Questions about limiting editions of prints

Mainecoonmaniac · Dec 1, 2014

For years, I've been wanting to sell my prints. I've given a bunch away because I just hate pricing my prints and the business part. Are there any advantages of limiting the number of prints? Also, lets say I want to limit the number of prints to lets say 300 prints. Do I have to print all 300 of them or just keep track and stop printing the neg on the 300th one?

Sirius Glass · Dec 1, 2014

Why bother? All your prints are valuable.

Rick A · Dec 1, 2014

I print batches of three. Any reprints of that negative will be changed slightly, reversed, or toned. After 10 prints total, no more will be made. I charge $150 for a matted 8x10 print.

Mainecoonmaniac · Dec 1, 2014

Not really

Sirius Glass said:
Why bother? All your prints are valuable.

I just want people to perceive them as valuable by making them "limited" edition. Maybe I can get rich by "limiting" them to many as I can sell. I can give them away as gifts. Demand is really high if they're free.

Rick A · Dec 1, 2014

If you continue to give them away free, no one will want to buy them. I usually donate one or two prints a year to charity causes, which results in an increase of sales post event. I have a rep who has an exclusive on retail sales, and I never sell directly to any one. When asked, I refer them to my rep. I do accept orders for out of print photos, but that requires a 100% prepay with the order.

Mainecoonmaniac · Dec 1, 2014

Sound advice Rick. I have to stop thinking in terms of the cost of paper, film and chemistry. Art is such a tricky game. But donations to charity is a great idea. You'll get free exposure.

Rick A · Dec 1, 2014

I did a one man show of my prints at the local library a couple of years back, that opened a few doors. I still refuse to show my work at the local art center.

tkamiya · Dec 1, 2014

As far as I know, the definition of "Limited Edition" is kind of murky.

Some say if it's limited edition of 100, there will be only 100 prints of that image PERIOD.
Some say if it's limited edition of 100, that means that image in that size will be limited to 100. Printed to different size, there may be more prints.
Some say limited edition 100 means there are 100 prints in that issue/batch. There may be more printed at later date. (this one doesn't sound right but it came from someone who used to work at a gallery in New York)

Then there are concept of Artist Proof (A/P). These were originally meant as a quality control measure but they come out in market often, too. These are not part of the editions.

Many collector values limited edition and notation of issue numbers. But, if you have never sold your work, why not just sell some, and see how much business you can actually get before deciding for sure? You may not want the headache or limit your money making potentials.

gzinsel · Dec 1, 2014

back in the day, (before photography) prints were limited because the copper, steel, or zinc plate would fail, or the litho stone would lose information. By fail I mean the first print pulled would have information on it that the last ones did not have. With photography, light shinning through it, does not degrade negative. so in theory you can make a zillion prints if your chemistry, time, and temp. stays the same. most people change out the chemistry every so often "to keep it real" as they say. . . . . Some people who make limited additions of the negative have a "strike plate" or image that shows "the original" being altered or partially destroyed or fully destroyed and make a print of that. Many photags do not like to destroy their negatives. They keep an "open" addition. so you just keep numbering them, , ,1,2,3,4,5,6 and so on. . . . . if you make a strike plate then you can number them 1/10, 2/10, 3/10 and so on . . . .. IF you do not have a strike plate, then it is misleading to say you have 1/10,2/10, and so on.because tomorrow or the next day, you can print more because your "original" is still quite nice and has not been tampered with. If its limited, then make it limited, If its not limited, do not say that it is. Its like Jeep wrangler being "limited" its mass produced!!! how absurd!

NB23 · Dec 1, 2014

I once tried. Numbered 3 prints, then forgot to number the rest, got confused about the number I was supposed to write, then felt silly about this "numbering" thing, and stopped.

I simply sign all my prints and write the year. The mere fact that my print is signed it means that the print is Archival, To my ultimate liking, selenium toned. That's what my signature means. Numbering them made me feel stupid, pretentious and Con Man.

Mainecoonmaniac · Dec 2, 2014

I feel ambivalent about limiting the number of prints of a particular shot. GZINSEL has a point where numbering is relevant to other mediums of art. NB23 also has a point about limited printing of an edition. It's creating a false shortage to make the print exclusive. There's really no governing organization that verifies actual number of prints. I remember years ago, when somebody found a stash of art paper with Salvador Dali's signature on it. From that stash, someone made forged Dali prints with his signature on it. http://www.ebay.com/gds/Dali-fakes-and-frauds-that-have-real-signatures-/10000000088657016/g.html

As for me, I think I'm getting way ahead of myself and assume that people will buy my prints if I limited the number of copies. Just like NB23, I feel like a pretentious con man. I'm a former pro and now a hobbyist with a day job with health care. I'm happy where I am and I don't need to earn my living by selling prints. I don't have a thick enough skin to be more than that.

Jim Jones · Dec 2, 2014

Limited and numbered prints by well-known photographers have their place in galleries that pander to the rich. One of the advantages of photography is that unlimited editions of popular images by us ordinary people can enrich the lives of those who can't afford to support galleries and ambitious photographers. I'd rather make the World a slightly more pleasant place than try to merely make more money than I really need.

Mainecoonmaniac · Dec 2, 2014

I agree with you

Jim Jones said:
I'd rather make the World a slightly more pleasant place than try to merely make more money than I really need.

You truly have a soul of an artist.

Thomas Bertilsson · Dec 2, 2014

All my prints are in editions of 25. I hope it doesn't come across as pretentious, but the main thing is that I once printed 25 prints from the same negative in one day. It sucked. I hate re-printing stuff. So if I stop at 25 I don't ever have to print more. That's a heck of a relief for me, even though I seriously doubt I'll ever sell 25 prints from the same negative.

I keep track of the prints in a big spread sheet, where I have a thumbnail, which number of the 25 prints went where, year printed, title, size, mat size, frame yes/no etc, and price.
I have exactly one print that I have sold more than three of, and up to number seven is on display somewhere, waiting to be sold.

It's not that tough to keep track of it all, but it does take a little bit of work.

RalphLambrecht · Dec 2, 2014

Rick A said:
I did a one man show of my prints at the local library a couple of years back, that opened a few doors. I still refuse to show my work at the local art center.

Why at a library???Isn't that a place frequented by people who are too cheap to buy books?unlike customer baseI'd say.

RalphLambrecht · Dec 2, 2014

tkamiya said:
As far as I know, the definition of "Limited Edition" is kind of murky.

Some say if it's limited edition of 100, there will be only 100 prints of that image PERIOD.
Some say if it's limited edition of 100, that means that image in that size will be limited to 100. Printed to different size, there may be more prints.
Some say limited edition 100 means there are 100 prints in that issue/batch. There may be more printed at later date. (this one doesn't sound right but it came from someone who used to work at a gallery in New York)

Then there are concept of Artist Proof (A/P). These were originally meant as a quality control measure but they come out in market often, too. These are not part of the editions.

Many collector values limited edition and notation of issue numbers. But, if you have never sold your work, why not just sell some, and see how much business you can actually get before deciding for sure? You may not want the headache or limit your money making potentials.

There is a brilliant article on this subject on theweb by the editor of lens works,well worth a read.

NB23 · Dec 2, 2014

Thomas Bertilsson said:
All my prints are in editions of 25. I hope it doesn't come across as pretentious, but the main thing is that I once printed 25 prints from the same negative in one day. It sucked. I hate re-printing stuff. So if I stop at 25 I don't ever have to print more. That's a heck of a relief for me, even though I seriously doubt I'll ever sell 25 prints from the same negative.

I keep track of the prints in a big spread sheet, where I have a thumbnail, which number of the 25 prints went where, year printed, title, size, mat size, frame yes/no etc, and price.
I have exactly one print that I have sold more than three of, and up to number seven is on display somewhere, waiting to be sold.

It's not that tough to keep track of it all, but it does take a little bit of work.

I'm maybe out of reality but 25? If you have 100 really good keepers, that makes 2500 prints.

I have more the 2500 16x20/20x24 fb prints of my best shots, but i usually stop at 2, and rarely 3, prints of a same image that I judge excellent.

Rick A · Dec 2, 2014

RalphLambrecht said:
Why at a library???Isn't that a place frequented by people who are too cheap to buy books?unlike customer baseI'd say.

I was asked to display there. We are a very small community, population of the entire county is less than 4000, I'm in the county seat, population less than 1500. It was an honor to d it and expose the locals to some art. Most folks here won't enter the local "artisan" center, run by a pretentious, no-talent goober. I tried explaining carbon transfer process to her, she expected to see me do it on my computer. Every digi-snapper in the area sells over manipulated drivel in there.

Bruce Osgood · Dec 2, 2014

I've never felt there was such a thing as a Limited Edition until you burn the negative.

Richard S. (rich815) · Dec 2, 2014

Interesting write up on this very subject:

http://theonlinephotographer.typepa...pher/2013/04/limited-edition-photographs.html

cliveh · Dec 2, 2014

I think limited editions are out dated marketing crap. I would rather let the market determine how many I produce and sell, whether that be none, one or 100.

miha · Dec 2, 2014

This limited editions thing goes directly against one of the media's main strength.

Maris · Dec 2, 2014

miha said:
This limited editions thing goes directly against one of the media's main strength.

A most interesting observation!

If one thinks of photography as culminating in the mechanical reproduction of illustration as a commodity (as per Walter Benjamin) then a limited run of indistinguishable copies is its highest form. A collector of a "print" might have their ownership experience enhanced by the knowledge that there are maybe a hundred identical examples out there somewhere.

If one thinks of photographs as pictures made out of light-sensitive substances and produced one at a time by skilled hand-work then the concept of "edition" is misconstrued. No two photographs are exactly the same and instead of an edition one has a run of successive originals. It is possible to imagine a collector deriving satisfaction from owning an original piece and knowing there isn't another one just like it anywhere.

bdial · Dec 2, 2014

The other side of this is, if an image is selling, why stop making prints? (assuming you're not utterly sick of it).
Last time I checked, you could still buy new prints of Pepper #30 from Kim Weston

IMO, in photography, the only way a limited edition is actually meaningful is if the negative is destroyed or the image is one of a kind, for example, a wet plate. What is truly absurd is "xx/xx" written on the bottom of an "archival inkjet print".

MrBrowning · Dec 2, 2014

bdial said:
What is truly absurd is "xx/xx" written on the bottom of an "archival inkjet print".

+1

Questions about limiting editions of prints

Membership Council

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency