What do you do with proof prints or prints that are only 98%? Do you ever save copies for yourself? Or do you always trash them? (I am talking about paid work, not your own.)
Thanks!
Printable View
What do you do with proof prints or prints that are only 98%? Do you ever save copies for yourself? Or do you always trash them? (I am talking about paid work, not your own.)
Thanks!
Never keep seconds ... Always ask the photographer to sign a printer proof which I keep for retirement....I only keep imagery that I will hang on my walls..
To date I have over 200 signed pieces that someday will be auctioned off for my retirement needs.
It is the kiss of death not to make your clients aware of your policys, and everyone that works with me understand that I may want a signed printer proof.
Never have kept an image without my client being aware of the fact.
In my experience, b.a.t. prints (bon a trier, or literally "good to print" if my grade school french memories are correct) are a staple in the printmaking world. When we edition a print at school, it's typically an edition of 10, 2 artists proofs, 2 press proofs and a bat. I ran across a guide somewhere on the interwebs that had a recommended quantity listing for various print runs.
Several visiting artists we've had over the last couple of years have remarked that other schools tend to be more liberal in their press proof quantities, some wanting several press proofs, as well as the first of an edition.
When I print an edition of fine art repro's for artists, there's an entire section in the contract stipulating the bat and press proofs are retained, with signatures. To date no artist has ever complained or questioned it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bob carnie
Do you explain your retirement story to them? Or just ask for a signed copy as part of your print fee?
Do you just do it with large prints, famous photogs or?
What about museums / galleries? You make a print and it is not perfect...but almost perfect...do you trash it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by erie patsellis
I've heard the term 'proof' over the years but did not know what it meant.
Is a proof print one of the first prints on a run? Can it be different / lesser quality than a standard run print?
What exactly does 'proof' mean?
Proof/test prints are those mnade while interpreting a negative while the final dodging/burning/toning etc is finalised and not the same quality as the final prints.
Can't speak for the US/Canada etc but it's actually against the lawhere in the UK to make prints for yourself or profit/gain from the sale of proofs etc without the permission of the copyright owner, usually that's the photographer. Anything else is theft and people have paid heavily for infringing that when taken to court.
You also have to obtain permission to use someone elses image you've printed in your own portfolio, but in most cases there's no objections.
Ian
The b.a.t. is the reference, usually the two press proofs are the first run and should be identical to the b.a.t.
As Ian stated, there are differences from country to country. My experience is primarily from the fine art printmaking (atelier) arena, where it was explained to me by my professors. Further research on my own confirmed most of what I was told, but there are variations from studio to studio. One of my professors has a rather extensive set of Rauschenberg prints from when he worked extensively with him for a period of about 8 years. The artist was fully aware of the existence of these prints, as he signed and numbered them as either artist proofs or press proofs (either a.p. or p.p. followed by a number)
No , I tell each client that I have decided I want one of their prints and leave it at that, I let them know its a printer proof and is mine. I try to keep the smaller prints in the 16 x20 range as the big murals take up too much space.
I have traded scanning services for some pretty famous images that were produced for a local gallery show... the estate did not have
money for scanning and printing and I offered up the services to be able to keep one colour and one black white final print , of the series. Two prints for about four days work.
In my business a lot of printers did not do this and when the world went digital , some did not do so well as the client base completely moved.
I always trash prints that I do not think are worthy of hanging. I see no mileage in keeping second quality prints.
The signed print is not part of my print fee... I have a day rate plus the clients pay for the materials .. This allows me never to worry about wastage, never
worry whether the client will like my job or not... I encourage my main clients that pay this rate to spend time in the darkroom with me and sign off on the density's, styles
toning and so on.
I am working with a very well know photographer who worked with musicians in the 60's, He still prints silver , but together we are making a platinum/carbon edition of his most
compelling musicians. For this all I want is a signed print of each image for myself as the fee, no cost to him on all scans , negative output and final multiple printing on aluminum.. this is taking about three years to complete as there is a large cataloque to go through.
If a client does not want me to have printer proofs , but wants me to print for them our relationship does not go too far and basically I move in other directions.
I have always wanted to work with photographers who work on long term projects and with that are not famous when I meet them , we work together and 1 out of 10 move forward
to the gallery / museum world.
I have never approached photographers to work with them , specifically those with known bodies of work..... To me the print/image has already been done by someone else and all I can add is copying another printers work , which does not interest me in the least.
I opened my small shop in 1991 and twenty years later some of my clients work is getting recognition and some are still unknown but will land on the museum/gallery circuits within the next five years.
Retirement is a funny word , as I do not intend to stop printing , I see no reason too as I love Printing, so all the prints I am collecting will be shown at shows over the next years and at some
point auctioned off or given to Canadian archives.
I got lucky in life,, 1970 I was a west coast high lead logger and not very happy, went to photography school and fell in love with silver prints emerging from trays... going into the darkroom today while most Canadians are enjoying the May 24 weekend. My wife and I are building a monster darkroom in our living space to continue our love of printing.. she's a pretty shit hot printer herself.
So if you are planning a career of printing for other then I feel its important , to only produce the best you can, throw out the seconds and keep a history of your accomplishments by insisting on signed printer proofs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by slackercruster
All our clients are very aware of what we are doing as they sign them and give them to me. The same law apply's here about usage without the owners knowledge.
But this is now what I am talking about... I am talking about the collaboration with a client and a official pp printer proof that is signed by both the printer and the artist.
my basic understanding is roughly this.
PP - printer proof
dp - display proof for gallery shows
AP - 20 % of the edition
edition - 1 - ???
Louis Nadeau and others have written about this , and its basically the formula I follow.
Quote:
Originally Posted by IanG
Yes, I understand about the profit deal. Would there be a problem saving proofs for your own use? Enjoyment?Quote:
Originally Posted by IanG
Thanks Bob C for the detailed rundown!
You need permission from the copyright holder for any use.Quote:
Originally Posted by slackercruster
A hypothetical:
If I hired you as "my printer" for a work of mine, your "fee & terms" would be known before I handed you the negative.
If a printers proof was not part of our deal and you kept one I'd be pissed, mostly because you were not playing straight with me.
If/when I found out, I'd either want the print back or destroyed in front of me & I might even sue or have you charged with theft or embezzlement or something.
Your reputation as a printer and all round good guy would be in serious jeopardy.
Conversly, If you did as Bob does, with the terms fully known before the fact, then we'd all be happy.
Mark's really added what I would say.
Having printed for others in the past I don't have any proofs or final prints, anything left over was destroyed and all negatives etc returned. We were printing for commercial photographers the images were of no interest anyway.
Bob Carnie is printing for a different sector of the market and is handling the issues in an appropriate manner which is mutual to both parties.
I have been in a situation where I found some of my images being used by someone else in his portfolio, I took appropriate action which meant liasing with his employer - there had been no monetary gain.
Ian
Except that you probably wouldn't know about it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Barendt
Steve.
True, but that doesn't make it ethical or right.Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Smith
Are you suggesting that that type of behavior is acceptable?
No I'm not.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Barendt
But if someone is keeping prints which he isn't supposed to be keeping then he's not going to tell you about it.
Steve.
I get the idea with pro printers.
Guess I just look at it differently since I've never made a dime from photography. Once $$ is involved things are different.
Not just money, money as a Professional artist.Quote:
Originally Posted by slackercruster
If you send off stuff of your kids in the backyard playing would you want some lab tech taking those pictures home, for their own use?
it is a small world that fits on money.Quote:
Originally Posted by slackercruster
FYI: PhotoBiz -> EditioningQuote:
Originally Posted by slackercruster
thanks for posting this
Quote:
Originally Posted by ROL
[QUOTE=bob carnie;889134 . . . To date I have over 200 signed pieces that someday will be auctioned off for my retirement needs. . . . "
How do you handle this from a Canadian income tax standpoint? Under U.S. law you'd be required to report the value of the prints as income, which could present a cash flow problem if they're valuable enough to eventually serve as your retirement fund (i.e. you'd report their value as income each year which would increase your tax liability but since you're saving them to sell later they don't produce any current cash with which to pay the taxes). Does Canadian tax law not require you to report their value when you keep them?
A "Printers Proof" is not itended for resale.
Thomas
Good Question
I have my place insured for artwork but until I sell the pieces I have not made any income from these pieces.
When I sell , auction, donate then I believe the Tax man will want his share.
At this point its work hanging on my wall for my own pleasure.
[QUOTE=Brian Ellis;889914][QUOTE=bob carnie;889134 . . . To date I have over 200 signed pieces that someday will be auctioned off for my retirement needs. . . . "
How do you handle this from a Canadian income tax standpoint? Under U.S. law you'd be required to report the value of the prints as income, which could present a cash flow problem if they're valuable enough to eventually serve as your retirement fund (i.e. you'd report their value as income each year which would increase your tax liability but since you're saving them to sell later they don't produce any current cash with which to pay the taxes). Does Canadian tax law not require you to report their value when you keep them?[/QUOTE]
A printers proof in my world is a signed piece, that I certainly can do what I want with it. To date I have never sold one and probably will not for quite awhile.Quote:
Originally Posted by tgtaylor
Different printmaking processes may have a different definition for pp , but I see it as part of my advantage of working in collaboration with phototographers.
I used to keep a copy of the prints I made but since there have been movements about saving and cutting back in the use of materials where images are printed, I have switched to just saving copies and having the photographers sign so that there would be proof.
And like what other have stated here, I only keep a copy of those which are going to be displayed and really useful indeed.
It’s better to recycle them. Let's not waste them. Let's push for sustainability in business.