Where to sign a print? Where to write the legend?

[Awsiya]

No doubt that this point should entail various points of view? But indeed, I need to have some final prints legended and signed and the question occured to me: I opted for the back, but I am in two minds about writing the date of the printing as well or not as the title, place and date. After all, this is a question of honesty! Also, if you print, say, 25 prints of the same negative, do you number each print (eg. 1/25, etc.)? At the end it gives you something looking like this : "Title. Place, date. Printing date. Number. Signature." Rather long, but complete!

Many thanks in advance for your contribution. Awsiya.

[Wayne_6692]

My only comment is that the 1/25 implies 25 TOTAL prints and that more will never be made. Some people fudge this and will print another series in a different size (i.e. 14x17 vs. 11x14), but that's misleading (IMHO).

[Jorge Gasteazoro]

Well the prints I have bought come in as many different ways as there are photogrpahers, so I will give you examples of how they come and you deicide. Some if not most of the alternative prints come with only a signature on the front of the print. The series and additional information is usually written on a box with preprinted information on the mat board....for example an ink seal with things like neg number, print number, title, process etc.

Some of the silver prints only come signed and with the date an print number on the MAT.....specially if the print is dry mounted. But again I have seen some where the front only has the signare and additional information is on the back on the mat.....NEVER put your info on the back of the photo itself, specially if you are using ink. at the most use part of the white border on the print to put your signature. I hope this helped and I am sure more knowledgeable people will add more to this info.

[darter]

I always put the information on the back of the print in ink. In my opinion, a signature does not look good on the visible part of the print, although a small penciled signature is sometimes okay on the front margin.

[Doug Paramore]

I sign my mount board on the front, and also the mat as the mount board is hidden. I sign the mat on the lower right hand corner, and the title is on the left hand lower corner. I hate print titles, but it is the only way to identify a print when someone orders one over the phone or wants a duplicate print as a present. I do not get into the numbering of prints. That is just a bunch of hype. People will buy your prints, numbered or not, if they are good. If you must number them, do as the artists do...after the signature, write 1 of 25. I put the date printed and date made on the back of the mount board and sign that also. Every photographer has his or her own method, but this works for me.

Regards,

[Steve Gangi]

It looks like signing down in the corner on the back side should be alright. Numbers always seemed to be more for convenience in cataloging if you have a large number of prints, but not necessary for a small amount.

[neil poulsen]

If I were going to number my photos 1/25, 2/25, etc., I think that I would do this only on the photos that didn't come out very well. Why limit the good ones?

[Sandy Sorlien]

Limited editioning on prints (numbering) is expected by most collectors. They will pay more if they know there are only a few duplicate images out there. You would do well to decide on your maximum number and stick to it. (25 or 30 is good for average size, 5 or 10 for huge prints. As I recall, Michael Kenna's small prints end at 45.). Many dealers/artists escalate their prices as the numbers get higher (supply more scarce). A huge moneymaker like Sally Mann has two tracks; she prints a certain number of contact prints with one numbering track, and a certain number of enlargements on the other track. At each 5 or 10 sold, the price jumps up. This encourages people to buy the less expensive lower numbers of less popular images, or any images at the beginning of their availability.

It is a mistake to call the limiting of editions "hype" as it is a standard in the printmaking world.

Of course, you do not have to print them all at once.

Cheers,, Sandy

[Ron Mc]

<<It is a mistake to call the limiting of editions "hype" as it is a standard in the printmaking world. Of course, you do not have to print them all at once.>>

Its my opinion that numbering prints in photography is hype. Numbering prints implies an edition and in the printmaking world editions are printed at the same time. Often the edition's size limited by the matrix breaking down. The planned appreciation based on the number of prints sold also goes against what print colectors have been told for years, that the lower numbers of an edition are the most desireable because the matrix it the most intact at that size.

Ron

[Sal Santamaura]

Doug, Sandy and Ron are all correct and incorrect. Numbering is hype. Hype is the major constituent of marketing today. Photographers generally need to market to thrive. So be it.