From: garimo (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: 05/27/00-01:37:38 PM Z
Hi Rod and everybody,
Thanks for the time in making a informative replies that focused on my
print dating question. So far, this is how I have been handling my
worksss... I can't seem to make very many alt-prints that are exactly
the same, (each seem to be a little different) so I have never
considered that they are an edition of a single image. After I make a
negative, I make 5-10 prints that I think are of a saleable quality,
and rip up the others. I don't have a bunch a galleries that have my
work and most prints I sell, sell out of my studio, I don't need a lot
of prints on hand. But now, I'm finding that I'm running out of prints
(the ones people actually buy) that I printed two & three years ago.
I think what I'll do is...since I don't always make a title, I'll just
sign on the right and date it with the year of the negative...then if
the print made at a later date I'll make a slash with a second date for
a print. This year some of my prints will read 1997/2000 or 1998/2000.
I asked a similar question to the list a little more than a year ago
about printing for other people and how to be recognized as the printer
when the photographer signs on the right. Now the prints I have make
for others have a mark of my studio's name in the lower left corner. I
printed some small transparencies that I put on the paper below the
negative, and then expose...so in the brush stroke edge is my printers
mark that says in very small type Gold Gulch Studio. Galleries,the
photographer & I felt good about the different identifications.
Thanks again, I think I've sorted it all out in my head...'till the
>HI Garimo, this is long so sorry; if you don't like long posts, delete.
>The "conventional" approach is to sign and date the print at the bottom
>right hand corner, the title of the print centrally and the edition number
>(if appropriate) to the left.
>Adams signed the mountboard to which he had drymounted the board- he
>regarded this mounting as a permanent part of the finished artwork so there
>was no chance of the signature becoming separated from the image itself. He
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 06/13/00-03:10:22 PM Z CST