Photographer Print Stamps

[ParkerSmithPhoto]

Berenice Abbott print stamp from a 1976 portfolio of 10 images:

 

[ParkerSmithPhoto]

Arnold Newman Print Stamp. This was his standard stamp for years. Signed on the front (recto) stamped on the back (verso). I went through about sixty of his prints and they were all presented this way.

 

[frank]

I had a rubber stamp made with just my name and copyright symbol.

 

[ParkerSmithPhoto]

Pirkle Jones print stamp

 

[removed account4]

using these stamps or labels
do you worry the adhesive/ink
will screw up the print?
the only label i would ever use is one i make myself
made from rag paper and glued with wheat/rice paste.
i've made end papers for hand made books and glued them in
with rice/wheat paste, the same used to cover the books
does lineco / or similar archival supplier sell pre-glued labels ?

 

[greg zinselmeier]

There are many inks that are quire safe. Printmaking and inks have been around a long time. Even if it's stamped. There is no harm

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Whenever I get a chance to view original prints, I try to make a quick photo of the stamp on the back of the print, and I thought it would be a good idea to post some of these for public consumption. If anyone has one, either their own or that of another photographer, please post.

here is mine:

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Do you stamp these on the back of the print itself, or somewhere viewable in the frame?

somewhere visible, because, the back of the print is no longer visible after dry mounting.

 

[faberryman]

I use a stamp with an acid-free archival ink pad, and a Micron archival pigment ink fine tip pen.

 

[removed account4]

greg and faberryman, thanks !
i would worry that all that work would be done on my end to
print it to last, would be compromised by "the stamp" or glue ...
good to know my fears are unfounded !

 

[ParkerSmithPhoto]

greg and faberryman, thanks !
i would worry that all that work would be done on my end to
print it to last, would be compromised by "the stamp" or glue ...
good to know my fears are unfounded !

For the past year, I have been working with Lumiere gallery here in Atlanta, helping them with inventory, and copying their photographic collection, which contains about 3000 prints from Brett and Edward Weston, Strand, Abbott, Newman, Rodchenko and more. The vast majority of the collection is 50+ years old, almost all silver prints. Virtually all of them use a print stamp, either on the back of the print, or on the back of the mount board. Very few use LABELS, mostly print stamps. This is what I have been posting since I started this thread.

I haven't seen a single instance where an ink stamp or label caused any deterioration. A few of the labels had loosened, so I would suggest using a stamp.

None of the dry-mounted prints showed any evidence that the mounting had any deleterious effect on the print, even on the older Edward Weston prints that were on a gray art board which looked highly suspect. Exactly one dry-mounted Abbott print had come off the mount.

Out of all of these prints, I'd say there might be six that had some problems with the print itself (oddly enough two of these were Ansel Adams prints) and these look like they were not fully fixed. Everything else looks like it just came out of the print washer. Seriously, a good silver print has an insanely long life span. I think we obsess a bit too much on what is archival (I plead guilty) but given the wide variety of photographers and processes represented here I think there is probably much more latitude in the silver printing process than we realize.

 

[Bob Carnie]

I really like the emboss stamp idea for prints, have been thinking about designing one for years. I am now starting to print for edition my work and I think a emboss is nice.

 

[ParkerSmithPhoto]

I really like the emboss stamp idea for prints, have been thinking about designing one for years. I am now starting to print for edition my work and I think a emboss is nice.

Imogen Cunningham had a beautiful emboss made to mark her posthumous prints. I'll try to grab a photo next time I'm over there.

 

[Patrick Robert James]

Personally I wouldn't put anything on the back of the actual print since I print nearly borderless. I have been thinking about a really small stamp but haven't done it yet. I do sign the prints along a rear edge with a pencil and typically there is some exposure info in pencil too. I don't dry mount prints either. I put a label on the back of the matt identifying the print, neg, edition..... I usually sign the matt and sometimes put the title as well, but it is very light with a hard pencil. That is about it.

If you print with a lot of space around the image then an emboss would be nice. I would do that, but I never have the space for it. I've thought about embossing the rear matt, but matts get changed quite often. That is why I don't drymount....

One suggestion I'd make is if you plan on using a stamp have a designer do it. You will get something a lot better than you can do yourself. Just a little tip. Little things like that matter sometimes.

 

[ParkerSmithPhoto]

Wynn Bullock Print Stamp

 

[ParkerSmithPhoto]

Vivian Maier Print Stamp

 

[Tom Taylor]

I've been using this ink stamp on a back corner of the museum board on dry-mounted prints. I'm going to redesign this in the near future.

Thomas

 

[ParkerSmithPhoto]

August Sander archive stamp

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Whenever I get a chance to view original prints, I try to make a quick photo of the stamp on the back of the print, and I thought it would be a good idea to post some of these for public consumption. If anyone has one, either their own or that of another photographer, please post.

here is mine(lat page of the pdf).