Digital BW, The Print

As I'm beginning to sell more of my images as "art prints" (hate that 
term, but it does communicate), I need to decide how to handle 
editions.  I'd like to do this with sensibility, integrity, and 
business savvy -- trusting that these will not be in conflict.

My understanding is that I'd establish separate numbering for each 
print size, and not necessarily for all sizes.  Thus, I might, for example say:
	17 x 22		Edition of 25
	11 x 17		Edition of 50
	8 1/2 x 11	Open (no edition)

But I've a number of questions about this:

* On what basis do I set the number (is it called "edition 
size")?  In theory, an edition of 25 should give more value than an 
edition of 100.  But what are the limits?  I'd expect that an edition 
of 5 would just limit me, and bring little reward.  How to place myself?

* Are there norms about which print sizes are sold in editions, and 
which are not?

* Can/should I also mark some artist's "proofs"?  This name makes 
more sense for monoprints or etchings.

* What about rejects?  I've sold some flawed prints or given them 
away (with concern that these not get into circulation and diminish 
my name or reputation).

* Some of my best images have already been sold -- one to a 
museum.  Can I start editions on these images, even though a few 
unnumbered prints are in circulation?

* What do I do about prints that will hang in my home or 
studio?  Should the edition include ALL of these?

* Right now I sign the mats, and not the images.  And I like the mat 
the cover all the border around the print.  Should I also sign and 
number the print, so that somebody who removes the mat from its frame 
or sleeve, and opens it, will find an indelible marking on the 
physical print itself?

* One of my image is being printed and displayed in three ways:  As a 
horizontal, as a vertical, and as a vertical stretched to be about 
20% wider than taken.  (Amazing how those fish gain and lose 
weight!  Should these be in separate editions?  (I don't think so.)

* What about images that are printed and displayed either as a 2:3 
format, or square?

* What about some images that are printed differently enough to feel 
like distinct images -- but that are recognizably different 
renderings of the same shot?

* Some of my images are printed both as black and white and as 
color.  Can I treat these as completely different?

* In a few cases I've printed from two almost (but not quite) 
identical frames.  Should I call these the same?

- - -

In all of the above, I'm not wanting to overly complicate my life, or 
confuse potential buyers.  But I do want to understand clearly what 
my representation "3/25" really means, and know that I'm faithfully 
following through with that.

By the way, my assumption is that I'll have a record keeping system 
for this outside of my photo database (now Portfolio, but will 
probably be iViewMediaPro) -- which saddens me.  I'd like to have one 
database, in which I caption a raw image, track the various 
conversions, further track the different files made for printing, 
track the editions produced, and, finally, keep contact information 
for who has each print.  I am, after all, my own curator.

Thanks for any help.

Arthur Fink


	A r t h u r    F i n k    P h o t o g r a p h y
	-----------------------------------------------
	Ten New Island Avenue         land 207.766.5722
	Peaks Island, Maine 04108     cell 207.615.5722
	www.arthurfinkphoto.com  af@...

	 Photographing people, places, objects, events

Hello Arthur,

Good questions, all, which is why I have the same reply as Bruce.  I
number my prints sequentially, regardless of size or treatment.  I
feel that limited editions are an artificial marketing gimmick, and,
as you are seeing, make everything more complicated.

IMO, if you become famous then you'll sell more prints and you don't
want to limit a popular image.  If an image is really popular, it will
hold it's collector's value even if you have made a lot of them
(Moonrise).  One that is not so popular won't have very many out
there, so if there is any added value by being scarce, collectors will
still derive that benefit.  So in the first case, the LE hurts you,
and in the second, gives no added benefit.  If you don't become famous
then none of it matters anyway.   

Having numbered prints, on the other hand, does provide some benefits:
1) Prints are uniquely identifiable and can be tracked.
2) To the buyer, a numbered print still has the "ambiance" (is that
the right word?) of a serious piece of art.
3) Assuming you keep records and become famous, a paper trail of a
print can be built by historians and researchers years after you are gone.

Just my $.02
 


>By the way, my assumption is that I'll have a record keeping system 
>for this outside of my photo database (now Portfolio, but will 
>probably be iViewMediaPro) -- which saddens me.  I'd like to have one 
>database, in which I caption a raw image, track the various 
>conversions, further track the different files made for printing, 
>track the editions produced, and, finally, keep contact information 
>for who has each print.  

I may have a good solution for you.  Can you contact me by private email?


Regards,
Clayton


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

On May 14, 2006, at 9:00 AM, 
DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com wrote:

> Message 14
>     From: "Arthur Fink" af@...
>     Date: Sun May 14, 2006 6:01am(PDT)
> Subject: Print "editions"
If you have decided the edition runs in advance all the certificate of 
authenticity should relate the information on the sizes and runs and 
artists proofs.
The designation A/P is usually used on those. If six artists proofs 
were printed then the first would be A/P 1/6The limited edition will 
say L/E or nothing before the 1/25 etc.
All artwork sold as a limited edition should have a certificate of 
authenticity to document the size, run etc.
Some states do not allow you to sell (legally) limited editions without 
the accompanying Cert of Authenticity. Also something to keep in mind 
is that the guidelines were developed around printmaking, not a 
photographer printing his own work on his own machine and fiddling 
around a lot. Remember this is based on experience not book learning so 
take it for what it is worth.

>
> As I'm beginning to sell more of my images as "art prints" (hate that
> term, but it does communicate),
"art prints" to me = more money , go with it. If you are producing work 
that people will pay money for then you are a professional artist. I 
salute your achievement.
>  I need to decide how to handle
> editions.  I'd like to do this with sensibility, integrity, and
> business savvy -- trusting that these will not be in conflict.

>
> My understanding is that I'd establish separate numbering for each
> print size, and not necessarily for all sizes.  Thus, I might, for 
> example say:
> 	17 x 22		Edition of 25
> 	11 x 17		Edition of 50
> 	8 1/2 x 11	Open (no edition)

In printmaking you pick one image and realizing the commercial 
viability of the image you produce many so that you can spend the 
latter part of your life on a beach somewhere being served ice cold gin 
and tonics with a double squeeze of lime. So the guidelines ( in some 
cases laws) are geared towards that. I would say one treatment, one 
size= one edition. I am not an expert just relating my learning curve 
in the last 15 years.
>
> But I've a number of questions about this:
>
> * On what basis do I set the number (is it called "edition
> size")?  In theory, an edition of 25 should give more value than an
> edition of 100.  But what are the limits?  I'd expect that an edition
> of 5 would just limit me, and bring little reward.  How to place 
> myself?

Just keep in mind that the most expensive photography ever sold was an 
"edition" of 2.
This was the outtake or something like that from a Marlboro man ad that 
sold for over a million bucks this winter.
>
> * Are there norms about which print sizes are sold in editions, and
> which are not?
>
No.
> * Can/should I also mark some artist's "proofs"?  This name makes
> more sense for monoprints or etchings.

Artists proofs are generally prints set aside for the artist for 
whatever reason. As long as the number is revealed on the certificate 
of authenticity it doesn't matter how many you print.
>
> * What about rejects?  I've sold some flawed prints or given them
> away (with concern that these not get into circulation and diminish
> my name or reputation).

Don't do this. If it is too flawed to put your whole name and 
reputation on it, the print needs to be in the recycle bin or trash.
>
> * Some of my best images have already been sold -- one to a
> museum.  Can I start editions on these images, even though a few
> unnumbered prints are in circulation?
At this point you should not produce in the same size any limited 
edition print that you have already sold.
>
> * What do I do about prints that will hang in my home or
> studio?  Should the edition include ALL of these?
That would be your artists proofs.
>
> * Right now I sign the mats, and not the images.  And I like the mat
> the cover all the border around the print.  Should I also sign and
> number the print, so that somebody who removes the mat from its frame
> or sleeve, and opens it, will find an indelible marking on the
> physical print itself?
I would like to see the print number and signature even if covered by 
the mat. It establishes authenticity.
>
> * One of my image is being printed and displayed in three ways:  As a
> horizontal, as a vertical, and as a vertical stretched to be about
> 20% wider than taken.  (Amazing how those fish gain and lose
> weight!  Should these be in separate editions?  (I don't think so.)

Yes, IMHO.
>
> * What about images that are printed and displayed either as a 2:3
> format, or square?
>
> * What about some images that are printed differently enough to feel
> like distinct images -- but that are recognizably different
> renderings of the same shot?
>
Not sure on this one.
> * Some of my images are printed both as black and white and as
> color.  Can I treat these as completely different?
Yes
>
> * In a few cases I've printed from two almost (but not quite)
> identical frames.  Should I call these the same?
No

>
> - - -
>
> In all of the above, I'm not wanting to overly complicate my life, or
> confuse potential buyers.  But I do want to understand clearly what
> my representation "3/25" really means, and know that I'm faithfully
> following through with that.
>
> By the way, my assumption is that I'll have a record keeping system
> for this outside of my photo database (now Portfolio, but will
> probably be iViewMediaPro) -- which saddens me.  I'd like to have one
> database, in which I caption a raw image, track the various
> conversions, further track the different files made for printing,
> track the editions produced, and, finally, keep contact information
> for who has each print.  I am, after all, my own curator.
>
> Thanks for any help.
>
> Arthur Fink
>

How about numbering the prints, and then have pricing tiers such that 
the first X prints  of a given size cost Y, then next X prints cost Z 
(where Z is more than Y), and so on.  This has a couple of advantages. 
First, it motivates an interested buyer to buy sooner rather than later; 
it automatically makes you more money on the best selling images, it 
means that you won't have to keep printing one popular image ad nauseum, 
you won't have to ever deny a customer a sale because the edition sold 
out, and early buyers will want you to sell more images because it makes 
their image more valuable.

-Peter

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Arthur Fink
<af@...> wrote:
>
> As I'm beginning to sell more of my images as "art prints" (hate that 
> term, but it does communicate), I need to decide how to handle 
> editions.  I'd like to do this with sensibility, integrity, and 
> business savvy -- trusting that these will not be in conflict.
> 
Athur,

You might want to check the archives of
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/artshow_photo/ as this is a subject that
comes up regularly in that group. You'll also find arguments both for
and against limited and open editions prints.

Cheers,
André

I've been caught in this trap, and have taken the decision from now on 
to number each individual print as the date it is printed. No more 
editions, which like was mentioned, is simply marketing crap. (And I 
have a degree in accounting, and it's still b.s. and a silly hassle to 
track.) 

It's really simple...just number the print as to the date it is 
printed in very small lettering on the lower left of the print (5-14-
06), along with a very small signature on the lower right, ditto on 
the back of the print, which nobody will ever see. Time of print will 
take care of itself, as long as it is disclosed the client understands 
you make one print per day of any given image. Problem solved...screw 
editions.