Digital Signatures on Prints

[Jack Brauer]

I've been thinking about the pros and cons of using a digital signature or digital stamp in my prints, instead of hand signing them.

I recently moved to a small town in SW Colorado (far from any big cities), and I've had to rethink my printing strategy... there's nobody around here that has an Epson 9800 (my printer of choice). Also the Colorplak mounting I love to do is far away too. I found a shop in CA that does both for wholesale pricing.

So... I could either:

A) Have the prints shipped here, sign them, then ship them off again to the customer

or B) Put in a digital signature, and have the shop send the prints direct to the customer; saving turnaround time, shipping costs, and gasoline.

I have grown to trust the consistently accurate results from the Epson 9800 (with files from my calibrated monitor), so I'm not overly concerned about not seeing the actual print before delivery to the customer. Is that unprofessional, in your opinion, to not see your print first, even if you're confident in the results?

Is my actual signature that important, vs a digital stamp? (My signature isn't even that pretty to be honest).

Thanks in advance for your opinions and suggestions.

[matthew blais]

I find it a bit lazy and impersonal. And, to not see what you are shipping off to a customer is again, impersonal and careless IMHO. Since you have already removed the "hands on" aspect of printing yourself, at least sign the work by hand.

P.S. You might try these guys in Ft Collins for printing, as I got the name from James Frank, an owner/photographer gallery in Estes Park a few months ago.

Fine Print, Ft Collins, CO

[Bruce Watson]

A) Have the prints shipped here, sign them, then ship them off again to the customer

This is what you have to do.

What the signature tells the customer is that you, personally, have examined the print and approved of it.

I understand the quest for efficiency. But this isn't about efficiency, it's about quality. Your signature on the print is your certification of the quality of the print.

That you trust in your vendors is admirable. But as a customer, I'm not dealing with your vendors. I don't know or trust your vendors. I'm dealing with you, and only you. You are the guy who has to assure me that the print you want me to buy meets your quality standards. The only way you can do that is to personally inspect the print, and your seal of approval is your hand made signature on that print.

The same applies to any kind of print - including silver, platinum, whatever. The artist's signature on the print is his seal, his guarantee, that the print meets his quality standards.

That signature is the difference between a fine art print and a work print, IMHO.

[Jack Brauer]

VERY good points. If the prints were shipped direct to a customer, and the quality was not top notch, they might not know the difference. I would.

[Kirk Gittings]

I agree with Bruce on this.

[Danny Burk]

IMO the digital signature would be a bad, bad idea. I agree with the good points above, and also...

If I were your customer and receive your print with original signature, my thoughts are "Original work of art. Hand signed by the artist. A piece worthy of fine print prices."

On the other hand, if I receive a print with a digital signature, I'll think to myself "Mass produced. Xerox copy. Poster reproduction. Not worth the price."

All this from a signature. As your customer, I may not know anything about print production processes, digital vs wet printing, or anything else of a technical nature. But I know a real signature from a mechanical reproduction, and that makes all the difference in perceived value of a product.

[David_Senesac]

I only sell rolled unmatted, unframed Lightjet prints. If I used a mat, I'd sign such in the usual ways. I use a discrete digital signature that nearly blends into the image somewhere along the bottom or top edges of my large landscape prints. If someone knows where the signature is, they can easily make out the writing. However without knowing where the signature is, from normal viewing distances, it may take them a bit of time to locate such. And that is preferred unlike someone famous marketing a print and advertizing to the audience that the famous guy made this one. Thus it does not detract from the aesthetic of my prints. Since my prints have whitespace borders to fascillitate customer framing needs, I do sign that part of media after checking the print thoroughly after receiving it from my lab. Thus it shows the customer, I actually checked the media as it has my actual signature. Of course that signature will not then show up in the matted and framed print. Years ago I absolutely hated signing the white mats and worse atop the image areas themselves because invariably a modest percent of those signed would end up looking lame no matter how carefully I practiced my John Hancock beforehand. After spending nearly $100 having a print made, I don't want to take a chance on boogering it up, even if that happens only 5% of the time. Maybe if I ever get famous, I'll soften that attitude but as long as I'm scraping by in peon status, nope. ...David

[Dirk Rösler]

In the old days photographers scratched their names onto the plates and it was printed/enlarged with the image on every print.

[Capocheny]

IMO the digital signature would be a bad, bad idea. I agree with the good points above, and also...

If I were your customer and receive your print with original signature, my thoughts are "Original work of art. Hand signed by the artist. A piece worthy of fine print prices."

On the other hand, if I receive a print with a digital signature, I'll think to myself "Mass produced. Xerox copy. Poster reproduction. Not worth the price."

All this from a signature. As your customer, I may not know anything about print production processes, digital vs wet printing, or anything else of a technical nature. But I know a real signature from a mechanical reproduction, and that makes all the difference in perceived value of a product.

FWIW, I fully agree with both Bruce and Danny on this... skip the electronic signature. My personal preference would be the personal signature as opposed to the digital version.

Cheers

[tim atherton]

+ pritns on the front of the print always appear somewhat tacky