| Author | Thread |
|
|
10/27/2007 09:48:56 AM · #1 |
Hi - I've been a lurker here for about a year...first post and it's a question.
I have 4 photos that I'm donating (matted and framed) for a charity auction. What is the best way for me to sign them? I have heard that you should sign the back of the photograph with the copyright symbol and your name...and I would also then write my name on the mat near the bottom right of the picture?
Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.
Lori |
|
|
|
10/27/2007 10:17:03 AM · #2 |
Put your autograph on the mat with a pencil and place an unremovable sticker with © and other useful info on the back.
|
|
|
|
10/27/2007 01:29:09 PM · #3 |
| I was at an auction where the signature was on the matte. When it was called to the attention of the crowd, bidding immediately stopped and it was removed from the sale. I think that there are specialty pens made just for the purpose. |
|
|
|
10/27/2007 01:58:07 PM · #4 |
| Hi I sell quiet of few prints to local art galeries and I use writer brand metallic pens or vellum wirters. They are acid free so they wont dammage the photos. You can buy them in the scrapbook section of your local hobby store. If you have art quality photos make sure you use arcival materials.... Good luck! |
|
|
|
10/27/2007 02:03:38 PM · #5 |
Thank you for your replies. I had intended to use archival pens, so that's not a problem.
eyewave, thank you for the sticker idea! One of the photos has a lot of white in it and I was afraid that anything written on the back might show through. |
|
|
|
10/27/2007 02:08:25 PM · #6 |
Originally posted by Lolo64:
Thank you for your replies. I had intended to use archival pens, so that's not a problem.
eyewave, thank you for the sticker idea! One of the photos has a lot of white in it and I was afraid that anything written on the back might show through. |
You should NOT use stickers on the back of art prints; over time the glues may leach through, and if anyone ever tries to actually MOUNT the image the sticker would have to be removed.
Art prints should be signed in the print, not on the matte. That is, print with a white border, sign in the border (pencil is normal), and then cut the matte to expose that signature. I float my images behind the matte; I don't size them so the matte is the same size as the image, but give an extra half inch or so in both directions.
R.
|
|
|
|
10/27/2007 02:09:42 PM · #7 |
I'm not sure why people say not to sign the photograph itself, painters sign their stuff (granted it is usually with paint). I sign my stuff with craft pens that are acid free or have my info printed right on the image if I can't physically sign it myself (i.e. dpcPrints).
I do like the idea of the sticker on the back but still think I like the signature on the front. I think in the long run it's probably just your personal preference. |
|
|
|
10/27/2007 03:05:21 PM · #8 |
| I've always signed my prints in pencil as Bear_Music describes, in the area of paper bordering the print, and cropped by the matte. The size of this "border" is dependant on what your final framed image is, and should be considered as carefully as any aspect of the final product. In addition to signing, I number prints by indicating the print number over the run number, as in: 1/50 (first of fifty). |
|
|
|
10/27/2007 03:16:33 PM · #9 |
I sign the back with a gel pen and as little pressure as possible. Then I also sign the mat with a very sharp pencil.
|
|
|
|
10/27/2007 03:48:31 PM · #10 |
I only number my canvas prints. I don't see any reason to number limit. If you made only fifty prints of somthing you are really limiting your profit. Most of my prinst are 16x24 and I sell them for $90.00 If I were to do so few of them and I sell 30 a month then in two months I wouldn't profit anymore. That would be a big loss of income especially on a big seller. I do borderless prints and sign right on the photo. Just my thoughts...
Originally posted by Louis:
I've always signed my prints in pencil as Bear_Music describes, in the area of paper bordering the print, and cropped by the matte. The size of this "border" is dependant on what your final framed image is, and should be considered as carefully as any aspect of the final product. In addition to signing, I number prints by indicating the print number over the run number, as in: 1/50 (first of fifty). |
|
|
|
|
10/27/2007 04:07:53 PM · #11 |
I knew I came to the right place to ask my question!
Bear_Music, thank you for YOUR information regarding using stickers. I never considered the mounting aspect.
I don't think I have to worry about anything being removed from the auction, as it is a local charity event.
Snake - you say you sign right on the photo with an archival pen...I'm assuming you sign so that it shows after the matting?
Thank you so much, everyone, for all your help! |
|
|
|
10/27/2007 05:11:48 PM · #12 |
I dry-mount borderless (tirmmed) prints, and then use a "floating" overmat with extra space around the image. I use pencil or archival (acid free) pen to sign the backboard near the lower right corner of the print. I usually pencil the name of the print over in the lower left corner (again, on the mounting board).
Stickers should not be, as already mentioned, applied to the print, but I think the original suggestion was to apply them to the back of the mounting backboard. This is acceptable, and acid free adhesive stickers are available. I would tend to be careful about this, though, as some collectors will not want any such thing there. Check with the auction house, as they may be able to guide you, or they may even have rules.
For those who like to overmat right to the edge or slightly overlap the print: Signing the overmat itself is okay for display purposes, but the overmat can be removed from the image. Simply signing the overmat is insufficient, so you should also sign the backboard under the mat. I did see one photographer once who, in addition to signing both mounting board and overmat, actually embossed a nice rectangular signature area into his overmats. I don't know how he did it exactly, but it was sharp looking.
What some do, and I think this looks very nice, but it much more complex mat cutting, is to also cut out a signature window below the print window. Then you can still sign the mounting backboard.
If you are not dry-mounting the print--in other words, the print is "loose" (corner mounted, etc) and can be removed from the frame/mat, then you do need to find a way to get your signature on the print, even if it won't show in the matted framed configuration. In that case, I print with an extra large border at the bottom, so I can sign. One can still cover that with the matting, and sign the matting. But you want to make sure your signature goes wherever the print goes.
I have found that archival permanent ink is better for signing on the actual print paper--pencil just doesn't seem to work well. I use pencil on mat/mounting boards in most cases, though.
Message edited by author 2007-10-27 17:26:56. |
|
|
|
10/27/2007 05:25:51 PM · #13 |
Originally posted by chromeydome:
I dry-mount borderless (tirmmed) prints, and then use a "floating" overmat with extra space around the image. I use pencil or archival (acid free) pen to sign the backboard near the lower right corner of the print. |
It doesn't matter what you do if you dry mount. Dry mounting is not an archival process, and it's not acid free either. It's a heat-applied backing adhesive and it's permanent, so archival is out the window.
|
|
|
|
10/27/2007 05:27:19 PM · #14 |
|
|
|
10/27/2007 05:28:49 PM · #15 |
|
|
|
10/27/2007 05:42:27 PM · #16 |
Ok... It's still not archival because it's making a permanent change to the print when you mount it. It' can't be undone. It doesn't really matter though unless you expect the print to be worth anything one day.
|
|
|
|
10/27/2007 06:01:05 PM · #17 |
Guess we have different definitions of archival, then--I have always taken it to mean a print that will not degrade or fade due to itself or its mounting (old color prints from color film--not archival because they will both degrade, while silver prints, properly washed and handled, and mounted in any fashion using only acid free, archival materials, are considered archival).
If your definition of archival includes a requirement to have a loose print, then that is different, and by that definition drymounting would not work.
I agree with you that loose prints are preferable, though. But Ansel Adams, the Westons, and LOTS of others have drymounted prints that (a) have lasted well, and (b) are worth something.
Mounted prints have the advantage of providing some protection to print, and the disadvantage of being (mostly) permanant (restoration experts can deal with such things, but the average folks cannot). If the mount itself becomes a source of problems, then it is more problematic.
I suspect the biggest overall risk, though, is handling and storage. People start handling loose prints without fresh gloves, or kinking them when handling, or storing them improperly, humidity, or exposure to light (esp sunlight) are more serious risks.
Drymounting does offer the advantage of less handling, since people are touching the board and not the print. Loose prints, archivally corner mounted with paper and tape, or other similar techniques, offer lots of advantages, too, but with equivalent amounts of risk, too. |
|
|
|
10/27/2007 06:16:16 PM · #18 |
Ha. And nobody has had their copyright infringed more than God. :P
|
|
|
|
10/27/2007 06:37:44 PM · #19 |
Sign it how you want. It's your image....!
|
|
|
|
10/27/2007 06:52:13 PM · #20 |
Originally posted by yanko:
Ha. And nobody has had their copyright infringed more than God. :P |
I think after 6000 years the copyright has expired and it's all moved into the public domain. |
|
|
|
10/27/2007 07:04:16 PM · #21 |
May be some reasons not to do this but I have signed mine using a scan of my signature and date converted to a PhotoShop brush and placed where appropriate for the photograph.
Most of my photos that are involved go to charity auctions and they are expected to be signed.
|
|
|
|
10/08/2008 04:41:40 AM · #22 |
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
Originally posted by chromeydome:
I dry-mount borderless (tirmmed) prints, and then use a "floating" overmat with extra space around the image. I use pencil or archival (acid free) pen to sign the backboard near the lower right corner of the print. |
It doesn't matter what you do if you dry mount. Dry mounting is not an archival process, and it's not acid free either. It's a heat-applied backing adhesive and it's permanent, so archival is out the window. |
D/Mounting has a number of acid free and archival tissues on the market just google archival mounting to find suppliers
I'm a framer who has over twenty years of museum standard framing experience
there are more and more framing companies that are turning to this level of framing so If your in any doubt call your local framer for the latest info
//www.framersequipment.co.uk/dry_mounting_adhesives.htm
Message edited by author 2008-10-08 04:42:13. |
|
|
|
10/08/2008 07:37:04 AM · #23 |
I'm probably the odd ball out and probably doing it all wrong...For my stuff in DPC Prints, I scanned in my signature and just drop it into the photo just before saving, usually adding the date taken too. Actually come to think of it, I'm pretty much doing this for all printing...when I used to hand sign them I used an archival acid free ink on the print itself.
|
|
|
|
10/08/2008 09:35:37 AM · #24 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by Lolo64:
Thank you for your replies. I had intended to use archival pens, so that's not a problem.
eyewave, thank you for the sticker idea! One of the photos has a lot of white in it and I was afraid that anything written on the back might show through. |
You should NOT use stickers on the back of art prints; over time the glues may leach through, and if anyone ever tries to actually MOUNT the image the sticker would have to be removed.
Art prints should be signed in the print, not on the matte. That is, print with a white border, sign in the border (pencil is normal), and then cut the matte to expose that signature. I float my images behind the matte; I don't size them so the matte is the same size as the image, but give an extra half inch or so in both directions.
R. |
By doing this though all your images have a border, am I correct Robert? Or did I miss something? I was at the mall last week where the local photography club was exposing their images and I noticed that not a single image had an autograph on it anywhere. They had business card size ID's just below each print with the artist's name, that's it. I liked that idea but I also understand it was for an exposition and not an auction. As for myself, I would autograph my images on the back somewhere as I find it distracts from the viewing pleasure.
Message edited by author 2008-10-08 09:36:18. |
|
|
|
10/08/2008 09:57:08 AM · #25 |
i only sign on the back (canvas & paper prints ..)
i have very poor handwriting & don't want to uglify the print .. :P
signature date title LimitedEdition#
if the print is partially sealed (matte /print/ backing) sign both the backing & the print |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 06/18/2025 12:42:13 PM EDT.
