAL OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, 
> DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS, GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE 
> LOSSES (EVEN IF THE  “OWNER” AND “MODERATORS” OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT 
> YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES), 
> RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE INABILITY TO USE THE DIGITAL BW, 
> THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR ALTERATION OF 
> YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY THIRD 
> PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER 
> MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP.
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

get mean....  Oops, don't need my help

Don

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Peter Gorwin <pshelleyg@c...> 
wrote:
> Get educated.
> Peter G.

On 2/23/05 7:22 PM, "Peter Gorwin" sent the following verbage:

> 
> Well, Arlene, if it's so Dumb, why have some of the greatest
> photographers in history signed on their mats?
> Sounds to me like you don't go to enough galleries.  Get educated.
> Peter G.


Some of the greatest in history also signed their prints.  Opinions are
great and can be enlightening, rudeness is toxic... and history is over.

Carolyn 

PS: The resume section on Arlene's site is a great read.

Peter,

I agree with Arlene that signing on the matte or anywhere else other
than the print itself is dumb, but I do it anyway because it is
conventional and it doesn't cost me anything. I also include a printed
notice as evidence of my authorship as part of the print itself,
outside the image area. The one time I signed a print in the image
area, in a gallery while preparing to present the framed piece to a
commissioning client, the gallery's damn silver pen skipped, I botched
my signature and I was and have been mortified to this day, 10 years
later, so I'm rather shy of visibly putting my hand to a finished piece. 

Also, since my autograph is not collectible and I feel no duty to
posterity to suppose that it ever will be, signing the matte seems
harmless and I don't mount my prints in such a way as to expose the
notice/title/signature applied to them - that serves another purpose.

Frank

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Peter Gorwin
<pshelleyg@c...> wrote:

> Well, Arlene, if it's so Dumb, why have some of the greatest 
> photographers in history signed on their mats?
> Sounds to me like you don't go to enough galleries.  Get educated.
> Peter G.
>

Peter Gorwin <pshelleyg@c...> wrote:

> Sounds to me like you don't go to enough galleries.  Get 
educated.

Sounds to me like Arlene does and is. According to several 
highly respected curators of photographs at a major world-class 
museum, "It is customary that a print either be signed front or 
verso, or both if chosen. Never on the matt. Reason being is that 
a matt can be transferred along with it's signature to another 
work which could consequently attribute that piece to the signor". 
The intellectual community is concerned with such practices. 

In the same way a painter signs their painting, the photograph is 
the work of art, not the matt that showcases it.

If a master had signed a matt, his or her action does not set 
precendence for proper credit attribution. Moreover, who's to 
know whether or not the actual print itself had been signed. In 
any event, if a matt IS signed, it then becomes a part of the 
finished piece, no matter what future ruin the matt may fall into.

Arlene is also correct in advising that prints be signed in pencil. 
And it is preferred by curators. No, not so it can be erased, rather 
because graphite is safe, and when used properly on the back 
side of the print, will not show or leach through.

For every person creating a print, there will be an equal number 
of opinions about what is the correct way to sign and impart 
information. But there are certain methodologies that should be 
adhered to, matt signing NOT being one of them.

John Lewis

I have to jump in and agree on the pencil thing, unless the Rapidograph w/
K ink works out.

Sharpies are deadly!!  Archivally, they bring the whole piece down IMHO.

On the pencil vs. black ink thing: I think pencil is less intrusive to the
work.  The dark ink would draw the eye, where the pencil would just "be
there."

Seth



==-----Original Message-----
==From: John C. Lewis [mailto:lewiseye@...] 
==
==Arlene is also correct in advising that prints be signed in pencil. 
==And it is preferred by curators. No, not so it can be erased, rather 
==because graphite is safe, and when used properly on the back 
==side of the print, will not show or leach through.
==

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Seth" 
<seth@m...> wrote:
>  I have to jump in and agree on the pencil thing, unless the 
Rapidograph w/
> K ink works out.
> 
> Sharpies are deadly!!  Archivally, they bring the whole piece down 
IMHO.
> 
> On the pencil vs. black ink thing: I think pencil is less 
intrusive to the
> work.  The dark ink would draw the eye, where the pencil would 
just "be
> there."
> 
The rapidograph works well because it is A)the same ink you just 
made your print with (Shirley no curator can object to that)
and B) You can dilute the ink to give you any shade you want. 
I also dislike a dark, obtrusive signature; I have it diluted to 
about the same shade as a no3 pencil. IT DOES NOT work well on matte 
papers, even RC, though it does work on air-dried fiber-base glossy 
paper. As long as you keep it to semi-gloss and glossy papers, its 
fine. They real down side though is: you only get one shot at it, so 
practice first on scrap!

Steve Karafyllakis


> Seth
> 
> 
> 
> ==-----Original Message-----
> ==From: John C. Lewis [mailto:lewiseye@e...] 
> ==
> ==Arlene is also correct in advising that prints be signed in 
pencil. 
> ==And it is preferred by curators. No, not so it can be erased, 
rather 

> ==because graphite is safe, and when used properly on the back 
> ==side of the print, will not show or leach through.
> ==

To be precise I think the rotring pen is branded "isograph" - these are the
refillable ones that come empty to begin with.  One issue with them: they
have a fine (depending on pen) steel nib which catches easily on RC paper if
moved at speed (eg while signing).

And to Seth:  why on earth do you not consider "glossy" an exhibition
medium?  We are talking about RC papers generally here and so I will assume
you extend your view to semi-matte RC paper.  I have to say that almost all
conventional and Lightjet work I have seen exhibited would fall into the
glossy or semi-matte category.  RC ink jet is not as prevalent simply
because of the issues we have been trying to overcome (bronzing-free
longevity).  I suspect you have the cart before the horse on this one.

> From: Steven Karafyllakis <steve@...>
>
>> 
> The rapidograph works well because it is A)the same ink you just
> made your print with (Shirley no curator can object to that)
> and B) You can dilute the ink to give you any shade you want.
> I also dislike a dark, obtrusive signature; I have it diluted to
> about the same shade as a no3 pencil. IT DOES NOT work well on matte
> papers, even RC, though it does work on air-dried fiber-base glossy
> paper. As long as you keep it to semi-gloss and glossy papers, its
> fine. They real down side though is: you only get one shot at it, so
> practice first on scrap!
> 
> Steve Karafyllakis
> 
>

When possible, pencil SHOULD be used to sign a print, but when I can't
use it, what I use is a calligraphy pen set (you have several tip
widths available) filled with the lightest hue of my inkset. If
needed, you can dilute it to your own taste/needs. It works with
practically any kind of paper, and their advantage is they are soft
and have a nice flow on almost anything. Rotring has some very nice
ones but if you'd rather get more classy, Mont Blanc has an amazing
variety of tips that slide beautifully on papers.

Regards,

Pablo

On Feb 24, 2005, at 12:18 AM, John C. Lewis wrote:

>
>  According to severalhighly respected curators of photographs at a 
> major world-class
> museum, "It is customary that a print either be signed front or
> verso, or both if chosen. Never on the matt. Reason being is that
> a matt can be transferred along with it's signature to another
> work which could consequently attribute that piece to the signor".
> The intellectual community is concerned with such practices.

You don't know what you're talking about. Name your sources.  Is this 
like " a ranking official."
Here's a photography museum to check into.  Ask for Arthur, he's the 
curator.  He'll set you strait.

http://www.mopa.org

Frank:

Nice diplomatic response; however, I believe "dumb" is a rather rude 
way to refer to a traditional technique or its practitioners, and it 
does indeed show a lack of sophistication. Regarding signed mats, 
again, if that's dumb, then someone needs to take it up with the 
masters. (I won't burden you with a litany of
famous photographers who have chosen the convention of signing their 
front mat. You sign your mats, and, trust me, you are therefore in good 
company.  Whether there's room for experimentation in the middle of 
this digital paradigm shift is an entirely different discussion.  
However, trust me, as a photographer, you can't go wrong signing the 
front mat.  (And yes, with a pencil.)

Regards, Peter G.

On Feb 23, 2005, at 8:35 PM, njfranknj wrote:

>
>
> Peter,
>
> I agree with Arlene that signing on the matte or anywhere else other
> than the print itself is dumb, but I do it anyway because it is
> conventional and it doesn't cost me anything. I also include a printed
> notice as evidence of my authorship as part of the print itself,
> outside the image area. The one time I signed a print in the image
> area, in a gallery while preparing to present the framed piece to a
> commissioning client, the gallery's damn silver pen skipped, I botched
> my signature and I was and have been mortified to this day, 10 years
> later, so I'm rather shy of visibly putting my hand to a finished 
> piece.
>
> Also, since my autograph is not collectible and I feel no duty to
> posterity to suppose that it ever will be, signing the matte seems
> harmless and I don't mount my prints in such a way as to expose the
> notice/title/signature applied to them - that serves another purpose.
>
> Frank
>
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Peter Gorwin
> <pshelleyg@c...> wrote:
>> Well, Arlene, if it's so Dumb, why have some of the greatest
>> photographers in history signed on their mats?
>> Sounds to me like you don't go to enough galleries.  Get educated.
>> Peter G.
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other 
> resources as they are often being updated.
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish 
> to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting 
> this same page.
>
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to 
> keep them short.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or 
> flames. Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from 
> the membership without notice.
> - Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital 
> B&W printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be 
> removed from the membership.
> - By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and 
> guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group 
> Owner and Moderators. See “Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines” in the 
> Files section:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/
>
> BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE 
> PRINT YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE “OWNER” 
> AND “MODERATORS” OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE 
> LIABLE TO YOU FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, 
> CONSEQUENTIAL OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, 
> DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS, GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE 
> LOSSES (EVEN IF THE  “OWNER” AND “MODERATORS” OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT 
> YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES), 
> RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE INABILITY TO USE THE DIGITAL BW, 
> THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR ALTERATION OF 
> YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY THIRD 
> PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER 
> MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP.
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

> According to several highly respected curators of photographs at a
> major world-class
> museum, "It is customary that a print either be signed front or
> verso, or both if chosen. Never on the matt. Reason being is that
> a matt can be transferred along with it's signature to another
> work which could consequently attribute that piece to the signor".
> The intellectual community is concerned with such practices.

Peter - I specialize in photographing artworks, and have been shooting in
museums, collections, and galleries for 30 years.  Many of my friends and
colleagues are Directors, Curators, Collections Managers, and Registrars.
Not only is the above comment correct, but in having seen and shot literally
thousands of photographs in various collections, I can tell you that the
vast majority of them, when mounted/matted are signed on the front or back
of the print.  The mat is not generally not considered to be a part of the
piece itself.

I, for one, would appreciate it if you could remove some of the nastiness
out of the tone of your postings.

On Feb 24, 2005, at 9:07 AM, Stephen Petegorsky wrote:

>
>> According to several highly respected curators of photographs at a
>> major world-class
>> museum, "It is customary that a print either be signed front or
>> verso, or both if chosen. Never on the matt. Reason being is that
>> a matt can be transferred along with it's signature to another
>> work which could consequently attribute that piece to the signor".
>> The intellectual community is concerned with such practices.
>
> Peter - I specialize in photographing artworks, and have been shooting 
> in
> museums, collections, and galleries for 30 years.  Many of my friends 
> and
> colleagues are Directors, Curators, Collections Managers, and 
> Registrars.
> Not only is the above comment correct, but in having seen and shot 
> literally
> thousands of photographs in various collections, I can tell you that 
> the
> vast majority of them, when mounted/matted are signed on the front or 
> back
> of the print.  The mat is not generally not considered to be a part of 
> the
> piece itself.
>
> I, for one, would appreciate it if you could remove some of the 
> nastiness
> out of the tone of your postings.

I will return with some definitive responses from other curators who 
will defend my position
regarding my position.  Thanks for your feedback!  Peter

>
>
>
>
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other 
> resources as they are often being updated.
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish 
> to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting 
> this same page.
>
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to 
> keep them short.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or 
> flames. Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from 
> the membership without notice.
> - Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital 
> B&W printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be 
> removed from the membership.
> - By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and 
> guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group 
> Owner and Moderators. See „Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines‰ in the 
> Files section:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/
>
> BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE 
> PRINT YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE „OWNER‰ 
> AND „MODERATORS‰ OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE 
> LIABLE TO YOU FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, 
> CONSEQUENTIAL OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, 
> DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS, GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE 
> LOSSES (EVEN IF THE  „OWNER‰ AND „MODERATORS‰ OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT 
> YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES), 
> RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE INABILITY TO USE THE DIGITAL BW, 
> THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR ALTERATION OF 
> YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY THIRD 
> PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER 
> MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP.
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

This is an opinion from one on the consumer end of things.  In my
personal collection I REFUSE to buy anything signed on the matt.  I
also generally do not buy pieces already matted if possible, however
that is not always the case.  All pieces should be signed prefferably
on the front of the piece, but if not, on the reverse, never on
anything exterior.

On Thu, 24 Feb 2005 09:34:17 -0800, Peter Gorwin <pshelleyg@...> wrote:
> 
> 
> On Feb 24, 2005, at 9:07 AM, Stephen Petegorsky wrote:
> 
> >
> >> According to several highly respected curators of photographs at a
> >> major world-class
> >> museum, "It is customary that a print either be signed front or
> >> verso, or both if chosen. Never on the matt. Reason being is that
> >> a matt can be transferred along with it's signature to another
> >> work which could consequently attribute that piece to the signor".
> >> The intellectual community is concerned with such practices.
> >
> > Peter - I specialize in photographing artworks, and have been shooting
> > in
> > museums, collections, and galleries for 30 years.  Many of my friends
> > and
> > colleagues are Directors, Curators, Collections Managers, and
> > Registrars.
> > Not only is the above comment correct, but in having seen and shot
> > literally
> > thousands of photographs in various collections, I can tell you that
> > the
> > vast majority of them, when mounted/matted are signed on the front or
> > back
> > of the print.  The mat is not generally not considered to be a part of
> > the
> > piece itself.
> >
> > I, for one, would appreciate it if you could remove some of the
> > nastiness
> > out of the tone of your postings.
> 
> I will return with some definitive responses from other curators who
> will defend my position
> regarding my position.  Thanks for your feedback!  Peter
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other
> > resources as they are often being updated.
> >
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
> >
> > If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish
> > to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting
> > this same page.
> >
> > Please follow these basic guidelines:
> > - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to
> > keep them short.
> > - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or
> > flames. Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from
> > the membership without notice.
> > - Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital
> > B&W printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be
> > removed from the membership.
> > - By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and
> > guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group
> > Owner and Moderators. See „Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines‰ in the
> > Files section:
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/
> >
> > BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE
> > PRINT YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE „OWNER‰
> > AND „MODERATORS‰ OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE
> > LIABLE TO YOU FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL,
> > CONSEQUENTIAL OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO,
> > DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS, GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE
> > LOSSES (EVEN IF THE  „OWNER‰ AND „MODERATORS‰ OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT
> > YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES),
> > RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE INABILITY TO USE THE DIGITAL BW,
> > THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR ALTERATION OF
> > YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY THIRD
> > PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER
> > MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP.
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> 
> 
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other resources as they are often being updated.
> 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
> 
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same page.
> 
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep them short.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames. Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from the membership without notice.
> - Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital B&W printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be removed from the membership.
> - By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group Owner and Moderators. See "Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines" in the Files section:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/
> 
> BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE "OWNER" AND "MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS, GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF THE  "OWNER" AND "MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE INABILITY TO USE THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR ALTERATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP.
> 
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
> 
>

This is certainly an interesting discussion. My customers that are
doing their first exhibits will often ask me about this. I see
different things from my more experienced customers. Some like to sign
the front of the image and leave extra room in the mat so it can be
seen after being framed. Some hate the idea of the signature area
interfering with the image and want the mat opening to be tight around
the image. When you cant see the signature, some will also sign the
mat, and some will not. I do not see a problem with signing the mat,
however, I do always remind them that the mat is not a permanent part
of the artwork and that they should also sign the print. I encourage
the use of pencil where it will work.


Mark Rogers
Frame Destination, Inc.
http://www.framedestination.com

Sorry to have gotten off on the wrong foot.  Personally, I hate 
obsessive little threads on these groups, and now I find myself as the 
initiator of one.
So, speaking of signing I will resign from this thread after this last 
post. For your satisfaction I will also refrain from anything that 
might remotely be interpreted as
nastiness, but neither will I melt away on this issue; I think it's 
important that photographers not get the impression that there is a 
hard and fast rule that states that
one MUST sign a print a certain way.

It was gratifying to hear back from an individual who I highly respect 
in this field.  Because I have become " the heavy," in this discussion, 
I will not quote him out of context as my "ally." You'll simply have to 
trust me. In his collection he says, " we have in our museum 
collection, images with signatures on the verso, on the recto, on the 
mat, and on the over mat. We have some with signatures on the image 
itself.  Some are inscribed to others on the image itself . . . . some 
in crayon, pen and ink, ball point, paint, pastel, charcoal, and 
pencil." He begins by writing, " First let me say that the real issue 
of professionalism comes not in the signature but in the image."

Again, without my being "nasty" or condescending, let me just say that 
if you as a consumer REFUSE to collect anything signed on the matt, I 
fear that you may end up passing up some rather beautiful and valuable 
photos.

Regards, Peter G.

On Feb 24, 2005, at 9:47 AM, Jonathon Schuster wrote:

>
> This is an opinion from one on the consumer end of things.  In my
> personal collection I REFUSE to buy anything signed on the matt.  I
> also generally do not buy pieces already matted if possible, however
> that is not always the case.  All pieces should be signed prefferably
> on the front of the piece, but if not, on the reverse, never on
> anything exterior.
>
> On Thu, 24 Feb 2005 09:34:17 -0800, Peter Gorwin <pshelleyg@...> 
> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Feb 24, 2005, at 9:07 AM, Stephen Petegorsky wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>> According to several highly respected curators of photographs at a
>>>> major world-class
>>>> museum, "It is customary that a print either be signed front or
>>>> verso, or both if chosen. Never on the matt. Reason being is that
>>>> a matt can be transferred along with it's signature to another
>>>> work which could consequently attribute that piece to the signor".
>>>> The intellectual community is concerned with such practices.
>>>
>>> Peter - I specialize in photographing artworks, and have been 
>>> shooting
>>> in
>>> museums, collections, and galleries for 30 years.  Many of my friends
>>> and
>>> colleagues are Directors, Curators, Collections Managers, and
>>> Registrars.
>>> Not only is the above comment correct, but in having seen and shot
>>> literally
>>> thousands of photographs in various collections, I can tell you that
>>> the
>>> vast majority of them, when mounted/matted are signed on the front or
>>> back
>>> of the print.  The mat is not generally not considered to be a part 
>>> of
>>> the
>>> piece itself.
>>>
>>> I, for one, would appreciate it if you could remove some of the
>>> nastiness
>>> out of the tone of your postings.
>>
>> I will return with some definitive responses from other curators who
>> will defend my position
>> regarding my position.  Thanks for your feedback!  Peter
>>>
>>>
>>>

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Carolyn Frayn <
carolyn@u...> wrote:
> On 2/23/05 7:22 PM, "Peter Gorwin" sent the following verbage:
> 
> > 
> > Well, Arlene, if it's so Dumb, why have some of the greatest
> > photographers in history signed on their mats?
> > Sounds to me like you don't go to enough galleries.  Get educated.
> > Peter G.
> 
> 
> Some of the greatest in history also signed their prints.  Opinions are
> great and can be enlightening, rudeness is toxic... and history is over.
> 
> Carolyn 
> 
> PS: The resume section on Arlene's site is a great read.

Some might that dogma is a great read too.

Salvador Dali is getting a lot of press these days...
He's long been known to have signed thousands of sheets of paper in
advance of his demise, allowing promiscuous postmortem mass production
of his "signed originals." But "curators" and "collectors" hate this
truth and debate it, encouraging ignorance in order to drive prices up.

Steve-

I am not an expert on carts, but have herded cattle so know a little about
horses <GGG>.

Anyway, it's a personal thing.  I didn't say or imply others shouldn't do
glossy prints.

I did a lot of printing for others in the Navy for contests.  It was always
matte or E surface.

I also did a lot of major (large) exhibits for a former employer and we
always used matte prints, even though we were copying 19th and early 20th
century originals.  Those did not have glass in front of them.

The only time(s) I printed gloss was if it was being sent out for
reproduction or was being sold to the public (F paper was cheaper).
Cibachromes were on Pearl, so that's as close as I went.

In my case now it's down to reflections.  

I guess I never thought of glossy as having as much "class" as a matte
print.  With matte I want to use the term more "regal," I guess.  Look and
feel?

I find no fault with those that print glossy.  I don't want to deal with all
the issues of rub off, drying, bronzing, etc.

Just me.  Just my opinion.  Just the way I want my work done.

Seth

==-----Original Message-----
==From: Steve Kale [mailto:stevekale@...] 

==
==And to Seth:  why on earth do you not consider "glossy" an 
==exhibition medium?  We are talking about RC papers generally 
==here and so I will assume you extend your view to semi-matte 
==RC paper.  I have to say that almost all conventional and 
==Lightjet work I have seen exhibited would fall into the 
==glossy or semi-matte category.  RC ink jet is not as 
==prevalent simply because of the issues we have been trying to 
==overcome (bronzing-free longevity).  I suspect you have the 
==cart before the horse on this one.
==

During my wet print years I trimmed and dry-mounted on 4-ply matt
board, signed just under the bottom of the print, and made the window
matt bigger than the print so the signature could show.  This is
usually called a floating matt or floating mount, or something like
that.  It looks real nice but requires a lot of precision and is
tedious and very time consuming.

My mentor at the time said this method is preferred by galleries and
collectors because it shows the entire print, assures that the image
hasn't been cropped by the matt, and no "sins" can be covered up (such
as torn edges, etc).  It also allows precisely measuring the print
dimensions.  

I know that dry-mounting has since fallen out of favor, so I don't
know what emulsion print folks are doing these days.  For my taste,
seeing wavy prints under a matt looks terrible.

Now with carbon ink prints, the paper stays flat and dry mounting
isn't necessary.  I leave a sizeable paper border around the image,
sign just under the bottom edge of the image as before, and still make
the window matt larger.  This gives a nearly identical appearance as
before - very nice looking - with all of the above criteria being
met.  

I attach the print to the back of the matt with linen tape, which not
only prevents it from shifting position, but eliminates the need for
the 2nd piece of mattboard.  The matt/print is then top-hinged with
linen tape to acid free foam core backing.

Because it's not dry-mounted, and the border with signature could be
trimmed off, I'm also signing on the back of the print in the image
area.  The signing is done very lightly with a #2 pencil.

Bottom line - matting is now quicker, easier, less expensive. 
Hooray!

Anybody interested in a Bogen model 510 dry mount press? :)


Regards,
Clayton


Info on black and white digital printing at    
http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm

I mount exactly this way.  The matt window is .5 inches larger on the 
top and sides of the trimmed dry-mounted print and 1.25 inches larger 
on the bottom to accommodate the signature.  It is worth the care 
taken for precision, to me.

I just sent two sets of a collection mounted and matted this way to 
France.

As far as "being out of favor", like so many things it depends on 
context.  Prints mounted this way are highly resistant to damage from 
handling.  The mount board is integral to the print, i.e., as if the 
emulsion were on the mount board.

Jesse

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Clayton Jones" 
<cj@c...> wrote:
> 
> During my wet print years I trimmed and dry-mounted on 4-ply matt
> board, signed just under the bottom of the print, and made the 
window

> matt bigger than the print so the signature could show.  This is
> usually called a floating matt or floating mount, or something like
> that.  It looks real nice but requires a lot of precision and is
> tedious and very time consuming.
> 
>

If anyone is interested, I have 4oz bottles of UT-FSN C, M, Y (dark, medium,
light grey) for sale.  The bottles are about 85-90% full - I just drew
enough ink to load an Epson 2100 cart each.  If anyone is interested please
contact me OFF LIST.

Steve,

What ink arrangement are you using in your 2100?

Paul
_____________________

-----Original Message-----
From: Steve Kale [mailto:stevekale@btinternet.com] 
Sent: Friday, February 25, 2005 12:48 PM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Digital BW] OT: FSN Ink for sale to UK


If anyone is interested, I have 4oz bottles of UT-FSN C, M, Y (dark, medium,
light grey) for sale.  The bottles are about 85-90% full - I just drew
enough ink to load an Epson 2100 cart each.  If anyone is interested please
contact me OFF LIST.







Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other resources as
they are often being updated.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint

If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to
unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same
page.

Please follow these basic guidelines:
- As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep
them short.
- Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames.
Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from the
membership without notice.
- Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital B&W
printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be removed from
the membership.
- By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and
guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group Owner and
Moderators. See Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines in the Files section:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/

BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT
YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE OWNER AND
MODERATORS OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU
FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR EXEMPLARY
DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS,
GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF THE  OWNER AND
MODERATORS OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE
POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE INABILITY
TO USE THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR
ALTERATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY
THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER
MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP.
 
Yahoo! Groups Links

Hi Paul

# Uses the MIS inks in the following positions:
# K PKN
# LK glop
# C PK 
# LC UT2 LM Warm Light Grey
# M Eboni
# LM UT7 Cool Light Grey
# Y UT2 Sepia toner

So same as Carl but slightly different slots.  Hence my discussion with Carl
about the density of the warm light grey.  I have only done prints on Ilford
Smooth Pearl, EPSG and Epson Premium Luster with this setup - I overcoat
with 50% glop.  The glop taints the page slightly at that load but not too
much.  No bronzing etc.  I prefer the surface texture of EPL (without glop)
- that nice soft matte silky look - but then there are the
bronzing/reflectance issues.  Would love to see a printer-applied coating
which was clearer, less glossy and required less load to kill the bronzing
but I will have to wait....

Cheers

Steve

> From: Paul Roark <paul.roark@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2005 13:03:52 -0800
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: RE: [Digital BW] OT: FSN Ink for sale to UK
> 
> 
> Steve,
> 
> What ink arrangement are you using in your 2100?
> 
> Paul
> _____________________
>

I just read the forum messages -- ignore my repetitious question.

Paul
___________________

-----Original Message-----
From: Steve Kale [mailto:stevekale@...] 
Sent: Friday, February 25, 2005 12:48 PM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Digital BW] OT: FSN Ink for sale to UK


If anyone is interested, I have 4oz bottles of UT-FSN C, M, Y (dark, medium,
light grey) for sale.  The bottles are about 85-90% full - I just drew
enough ink to load an Epson 2100 cart each.  If anyone is interested please
contact me OFF LIST.







Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other resources as
they are often being updated.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint

If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to
unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same
page.

Please follow these basic guidelines:
- As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep
them short.
- Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames.
Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from the
membership without notice.
- Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital B&W
printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be removed from
the membership.
- By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and
guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group Owner and
Moderators. See Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines in the Files section:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/

BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT
YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE OWNER AND
MODERATORS OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU
FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR EXEMPLARY
DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS,
GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF THE  OWNER AND
MODERATORS OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE
POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE INABILITY
TO USE THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR
ALTERATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY
THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER
MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP.
 
Yahoo! Groups Links

Hello Jesse,

>I mount exactly this way...It is worth the care 
>taken for precision, to me.

Yes definitely.  It's really beautiful and I did it that way for
years. Now in this new era I'm happy that dry-mounting isn't necessary
with carbon ink prints.  I still make the window matt bigger and get
the identical effect and advantages without nearly so much work and
time. Imahappycamper :)


>As far as "being out of favor", like so many things it depends on 
>context.  Prints mounted this way are highly resistant to damage
>from handling.  The mount board is integral to the print, i.e., 
>as if the emulsion were on the mount board.

Agreed, it's a great way to do it.  20 some years ago everyone (famous
photographers, workshop teachers, authors) was preaching to do it that
way.  During the past few years, however, I've heard that collectors
and gallery people now prefer that prints not be dry-mounted. 
Something about it being too permanent or something, in case it needs
to be removed.  Things change I guess, although I'd probably still do
it if I was doing wet printing.  I haven't seen an ad for a
dry-mount press in a long time.  I bought mine from B&H years ago. 
Now you can't find one in the ads. 

Just to make the point, I haven't had any replies from my earlier
post, so I'll mention it again: Anyone want to buy my Bogen model 510
dry-mount press?   

How about my Zone VI 4x5 cold light head with stabilizer and dry-down
control?

How about my Kodak 10x12 safe light?

How about my GraLab electronic timer with foot switch?

How about my Pentax digital spotmeter with leather holster?

Last summer I took a medium format enlarger to Goodwill because I
couldn't find anyone interested in it.  Last month I thought I'd sell
my trusty Minolta 7000i with 35-135 zoom and dedicated zoom flash and
fancy flash bracket.  I looked on Ebay.  There were pages and pages of
35mm cams, most with nobody bidding.  I found a 7000i outfit and
someone had bid $12.  My time is worth more than that so I took it to
Goodwill.

sigh.

But I'm happy.  I love digital BW printing and would never go back.

Long live Eboni! <g>.

Regards,
Clayton


Info on black and white digital printing at    
http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm

Having worked in museum for more than twenty years, I'll jump in and
give a perspective from there...  Dry mounting was very prevalent for
photographs up through the 60's as it provided stability against curl,
physical protection, and even a little extra crispness from the little
bit of ferrotypeing that would occur under the heat and pressure. 
However it began to lose favor in the 70's as photography became more
and more a "fine art".  Traditionally, other print media would be
hinge mounted and art photographers began doing this, in part to
emulate fine art.  And while it was long suspected that dry mounting
was an archival problem in that the fusion material may have
deteriorative effects on the print and mount, over time it became
evident that more often the problem was the deterioration of the mount
board itself.  Photographers also began printing with the image well
within the paper edge, in part to emulate other print types (and
separate them from the 1/4 inch borders of commercial printers) as
well as providing a visual "matt" for the image when showing a box of
prints without the necessity of mounting everything.

The most compelling reason not to use permanent mounting techniques is
that, as the mount/matt is meant to protect the print from physical
damage, it invariably becomes damaged itself and needs to be replace.
 Also, as presentation styles change over time, prints can be
re-matted to fit the current trend.  Having the ability to easily
remove and replace the mount/matt is really a necessity over the the
life (100+ years?) of a print.  Believe me, having had to prepare
prints that were dry mounted for exhibition can be a major pain.

I would recommend mounting prints with archival tape using the "T" or
"hinge" mount technique.  Archival tape will not damage the print and
can easily be removed by dampening from behind.  If you want to
"float" mount a full bleed image, you can to it with a hinge mount. 
It will not lay perfectly flat, but it does give an "artistic" effect.
 Archival photo corner mounts are also acceptable for small prints but
make sure to leave a little extra play in them for expansion.  Of
course, if you go this way, you'd want to sign the print so that it
travels from mount to mount.

John

Exactly, more often than not the mount, not the print, shows the first signs of deterioraton 
and discoloring. The matt can actually absorb all kinds of acids and contaminants like a 
sponge over long periods of time and keep them there. With the non-acidic linen tape 
method he described you can easily remove the print and throw away the matt every 50 
years or so and prolong the life of a print. A lot depends on the method of storage. The 
more toxants the mount comes into contact with the more likely it will need to be replaced 
more often.

There have been conservator tests that show that dry mouning with the thermo plastics in 
dry mount tissue, in some cases, had protected the prints from deterioraton. However, 
from what I read from these tests, they showed how the plastic dry mount material was 
protecting the print from acids bleeding into the old mount and transfering ultimately into 
the print. And, if the mount board was not acid free in the first place even more protecton 
would be noticed.

However, if the mount and matt are changed over time, before acids are absorbed and 
transfer into the print base, I would think this would be the best solution. Most museums 
that I have worked for would never have dreamed of dry or wet mounting anything that 
was considered for long term storage. Like he said, the mount can always be replaced, the 
artwork can not.

John



--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "mojojones2001" 
<mojojones@c...> wrote:

> 
> Having worked in museum for more than twenty years, I'll jump in and
> give a perspective from there...  Dry mounting was very prevalent for
> photographs up through the 60's as it provided stability against curl,
> physical protection, and even a little extra crispness from the little
> bit of ferrotypeing that would occur under the heat and pressure. 
> However it began to lose favor in the 70's as photography became more
> and more a "fine art".  Traditionally, other print media would be
> hinge mounted and art photographers began doing this, in part to
> emulate fine art.  And while it was long suspected that dry mounting
> was an archival problem in that the fusion material may have
> deteriorative effects on the print and mount, over time it became
> evident that more often the problem was the deterioration of the mount
> board itself.  Photographers also began printing with the image well
> within the paper edge, in part to emulate other print types (and
> separate them from the 1/4 inch borders of commercial printers) as
> well as providing a visual "matt" for the image when showing a box of
> prints without the necessity of mounting everything.
> 
> The most compelling reason not to use permanent mounting techniques is
> that, as the mount/matt is meant to protect the print from physical
> damage, it invariably becomes damaged itself and needs to be replace.
>  Also, as presentation styles change over time, prints can be
> re-matted to fit the current trend.  Having the ability to easily
> remove and replace the mount/matt is really a necessity over the the
> life (100+ years?) of a print.  Believe me, having had to prepare
> prints that were dry mounted for exhibition can be a major pain.
> 
> I would recommend mounting prints with archival tape using the "T" or
> "hinge" mount technique.  Archival tape will not damage the print and
> can easily be removed by dampening from behind.  If you want to
> "float" mount a full bleed image, you can to it with a hinge mount. 
> It will not lay perfectly flat, but it does give an "artistic" effect.
>  Archival photo corner mounts are also acceptable for small prints but
> make sure to leave a little extra play in them for expansion.  Of
> course, if you go this way, you'd want to sign the print so that it
> travels from mount to mount.
> 
> John

Hello John and John,

Thanks for filling in the blanks.  It all makes good sense.

Regards,
Clayton


Info on black and white digital printing at    
http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm

Hi Mark

I am still wondering how people do this with your frames and landscape
images.  For portrait the sizes work but not for landscape.  In all cases
one gets too much landscape width to get the height.

I have five images here ready to be framed - problem is 3 are portrait but
two are landscape.  And I generally expect the majority of my images to be
landscape.

I know we have chatted about this but I was wondering what demand might be
out there for you for "standard frame sizes" which allow extra room at the
bottom for signature etc. For example, a 10x15 image might require a mat
opening of 11.5 x 15.75 inches (3/8in top and sides and 1 1/8in at the
bottom).

(By way of comparison, your 10.75 x 16.75 opening works for a 10x15 portrait
image where the artist wants extra room at the bottom: borders are 3/8 left,
3/8 right, 3/8 top and 1 1/8 bottom.)

Cheers

Steve

> From: Mark Rogers <mrgs1001@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2005 18:53:36 -0000
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: [Digital BW] Re:signing
> 
> 
> 
> This is certainly an interesting discussion. My customers that are
> doing their first exhibits will often ask me about this. I see
> different things from my more experienced customers. Some like to sign
> the front of the image and leave extra room in the mat so it can be
> seen after being framed. Some hate the idea of the signature area
> interfering with the image and want the mat opening to be tight around
> the image. When you cant see the signature, some will also sign the
> mat, and some will not. I do not see a problem with signing the mat,
> however, I do always remind them that the mat is not a permanent part
> of the artwork and that they should also sign the print. I encourage
> the use of pencil where it will work.
> 
> 
> Mark Rogers
> Frame Destination, Inc.
> http://www.framedestination.com
> 
>

Hello Steve,

Lots of good questions, several things to think about...

>I am still wondering how people do this with your frames and 
>landscape images.  For portrait the sizes work but not for 
>landscape.  In all cases one gets too much landscape width to 
>get the height.

Frame size - It is possible, through creative matting (and within
reasonable limits of course), to put longish landscapes in standard
frames (or square pics in rectangular frames, etc.  So you first must
decide if you want to use standard sizes.  If you're selling a matted
print it will make a difference in cost and/or hassle for the buyer,
and may affect the buying decision.  If you're doing your own framing
its not as big an issue, just more hassle to purchase different size
frame pieces for each print.  The glass, though, is a more difficult
issue unless you cut your own.  You can always settle on a "standard"
non-standard size and keep the parts in stock.  Bottom line is its
always easier to stick with standard sizes.  Whatever you use, just
keep that in mind as you make the pics.  Your call.  Another issue is
whether a non-standard size is an incentive or disincentive for
potential customers.  A long framed panoramic may be difficult to work
into a decor with other more standard frames.


>...allow extra room at the bottom for signature etc. For example, 
>a 10x15 image might require a mat opening of 11.5 x 15.75 inches
(3/8in top and sides and 1 1/8in at the bottom).

It is not necessarily a requirement to have more room at the bottom. 
That's just one way of doing it.  Many photographers put the same
amount on all four sides, and still have plenty enough space for a
signature and/or title.  The space can be as small as 1/4" (I recently
did this for a 3x4 print in a 5x7 matt, which included a small title
and signature in that 1/4 inch), to 3/8" for an 8x10, 1/2" for 11x14,
5/8" for 16x20, etc.  Don't feel you have to do it a certain way.  Try
things and see what looks best to you.

Just some things to think about.


Regards,
Clayton


Info on black and white digital printing at    
http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm

Steve Kale wrote:
  > I know we have chatted about this but I was wondering what demand 
might be
> out there for you for "standard frame sizes" which allow extra room at the
> bottom for signature etc. For example, a 10x15 image might require a mat
> opening of 11.5 x 15.75 inches (3/8in top and sides and 1 1/8in at the
> bottom).
> 
> (By way of comparison, your 10.75 x 16.75 opening works for a 10x15 portrait
> image where the artist wants extra room at the bottom: borders are 3/8 left,
> 3/8 right, 3/8 top and 1 1/8 bottom.)

Just FYI, Steve, when I'm signing on the print (below the image) I only 
allow an extra 1/4" or so, and I sign/title/etc. quite small.  Given a 
3/8" margin on the other sides, I then have 3/8" + 1/4" (5/8" total) for 
the margin on the signing side, and the signature could be up to 5/8" 
tall (far larger than I normally sign art works; my typical signature is 
probably no more than 3/8").

I'm not sure what everyone else does, but I would not allow an extra 3/4".

Perhaps that's just a matter of taste, but it might help explain why 
some list members seem to think that a signature on the front would 
detract from the image.  It certainly could, if it's that large and 
visible, or with the margin itself that much larger on one side.

	Walt

My question was specifically directed to Mark.  He seems to have a great
little business running punching out high quality frames at various sizes
for photographers.  There are a multitude of sizes - take a look at his site
www.framedestination.com  - some of the sizes would allow for a lopsided
border, ie more on the bottom than top, if the 2:3 aspect ratio (ie 35mm)
image was hung in portrait fashion but none do if the image is landscape.
Mark obviously can't cater to every person's tastes - he has already picked
a wide range of "popular" sizes - but I would have thought it would be great
if there were a supplier of standard frames in sizes that suit photographers
and which allow a bigger bottom margin than top, left and right.  Maybe
everyone is happy to be doing their own framing but to be honest it is not
an area I wish to explore.  Outsourcing it to a framing shop, at least here
in London, is extremely expensive though.  Mark's prices are very
competitive by comparison.  You guys in the US are lucky to have businesses
like Mark's around.  I was simply puzzled as to why he doesn't see more
demand for sizes that would allow a bigger bottom margin - even for the 2:3
aspect ratio of 35mm film (forget for now odd shaped images such as
panoramics).  Seems from this thread that many people like to sign the image
itself (in pencil or whatever!) just below the image which in turn, I would
have thought, would demand a slightly bigger bottom border. (Walt:  I just
used an example that was consistent with one of Mark's existing sizes in
portrait mode)  Maybe I am the only one who would do things this way.

So let me ask a simple question then:  for those who like to sign their
prints just under the image, do you leave the same bottom border (as the
top, left and right) or do you leave a little extra room at the bottom?

> From: Clayton Jones <cj@cjcom.net>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 21:59:54 -0000
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: [Digital BW] Re:signing
> 
> 
> 
> Hello Steve,
> 
> Lots of good questions, several things to think about...
> 
>> I am still wondering how people do this with your frames and
>> landscape images.  For portrait the sizes work but not for
>> landscape.  In all cases one gets too much landscape width to
>> get the height.
> 
> Frame size - It is possible, through creative matting (and within
> reasonable limits of course), to put longish landscapes in standard
> frames (or square pics in rectangular frames, etc.  So you first must
> decide if you want to use standard sizes.  If you're selling a matted
> print it will make a difference in cost and/or hassle for the buyer,
> and may affect the buying decision.  If you're doing your own framing
> its not as big an issue, just more hassle to purchase different size
> frame pieces for each print.  The glass, though, is a more difficult
> issue unless you cut your own.  You can always settle on a "standard"
> non-standard size and keep the parts in stock.  Bottom line is its
> always easier to stick with standard sizes.  Whatever you use, just
> keep that in mind as you make the pics.  Your call.  Another issue is
> whether a non-standard size is an incentive or disincentive for
> potential customers.  A long framed panoramic may be difficult to work
> into a decor with other more standard frames.
> 
> 
>> ...allow extra room at the bottom for signature etc. For example,
>> a 10x15 image might require a mat opening of 11.5 x 15.75 inches
> (3/8in top and sides and 1 1/8in at the bottom).
> 
> It is not necessarily a requirement to have more room at the bottom.
> That's just one way of doing it.  Many photographers put the same
> amount on all four sides, and still have plenty enough space for a
> signature and/or title.  The space can be as small as 1/4" (I recently
> did this for a 3x4 print in a 5x7 matt, which included a small title
> and signature in that 1/4 inch), to 3/8" for an 8x10, 1/2" for 11x14,
> 5/8" for 16x20, etc.  Don't feel you have to do it a certain way.  Try
> things and see what looks best to you.
> 
> Just some things to think about.
> 
> 
> Regards,
> Clayton
> 
> 
> Info on black and white digital printing at
> http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other resources as
> they are often being updated.
> 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
> 
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to
> unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same
> page.
> 
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep
> them short.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames.
> Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from the membership
> without notice.
> - Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital B&W
> printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be removed from the
> membership.
> - By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and
> guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group Owner and
> Moderators. See ³Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines² in the Files section:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/
> 
> BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT
> YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE ³OWNER² AND
> ³MODERATORS² OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU
> FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR EXEMPLARY
> DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS, GOODWILL,
> USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF THE  ³OWNER² AND ³MODERATORS² OF
> DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
> DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE INABILITY TO USE THE DIGITAL BW,
> THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR ALTERATION OF YOUR
> TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY THIRD PARTY ON THE
> DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER MATTER RELATING TO THE
> DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP.
>  
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>

On Feb 28, 2005, at 5:59 PM, Steve Kale wrote:

> So let me ask a simple question then:  for those who like to sign their
> prints just under the image, do you leave the same bottom border (as 
> the
> top, left and right) or do you leave a little extra room at the bottom?
>
>

I leave 1/4 inch or 1/2 inch all around, depending on print size.

Carl

Hello Steve,

>My question was specifically directed to Mark.  

Sorry, didn't realize it was meant as an exclusive post.



>So let me ask a simple question then:  for those who like to sign
>their prints just under the image, do you leave the same bottom 
>border (as the top, left and right) or do you leave a little extra
>room at the bottom?

Same on all four sides.

Regards,
Clayton


Info on black and white digital printing at    
http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm

I leave a lot of white all the way around.  It's a hold over from silver
days when it stemmed the flow of degradation that normally sarts at the
outter edges.

Now it gives a large handling area and plenty of excess for
mounting/hinging.

If it is signed below the image, I leave about 0ne-half the amount of space
on the other three sides.  (E.g., if it's 1/2" at the bottom, the other
sides have 1/4" white inside the mat.

Yes, as in the "old days" of photography I always leave more mat at the
bottom.  It is an optical balance thing.

Seth 

==-----Original Message-----
==From: Steve Kale [mailto:stevekale@...] 


==
==So let me ask a simple question then:  for those who like to 
==sign their prints just under the image, do you leave the same 
==bottom border (as the top, left and right) or do you leave a 
==little extra room at the bottom?
==
==