Digital BW, The Print

Hello to this fine group,

I've recently begun to show my photographs publicly and have a 
question about signed and numbered prints.  I've seen that done.  I 
think it would be a bit silly for my prints.  What is the 
conventional wisdom about signing and/or numbering prints to show or 
sell?  

Thanks.

On the back in pencil. Edition number and other info and signature.
Mark

On Oct 5, 2006, at 12:36 PM, Tom Bell wrote:

> Hello to this fine group,
>
> I've recently begun to show my photographs publicly and have a
> question about signed and numbered prints.  I've seen that done.  I
> think it would be a bit silly for my prints.  What is the
> conventional wisdom about signing and/or numbering prints to show or
> sell?
>
> Thanks.
>
>
>
>
>
> 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
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

I hope you mean consensus by "conventional wisdom".  Here is what I do 
for our AAubreyBodine.com 7600 inkjet reprints we sell.  I have a 
signature GIF (with ".com" since the photographer is dead) that is 
pasted in the bottom right corner of the image.  There is a copyright 
notice in the bottom margin. We don't do limited editions or numbered 
reprints.  But we sell at retail prices - e.g. $30 for 11x14.


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Tom Bell" 
<tbellnh@...> wrote:

>
> Hello to this fine group,
> 
> I've recently begun to show my photographs publicly and have a 
> question about signed and numbered prints.  I've seen that done.  I 
> think it would be a bit silly for my prints.  What is the 
> conventional wisdom about signing and/or numbering prints to show or 
> sell?  
> 
> Thanks.
>

Hello Tom,

>I've recently begun to show my photographs publicly and have a 
>question about signed and numbered prints.  I've seen that done.  I 
>think it would be a bit silly for my prints.  What is the 
>conventional wisdom about signing and/or numbering prints to show or 
>sell?  

There are several approaches and no hard and fast rules.  You can
basically do whatever you want.  Also, there is a difference between
simple numbering and limited editions.  If you are selling prints as
art that you want to be tracable back to you as the artist, then there
should at least be a signature somewhere.  Otherwise it's not much
different than selling postcards or greeting cards, and even those
have an author and copyright notice.

Regarding numbering, I like to number my prints because I keep track
of print sales in a database and want them to be uniquely
identifiable.  I believe it also adds to the impression for the buyer
that they are individually made and not mass produced.  It also is an
aid to them if they are listing household items for insurance
purposes.  I don't do limited editions.  

As far as where to sign, I leave a 1" border around the image and put
the print title in pencil on the left, just under the image bottom
border, and my signature with print # on the right.  When I mat a
print, I make the window slightly bigger than the image so the title
and signature are visible.  This is a very common approach for
photography as frameable art.

Regards,
Clayton


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

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Clayton Jones" <cj@...> wrote:

>
> Hello Tom,
> 
> >I've recently begun to show my photographs publicly and have a 
> >question about signed and numbered prints.  I've seen that done.  I 
> >think it would be a bit silly for my prints.  What is the 
> >conventional wisdom about signing and/or numbering prints to show or 
> >sell?  
> 
> There are several approaches and no hard and fast rules.  You can
> basically do whatever you want.  Also, there is a difference between
> simple numbering and limited editions.  If you are selling prints as
> art that you want to be tracable back to you as the artist, then there
> should at least be a signature somewhere.  Otherwise it's not much
> different than selling postcards or greeting cards, and even those
> have an author and copyright notice.
> 
> Regarding numbering, I like to number my prints because I keep track
> of print sales in a database and want them to be uniquely
> identifiable.  I believe it also adds to the impression for the buyer
> that they are individually made and not mass produced.  It also is an
> aid to them if they are listing household items for insurance
> purposes.  I don't do limited editions.  
> 
> As far as where to sign, I leave a 1" border around the image and put
> the print title in pencil on the left, just under the image bottom
> border, and my signature with print # on the right.  When I mat a
> print, I make the window slightly bigger than the image so the title
> and signature are visible.  This is a very common approach for
> photography as frameable art.
> 
> Regards,
> Clayton
> 
> 
> Info on black and white digital printing at    
> http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm
>

On signing,

Most of my clients edition because it keeps the value of their prints  
up and also increases the print value over time if the entire edition  
sells. (ie: #1 #2 prints go way up in price.) The rich buyers really  
like this and it gives them an incentive to either buy the first  
couple of prints or the last. There's always a little lull in-between  
it seems.

Many of my clients have two editions. 1 large and 1 small. By large,  
I mean 1-10 at 30x40 inches of 40x50. Small are usually 20x24 or  
16x20 (1-20 or 1-35). Smaller ones are normally labled "artist proof"  
and that edition is usually small (around 4 prints.) Any other  
"proofs" need to either stay here at my studio or at the artist's  
studio and can't be sold. They are often given away by the artist  
though . . .

90% of my clients sign their prints on the back in pencil. There's  
two reasons to do this. #1. Someone can't cut out the photo and leave  
your print unsigned. #2. The buyer can frame/matte the print any-way  
they want.

The other 10% are using luster-based papers and sign their prints  
with archival dye or pigment on the back. Only one or two sign on the  
front.

take care, Walker Blackwell

Tom,

I use a black uniball "Deluxe Micro" pen to sign my prints.  I sign under
the bottom right, trying to leave about 1/4" from the print and the top of
my signature.  I title the print in the centre in quotes, and put the date
(year only) or edition number (for the few limited editions I decided to do)
on the left.  I sign everything, whether it's being shown on display or is a
8x10 print sold for pennies.

I don't use pencil, my prints are always glossy.  I should find out whether
this pen is even close to archival, I imagine not.

Chris

A relevant question to this post, is how much should a matte frame be
in ralation to the size of the print?
I understand that this is very subjective and also it can be related
to the nature of the photographic work. But is there a general rule of
thumb as what the ideal proportions of the matte should be compared to
image print?

> I understand that this is very subjective and also it can be related
> to the nature of the photographic work. But is there a general rule of
> thumb as what the ideal proportions of the matte should be compared to
> image print?

Z,
I would recommend that you go to a local museum or gallery and checkout 
what people are doing. Then choose what you like and what you can 
afford. The only "rule" is to not have the print sit up next to the 
glass or glazing of the frame. 

You may also want to check out this site, World Printmakers, 
http://www.worldprintmakers.com/. Checkout the Technical Topics, for 
more information about presentation.

Jarvis Grant
Washington, DC

i've found 1.5 to 2" for matting that fits 8x10 frame.  it's said that
2" or so is good up to 11x14 or 14x17/14x18 frame size.  on 16x20 and
18x24 i like 3" mat borders.  

sometimes, an 8x12 or 8x10 print looks great in a 16x20 frame with
real big mat borders.

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "zisskar"
<zissimos@...> wrote:

>
> A relevant question to this post, is how much should a matte frame be
> in ralation to the size of the print?
> I understand that this is very subjective and also it can be related
> to the nature of the photographic work. But is there a general rule of
> thumb as what the ideal proportions of the matte should be compared to
> image print?
>

I date my prints with the year I print them - example - Harris '07.  Since I may may make prints of the same image over a span of years, and could be on a new or different printer, it help to distinguish them.  At a show I may have a framed print dated '07 and another of the same image simply matted dated '05 which was made with the same or different printer.  Papers change, inks change, printers change, and our perceptions of what we want as a final print may change over a course of time. Harris Harris J. Sklar Reflections by Harris  www.harrissklarphotography.com
www.backstretchjourney.com reflectionsbyharris@... 
 
& R First PhotosHarris J. Sklar, President A Charitable Foundation Dedicated to helping improve the education and lives of city school children through the teaching of photography.123 Leverington StreetPhiladelphia, PA  19127215-508-9908  This e-mail is confidential and should not be used by anyone who is not the  original intended recipient. If you have received this e-mail in error please inform the sender and delete it from your mailbox or any other  storage mechanism.

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

My understanding (& practice) is that one should sign them on the print (rather than on 
the mat) with both dates - date photographed & date printed.  For example,

"X. Harris 2004/2007"

This will help art dealers keep track of your work when you're famous.