dating an image/print

On occasion, I will print a negative which I made in the 70's or thereafter. If, as it has been suggested to me by one of our mentors, I date, sign & number & perhaps title my print, I am a bit unsure about this one issue, ie: dating.

I believe I have been doing the right thing which is to date the printed image/mounted in the present (for exhibition or for display on archival matt board) rather than the past (the date the negative was made). Is this correct?

PS: Occasionally, I will make a notation on the back side of the matt board, that the image was taken "way back when", etc.. for "historical" purposes.

R.

Some people are interested in the date the image was made and for that reason I list two dates on the back of the image, date the image was taken and the date the print was made. It is easy and a nice bit of history on the image . There is the argument for "vintage" prints ( those made at about the same time as the negative) being more valuable, but heck, I am not in that league. For me it is just s piece of information I think some people might find interesting.

Hope it helps and have a great evening.

www.ericbiggerstaff.com

Perhaps my answer comes from exhibiting my photographs in galleries and museums, and viewing those of others, but the date should reflect the artists vision at the time the negative was made. As an example, if I were to view an Ansel Adams exhibition I would want to learn what his vision was in, say, 1945 regardless of when he made the print before me. However, for a collector who deals in vintage prints, the date of the print is a different issue. I would suggest the date of the image be on the front and perhaps the date of the print on the back so there would be no confusion as to vintage or modern.

I'll give Frank petronio's answer for him. When dating a print, one should start with dimming the lights, sitting down to a nice dinner, a bottle of wine, and perhaps some dancing afterwards. If that goes well then the next step would be take your print to a nice photogrpahy exhibit...

"If that goes well then the next step would be take your print to a nice photogrpahy exhibit..."

Yeah. But what happens when Frank gets back home. Does he sit in the car with the print....maybe a little smooth music on the radio, discussing important developments in the art world? Or does he just take the print inside, spill wine all over it, and end up laying next to it in the morning, wondering what happened?

Greg and Brian.... you guys beat me on this.... I was thinking about the same..

hehe... :-)

To quote Struan, You got to kiss a lot of frogs before you find your prints.

Corny. I had to repeat that 'cause it usually terminates threads.

I have dated many very superfiscial women, but none that were a mere image.

Mister Alpert has properly brought us to the original question.

The date the print was made might be important to a print collector. Include it if you care. The date the picture was made would definitely interest me far more. Photography's singularly unique characteristic is bound to time - the instants the picture embraced. So, I'd say include both dates.

As far as numbering... well, look at the threads concerning limited editions.