Signing Prints

[Terence T]

I've recently been asked for several copies of my prints and as these were my first print sales, I thought it would be appropriate to sign them off. Been reading about the number of ways to do this and was wondering if anyone of you experienced in this area might be able to offer some insight.

Mine are all large format digital prints, on a variety of media. I'm inclined to use a pencil but that doesn't seem to work for all paper types ie glossy. What would you include besides your name and date on the print?

Thanks!

 

[sf]

I sign with a pen when I do sign (once a year). I get prints on paper that accepts ink pen marks very nicely on the borders to be covered by matting.

I have to sign a print tonight because my dentist requests a print. I'll use a pen. Name and date and location of the shot is what I would include.

For instance, if I print one of my Paris street scenes, or something Seattlish, I will print :"George Masters, location, date"

 

[canonetc]

You can also sign on the back of the print. Include "copyright (C) George Masters, 2006, all rights reserved." If the print is part of a limited edition, number it such as "2/100", meaning, 2 of 100.

I also got a rubber stamp and use acid-free permanent ink that says, "No reproduction of any kind without the expressed and written consent of the photographer." That way your client, as well as the lab technician at Kinko's, will hesitate before trying to make copies behind your back.

Lots of info, but good ways to protect your creation...digital or otherwise...

Cheers,

Chris
canonetc

 

[T_om]

If you are selling prints, the proper way to offer them is mounted. Sign on the mount, not the print. Sign in pencil below the lower right corner. If the print is named or has an edition number, that info goes below the lower left corner.

Tom

 

[kbg32]

I worked in an established photo gallery in the late 70's, early 80's. I would never dry mount prints. Dry mounting was once considered the only way to present photographs. Not true anymore. Matts protect the print, dry mounting does not- only if it has an overmatt. If the matt gets damaged or dirty, it is easily replaced. If a dry mounted print gets damaged, not so easily repaired, and if removed, you lose the photographer's signiture. I never matt unless that is what the buyer requests. I leave the presentation up to the buyer. I always sign and title on the back, under where the image would be if reversed.

 

[Simon Larbalestier]

FWIW i sign on the back of the print in pencil along with title, date image made and date print made and a rubber stamp with my "S" logo. These are for non-editioned prints for special edtioned prints i have a copyright stamp instead of the "s" stamp which i use with the number of the edition inside.

 

[tkluck]

Collectors/dealers/experts like a signature and date on the mount and on the back, with perhaps even more details on the back. Provinence may be of more value to your estate than to you, but you can't go wrong with a copyright note. Ya never know...

Alas...
Anonymity has seemed so much more appropriate for my work...

 

[Ash]

I find signing the front of a print can look awful.

If you do a traditional print, then a nice border looks good with a signature in the corner, or centre-bottom. I find a signature, and other detailing should be on the back of the print, and if the paper doesn't accept a good ink-pen, then use a permanent overhead-projector/CD-writing pen.


You could also look into making a printing plate - not too hard to make (unless you try etching) and then print off a large number of templates. Then you fill in the details and gum/stick the label to the back of the print. It's not evident from the front, but when the frame is opened the viewer will see a very nice looking (A6 or smaller piece) label with details and name of the piece, number ___ / ___ and date, with signature.

 

[Simon Larbalestier]

If you are selling prints, the proper way to offer them is mounted. Sign on the mount, not the print. Sign in pencil below the lower right corner. If the print is named or has an edition number, that info goes below the lower left corner.

Tom

I never matt/mount my prints prior to selling and i never dry mount the print- i leave this choice of presentation to the buyer. To matt a 12" x 16" print i'd use top and side borders of 3"-4" and bottom 7-"9" that would make a very large print to send flat and way too expensive to ship. Prints are put inside a archval polyester print sleeve and packaged between two sheets of oversized hardboard to protect the print.

I choose not to sign on the reverse of the image itself as the pencil mark can leave a slight indentation on the paper - if you are not careful. The white edge borders are farily small maybe 1-1" if someone wants to rub off my signature and write something else that's up to them but it's hard to remove the copyright stamp!

 

[Avotius]

I sign them with a black sharpie and use my big chinese red ink stamp to press over my name, date, and number of print.....on the back

 

[Simon Larbalestier]

I sign them with a black sharpie and use my big chinese red ink stamp to press over my name, date, and number of print.....on the back

What's a black sharpie - in the UK that can mean a scalpel!!!
i like the idea of the stamp going over the writing - can you show a jpeg of that?

BTW this is an interesting thread as its not something i've ever really discussed with anyone over the years of making prints and in shows it's hard to see behind the print.

 

[kbg32]

Collectors/dealers/experts like a signature and date on the mount and on the back, with perhaps even more details on the back. Provinence may be of more value to your estate than to you, but you can't go wrong with a copyright note. Ya never know...

Alas...
Anonymity has seemed so much more appropriate for my work...

Collectors/dealers/experts will take anything by anyone they feel is important. If Anal Adams signed his prints in pig's blood and they thought he was important, they'd buy it. Prints can be removed from the mounts they are dry mounted on, thus losing the photographer's signature. I've seen this, especially if the mount was damaged. Sign, date, title, and copyright your print on the print. You can't go wrong.

I know a well known photographer who uses a spent pen to sign his work on the front of his images. His signature is embossed into the print. Hard to remove.

 

[Simon Larbalestier]

Prints can be removed from the mounts they are dry mounted on, thus losing the photographer's signature.

Just to clarify this dry mounting means to me, the kind were prints are glued to a board backing using a heat sensitive tissue that melts under a drymount press. This is permanent there is no way to seperate the two surfaces once glued - not without wrecking the print!. Hence the reason i never use it.
Prints attached to mounts (or matts in the USA) are usually fixed by archival tabs of tape on the edges of the top of the print - before framing.

 

[kaiyen]

I sign my prints, themselves, on the back. I usually use matte paper so I sign in pencil, and date it.

I then sign the front of the mat (lots of discussion about whether one should do this, but I do). I then put a stamp or a label on the back with additional information.

allan

 

[kbg32]

Just to clarify this dry mounting means to me, the kind were prints are glued to a board backing using a heat sensitive tissue that melts under a drymount press. This is permanent there is no way to seperate the two surfaces once glued - not without wrecking the print!. Hence the reason i never use it.
Prints attached to mounts (or matts in the USA) are usually fixed by archival tabs of tape on the edges of the top of the print - before framing.

Simon,

I've witnessed prints that were dry mounted being separated, very carefully from backboards, that have been damaged. When I worked in a photo gallery, I would occaisionally take damaged prints to an archivist for repair.

 

[Simon Larbalestier]

Simon,

I've witnessed prints that were dry mounted being separated, very carefully from backboards, that have been damaged. When I worked in a photo gallery, I would occaisionally take damaged prints to an archivist for repair.

Fair point Keith 🙂
I couldn't in all honesty offer up a print damaged in this way, up for sale even if it had been repaired but i guess if the photogapher is well known or the print very rare - in the collector's markets or in the case of a museum where the print is for public display - then such a course of action is the only way. I tend to throw away more prints than keep them.

Which brings me to the question of dust spots/marks on prints perhaps we should start a thread on how people spot their prints? A new thread would be better than me going OT. Would this be of interest to anyone?

 

[stet]

I worked in a frame shop in Philadelphia for years, and we'd always have to clarify what people meant when they said they wanted a print "mounted and framed." A lot of people will say "mounted" to mean either framing or dry-mounting. It's been said here already, but dry-mounting should be considered a permanent process, even if you choose an acid-free dry mount.

But if I learned anything about framing photos there, especially sold prints, it's that it would be wise for photographers to consider the final frame size, whether that will be paid by you or your buyer. The common aspect ratios don't match "stock" frame sizes when matted, so people often size the mat to such a frame. Then the borders differ between the sides and the top/bottom, and I think that detracts greatly from the image. Given the rare times that a photographer comes in way before printing to inquire about framing or matting, we would suggest sketching something out beforehand and working the size backwards, so that he or she can print the image to fit the framing and maybe cut down on costs. This is probably one good reason to sell matted prints. This means more, I guess, depending on how you think your buyer will feel about framing costs, but I think sizing your images to give the option of cheaper framing is good.

Back OT, Terence, I can't tell you much about signing, except what I saw at the shop. We did a lot of exhibitions and work for photographers like Tony Ward and Sharon Wohlmuth, and I think the most common was to ink info on the back of the print, but sign the mat in pencil. After we were done, people would come in and sign, and we would refit it. Sometimes they would ask for a "pocket" on the backing paper, and they would put a slip there with the info that is on the back of the print, or just affix that to the back. On signing prints themselves, pencil was common, but for glossy a Sharpie (Simon -- a brand-name marker. A scalpel??) or a Lumocolor pen. Title on the left, IIRC usually without quote marks, and sig and date on the right.

 

[Simon Larbalestier]

(Simon -- a brand-name marker. A scalpel??)

Thanks Rick. A scalpel is a very sharp knife the sort used in surgery (unless i'm very much mistaken) but you probably knew this! i've always thought "Sharpie" is slang for this kind of knife. Not one to mess around with - one almost took the top off my thumb - had to be stitched back on. 😱

 

[stet]

Good god. Yes, then, I can imagine calling a scalpel a Sharpie -- but not why you'd be playing with one! Glad you're hands are back to whole numbers.

 

[Simon Larbalestier]

Good job i'm left handed. My right thumb has little feeling in the top section!
i'm steering you way OT now 😀 . Sorry.