Signing prints

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…

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.

i would love to get a embossing stamp.

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,

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

Thanks again and greetings from Vienna,

Martin

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 .

Tomoko

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.

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

...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

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

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 4×5, 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?

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 4×5 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