http://www.lightstalkers.org/signing-prints An entire Lightstalkers thread via RSS/XML. en-us Hey Lightstalkers, I was wondering on where and how you sign your prints. Which information do you include when signing or labeling prints that you give away or sell? Thanks, Martin Tue, 06 May 2008 17:17:57 +0000 http://www.lightstalkers.org/signing-prints prints are usually signed au "verso", or on the back, and numbered in the form of 3/24, or open edition, with a date when it was printed, (and maybe negative date if it was printed much later) with a soft lead pencil for paper prints, or plastic with archival ink or name stamp Fri, 02 May 2008 00:53:13 +0000 http://www.lightstalkers.org/signing-prints#120440 Thanks for your reply Erica. So you'd write something like: Open Edition Printed: April 05, 2008 Original Photograph: July 2005 Signature Is that about right? Sorry for that stupid question... Fri, 02 May 2008 07:57:34 +0000 http://www.lightstalkers.org/signing-prints#120448 hi martin i have been told that you should put as much information on the back of the print, if you made the print as the photographer all the better, also use a good archival method and paper, fibre base paper rather then resin coat paper if you do the darkroom thing. sign on the front also in pencil. no such thing as a stupid question... Fri, 02 May 2008 09:17:27 +0000 http://www.lightstalkers.org/signing-prints#120450 you can use O/E for open edition, A/P for artist's proof I find the way the date is written tends to be a preference thing, also there are different conventions for different nations I sign all my limited edition prints the way erica describes, and sometimes use a 'chop' mark or seal, which is stamped on with a japanese soapstone seal, but can be with a rubber stamp, or a metal embossing stamp [I'm getting one of these for my work] I used to sign the front, but collectors, it seems, prefer verso signed prints. still a matter of personal preference, but to know your market helps also. I've asked many 'stupid' questions myself. it's a good way to learn. Fri, 02 May 2008 09:21:03 +0000 http://www.lightstalkers.org/signing-prints#120451 i am looking at dusting off a focomat and getting gassed in the darkroom again, i am missing those prints... i would love to get a embossing stamp. Fri, 02 May 2008 09:31:32 +0000 http://www.lightstalkers.org/signing-prints#120452 Martin, this is how I do it which doesn't mean it is right. But byers of my prints don't seem to care much. It is up to you, the photographer, to put info you feel needs to be there. I do not specify that the print is on the fiber paper since that is quite obvious, I believe... I sign on the back. For example, starting with the title, if there is any: Conversation from THE LAZARUS PROJECT (if print belongs to a specific project) Print #1 of 11 Printed by the photographer In Montreal, Apr 2008 Signature I wish you all (and myself) many sales, of course. Best, Fri, 02 May 2008 16:56:28 +0000 http://www.lightstalkers.org/signing-prints#120506 Hi Guys, In addition to everything mentioned above, i wanted to add some details to the discussion about what i do whenever i sell a FRAMED print: (i bill the framing costs directly to the client, by the way.) i sign the print itself before i give it to the framer. Then, when i get it back from the framer, but before i give it to the client, I stick an adhesive label on the back of the frame with the same info (edition, title, series, type of print, signature, etc.) and below that, add (in small type) the following statement: "This Photograph is sold for personal use only. It may not be copied or reproduced in any manner, shape, or form, or conveyed to any other medium. It must not be used for advertising purposes. This photograph is copyrighted and protected under international copyright conventions. All rights are reserved by the photographer and no rights are transferable." I've seen professional galleries in NYC do this with work, and i think it's a good reminder for all of us to keep reminding others of the copyright. Secondly, you gotta think long term on this stuff. It helps make you look professional, and years down the road if the original buyer ever sells the print, or it gets lost, etc...all of your info is on the back of the frame, so that it will be easily identifiable to whoever ends up with it. Hope this is helpful. All best, Landon Fri, 02 May 2008 19:50:58 +0000 http://www.lightstalkers.org/signing-prints#120514 Thanks all for your help. Good point about the copyright notice Landon! Thanks again and greetings from Vienna, Martin Fri, 02 May 2008 20:08:05 +0000 http://www.lightstalkers.org/signing-prints#120518 Landon`s post reminded me of a "resale contract" in which the buyer agrees to give a set % of resale of the work or any profits made by a rental of the work, and all reproduction rights. I am not a person who likes to do the paperwork, so I`ve never botherd about this. However, at least on one occasion or more, I`ve heard that my photos originally sold to a person has been put up on an auction. If your works have a resale value, this kind of agreements may not be a bad idea. Here is the "TAR":http://www.barrywindsor-smith.com/galleria/tar.html . "Tomoko":http://www.tomoko-yamamoto.com Fri, 02 May 2008 20:50:23 +0000 http://www.lightstalkers.org/signing-prints#120522 viva ls viva! Sat, 03 May 2008 07:54:29 +0000 http://www.lightstalkers.org/signing-prints#120544 On a related subject, how do you price your prints? Second question: Is a print of an image made with with film worth more than that made with a digital camera? Is the mode of capture a factor in pricing? Thanks in advance. Sun, 04 May 2008 14:49:41 +0000 http://www.lightstalkers.org/signing-prints#120602 Re: "...Is a print of an image made with with film worth more than that made with a digital camera? Is the mode of capture a factor in pricing?" short answer, no. Just last night I was at an art photography fund-raiser auction (which, unless there are some really big names involved, typically bring more per-picture price than gallery sales) and the digital/film issue made no apparent difference, even though the auctioneer tried to hype the film images as if that were a selling point. Potential buyers are first looking for an image they would like to have in their homes or offices. Secondly they want quality and longevity of the print itself. Don't believe any across-the-board statements that silver gelatin prints are superior to inkjet. Unless it's been properly printed, toned and washed by someone who knows what they're doing, a typical home-made darkroom silver print usually will have a lot more latent chemicals in the paper than a carbon ink/100% rag injet print any day. The bottom line is the image and the quality of the print. Just my 2c- -Skippy Sun, 04 May 2008 23:07:15 +0000 http://www.lightstalkers.org/signing-prints#120631 i sign, usually on bottom lower right, with date and version of edition (sometimes on back)and with a date of signature... ...soft lead pencil..reason--if from gallery, or if sold.. .if i give away, i sign, no edition, no date my entire approach to editions are terrible though..... i gave Veba 2 small prints 1 month ago, and i cant remember if i dated...only signed... oh well, i dont care that much- a la giacomelli--leave that up to someone else ç)) but, i always sign... cheers b Mon, 05 May 2008 16:03:22 +0000 http://www.lightstalkers.org/signing-prints#120690 Landon and all of you, priceless tips, Im just starting my print sales activity!!! I had this problem with framing signed prints...now problem solved :) thanks guys wish u lot of good print sales, this is nice way of earning on photography R ps. Martin if you are in Vienna 19th may you can drop in the brick-5 gallery , we have collectve show there called EAST by Anzenberger Mon, 05 May 2008 16:37:00 +0000 http://www.lightstalkers.org/signing-prints#120694 Re: ”...Is a print of an image made with with film worth more than that made with a digital camera? Is the mode of capture a factor in pricing?” No, but the way it was printed certainly does. A few months back, I fell in love with a big print by Hajime Sawatari that I saw at a gallery. It was a beautifully-printed nude, shot digitally, about 1m x 1.5m.. (I assumed it must have been shot with a 4x5, given the clarity at that size, but it was actually shot with a 5D, which helped convince me to get one.) It wasn't the one on this page, but the same model and series: http://www.artdish.co.jp/g/morisawa/index.htm (The one on the left is Moriyama.) I really wanted to buy it, but the thing was, the gallery couldn't tell me how it was printed, aside from "giclee". Had it been gelatin and silver on paper, it would be on my living room wall right now, but since I didn't know, I wasn't about to spend a couple grand on it. While there are, of course, archival digital prints, I've seen some "giclee" prints look like crap after a few years. (Of course I could get in touch with him and make sure it's printed in a way that's going to preserve the investment, but, well, the moment passed.) So what about putting some information about the printing process on the back of the print as well? Tue, 06 May 2008 00:49:02 +0000 http://www.lightstalkers.org/signing-prints#120726 Greetings All, At a recent art fair I was asked why I did my prints were not signed - I simply had not decided on how best to do this. This discussion is helpful! With each print I do include a small 4x5 card with contact info. Also, in my research (visiting galleries and art fairs) I see a number of artists who frame work, sign below the right-hand corner, and then mat the work such that the signature is still visible. Another frequent option I see is where an artist initials (with a gold/silver pen!) in a lower corner of a matted photo. All the best, :) Dale Tue, 06 May 2008 17:17:57 +0000 http://www.lightstalkers.org/signing-prints#120761