Signing prints question.

Hi All,

A simple question, but one I don't know the ans to. What is the best instrument to sign you prints (actually on the print and a glossy surface) pencil or pen and what type?

Thank you

verso on the print with pencil.

pencil under the print on the backboard.

I agree without the fancy language. I sign the back in pencil, I emboss some prints with my name and city, or I sign the mat of framed prints.

What ann said!

Never on the print, never, ever...

ooops sorry not actually on the print but below like you Ralph. What type of pencil?

Thanks

Do what you want..... I don't know about the never ever biz. I do sign my prints in the white border. I sometimes sign color prints with a metalic pen in a subtle way. In today's copy crazy world... I occasionally make my mark on my "consumer grade" images and prints.

Fine art B_W whatever that means... to me hand printed by me, I sometime emboss, and always sign the back in pencil.

I Like a soft pencil a HB works best for me.

i sign the back of the print in soft pencil
and the mat in the same pencil

padraigm said:

... What type of pencil?

Click to expand...

To follow the guidelines of not distracting from the image itself, print identification must be clear, but modest. A freshly sharpened or hard pencil will mar the surface and disrupts the smooth flow of writing. A pencil too soft, on the other hand, will make the writing far too dominant, demanding more attention than this secondary information deserves. Consequently, I use a normal #2 (in the US) or 2H (in Europe) pencil.

verso is not fancy language, it is the correct term. We need to use the proper Language to Communicate Intelligently



How about just turn the dial to a thinie, so the dodad is correct. How would we be able to discuss fstop /shutter speeds in that manner?

ann said:

verso is not fancy language, it is the correct term. We need to use the proper Language to Communicate Intelligently



How about just turn the dial to a thinie, so the dodad is correct. How would we be able to discuss fstop /shutter speeds in that manner?

Click to expand...

vpwphoto said:

I agree without the fancy language. I sign the back in pencil, I emboss some prints with my name and city, or I sign the mat of framed prints.

Click to expand...

I don't think I sounded dumb... just offering a perspective from the streets. I knew what verso meant, just being cheeky... er um a smart arse.

:confused::confused::confused::confused:

Greg Davis said:

You win at the internet today.

Click to expand...

Just be careful when signing the back of a print it doesn't telegraph through.

I like a softer pencil to sign the backs but rarely ever give or sell those. I generally matt n frame so I sign the matt on the left bottom with a date n maybe a theme or location on the right if it's called for.

I often wondered if there is a proper protocol for signing archival prints?

.

ann said:

How about just turn the dial to a thinie, so the dodad is correct. How would we be able to discuss fstop /shutter speeds in that manner?

Click to expand...

That's not what verso means. I looked it up. You're talking about the whatsit on the thingy for how shiny it is.

In the matter of language just remember that cactuses is now grammatically correct.

I refuse to use two or even one ' in spelling the word resume.
We don't use accents in English, at least the English I was taught in the 1970's.
I used to like to speak in an erudite manner but found it off-putting to the people I enjoy cordial discourse with most frequently and with great regularity.

Now let's start a thread about numbering editions...

No need for a lengthy discussion on limited editions without reading this first:

Dead Link Removed

If you are putting a print into a judged competition you shouldn't sign it anywhere so that if it wins the judges can't be accused of favouritism. I have seen cases where competition entry s have been disqualified because the photographers name was on the front of the mount.

I use spray paint on mine!

Jeff

benjiboy said:

If you are putting a print into a judged competition you shouldn't sign it anywhere so that if it wins the judges can't be accused of favouritism. I have seen cases where competition entry s have been disqualified because the photographers name was on the front of the mount.

Click to expand...

Print competitions???
I had hoped, we moved on from that.
Photography is not a sport.

Constructive feedback is a good thing, but judging one photograph against another gives me the shivers.

Ralph I just mentioned this because many entrants to shows just aren't aware of this,most photographers at some point in their life need to measure their work against other peoples to seek the approval of their peer group, and although I no longer enter or judge competitions some judges are capable of constructive criticism and many of them give their time and know-how for free.

benjiboy said:

... some judges are capable of constructive criticism and many of them give their time and know-how for free.

Click to expand...

No issue with that, but in my opinion, it should not go beyond exactly what you've said. Constructive criticism is very valuable, but a rating system to compare the 'value' of a photograph is just wrong. Rating one print higher than another undermines all efforts to promote photography as an art form. Who has ever heard of a oil-painting competition or a rating system for sculptures? Just plain nonsense. I'm ashamed to admit that I've participated in the past, but like you, I have stopped this BS about 10 years ago.

Good point about entering only unsigned prints, by the way. That's also beneficial for honest and objective, constructive criticism.

RalphLambrecht said:

No issue with that, but in my opinion, it should not go beyond exactly what you've said. Constructive criticism is very valuable, but a rating system to compare the 'value' of a photograph is just wrong. Rating one print higher than another undermines all efforts to promote photography as an art form. Who has ever heard of a oil-painting competition or a rating system for sculptures? Just plain nonsense. I'm ashamed to admit that I've participated in the past, but like you, I have stopped this BS about 10 years ago.

Good point about entering only unsigned prints, by the way. That's also beneficial for honest and objective, constructive criticism.

Click to expand...

Ralph:

Funnily enough, I have very recently started involving myself in competitions like these. The ones I have been involved in are club competitions - strictly amateur, with little more than recognition (and sometimes publication) as prizes. I'm definitely of two minds about them.

They seem to really emphasize a particular type of photography, and a photograph that doesn't fit within that type has to be really exceptional to "score" well. They also, IMO, put way too much emphasis on the immediate impact of a photograph, and way too little emphasis on other factors. Typically I don't score well, but then I rarely "see" (in my mind) the types of photographs that do score well.

There are a few good things about them though:

1) Print competitions actually encourage people to make and share prints of their photographs. I think that is a real advantage, because I see so many people who don't make prints;
2) Well I decry some of the judging criteria, they do provide some objectivity. For a lot of the beginning photographers there, the judge's comments are the first meaningful and understandable criticism they encounter;
3) Competition seems to encourage learning - somehow the "gamelike" atmosphere results in people seeking help and advice, taking more photographs and paying more attention to the results;
4) The "winning" photographs I've seen tend to be quite good, even if they aren't necessarily ground-breaking. In a few occasions they are quite exceptional. Most importantly though, the people I've encountered who are successful at these competitions seem to usually have some perspective about them and tend to be very generous about sharing their time and knowledge with others;
5) The social atmosphere surrounding them is quite pleasant - it is fun to be in a group which shares a lot of enthusiasm about photography;
6) It has been a good challenge for me to experiment with "thinking outside of the box". I've played around a fair bit with shooting for the club and the competitions, and think that I've stretched a few capabilities that wouldn't otherwise have been exercised; and
7) I enjoy sharing with others any relevant knowledge and experience I do have. And I smile at the digital gadget speak that swirls around, because it reminds me of the film gadget speak that swirled around 30+ years ago when I worked selling cameras .

Matt

If you need print competitions for people to print, they do it for the wrong reason.
I wish all 'print competitions' could be turned into 'print critiques' instead.

This would provide all the benefits, you've outlined, without turning a creative process into a competition. Isn't life hard enough already? Does everything have to be a competition? I think it does more harm than good. Again, ever seen a painting competition with judges, first and second price? They wouldn't dream of it!

RalphLambrecht said:

No issue with that, but in my opinion, it should not go beyond exactly what you've said. Constructive criticism is very valuable, but a rating system to compare the 'value' of a photograph is just wrong. Rating one print higher than another undermines all efforts to promote photography as an art form. Who has ever heard of a oil-painting competition or a rating system for sculptures? Just plain nonsense. I'm ashamed to admit that I've participated in the past, but like you, I have stopped this BS about 10 years ago.

Good point about entering only unsigned prints, by the way. That's also beneficial for honest and objective, constructive criticism.

Click to expand...

Oil/acrylic/watercolour competitions are actually quite common.

Competitions can be quite important and/or useful and I don't think they can be dismissed en mass as 'all the same.' They can be an excellent way of getting your work 'out there', making a return (in the case of oms of the bigger ones), and building up a reputation. Of course they are subjective, but I disagree with Ralph that they suggest one images is 'better' than another in absolute terms and that this is somehow a problem. They are human judged and subjective and as long as you go in with thick skin and take it for what it is, then it does not matter. It is not science! Certainly winning some prestigious competitions can really make people pay attention to your work when you make submissions to galleries or apply for grants. I am not referring to local club comps but some of the bigger ones with well respected judges form the photography/editorial/gallery world.

Like everything else, you need to know your audience and there is no point in entering classical work into a competition aimed at contemporary/conceptual work. It is also important to pay attention to who makes up the judging panel.

Another flip sides to competitions (some of which are free or at least very affordable) is that you can learn a bit more about what triggers responses to your work and this is useful information. This allows you to better manage portfolios and submissions in the future, and balance these factors against your own personal motivations. I consider every competition entry 'forgotten' unless I get an email with some good news. At no point do I feel the competitions set the value of my work, but I do think they can be useful to me under certain circumstances. They never have a bearing on my creative compass either.

As for signing editions, pencil on the back of the print, outside of the image area and gently i.e. what everyone else said