If you sign on the matte, nothing prevents you from also signing on the print.
If you sign on the matte, nothing prevents you from also signing on the print.
I don't see copyright protection as one of the reasons why prints are signed. A print is not that easy to reproduce well, and if one wanted to do it, they wouldn't think twice about cropping the image. You're not advocating signing in the middle I assume :-)
Conventions in painting and photography are quite different. Interestingly, the last time I sold (photographic) prints on canvas, I was asked by the buyer (art consultant), to sign in the image area. Like the blurb that I posed said, I'll sign anywhere the client wants, and I think that's the key.
If the signature is more important than the art, sign the artwork conspicuously. If the art is more significant, don't disfigure it. I do sign my paintings because they are not permanently matted or framed. The mount board becomes an integral part of the package of dry mounted prints, and a small signature on the mount is appropriate. If someone admires the photo, they can find the signature. If the signature was more important than the art, I'd be ashamed to sign it.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks