Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Another rain forest shot from NZ SI  (Read 5272 times)
RSL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6207



WWW
« Reply #20 on: June 18, 2012, 10:06:08 AM »
ReplyReply

Slobodan and I may not often agree on politics but we sure agree on this point. Sign on the back? What's the gallery visitor supposed to do, take the print off the wall and turn it over to see the signature? When I sign a print it means two things: I made the print, and I endorse the result. I'm willing to argue whether or not the signature should be on the print or on the margin, but a signature on the back is absurd. I had one gallery owner thank me for signing my prints on the photograph itself since it gave her more options in framing. Of course, I'm talking about an actual, manual signature, not a signature dubbed in with Photoshop. That kind of signature is the epitome of tacky.
Logged

Slobodan Blagojevic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5782


When everybody thinks the same... nobody thinks.


WWW
« Reply #21 on: June 18, 2012, 10:57:54 AM »
ReplyReply

... I'm talking about an actual, manual signature, not a signature dubbed in with Photoshop. That kind of signature is the epitome of tacky.

I can agree with that 90% or maybe even 99%. But what to do with drop-shipments (i.e., when the lab ships directly to the buyer) or face-mounted prints? Signing on canvas is possible, I guess, but would require a broad-tip pigment pen (and I am currently aware only of the rather fine-tipped ones).

How about a scanned signature, would that be any less tacky (at least for media that are not hand-signature friendly)?
Logged

Slobodan

Flickr
500px
popnfresh
Guest
« Reply #22 on: June 18, 2012, 03:01:36 PM »
ReplyReply

And again, why? If it was good for hundreds of years for paintings, why not for photographs? Why is it good for, say, oil on canvas, but not photo on canvas? What I can accept as the reason, is that it is a matter of personal preference, rather than a well-reasoned argument.

Well, of course it's a personal preference. But it's a personal preference that many artists are choosing. You're under no obligation to do the same.
Logged
RSL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6207



WWW
« Reply #23 on: June 18, 2012, 03:16:45 PM »
ReplyReply

I can agree with that 90% or maybe even 99%. But what to do with drop-shipments (i.e., when the lab ships directly to the buyer) or face-mounted prints? Signing on canvas is possible, I guess, but would require a broad-tip pigment pen (and I am currently aware only of the rather fine-tipped ones).

How about a scanned signature, would that be any less tacky (at least for media that are not hand-signature friendly)?

If you drop-ship Slobodan, as far as I'm concerned the print shouldn't be signed. After all, you didn't make the print. If that's a problem, you might want to give your customer a certificate of provenance. As far as signing on difficult surfaces is concerned there probably are two solutions: (1) Don't print on difficult surfaces. Making a photographic print on canvas seems to me the apex of asininity. Why would you want to degrade the resolution of a fine photograph that way? Canvas is for brushwork, not photographic printing. (2) Use a personal chop with paint or pigmented ink.

A scanned signature composited onto the print is exactly what I'm talking about: breathtakingly tacky.
Logged

popnfresh
Guest
« Reply #24 on: June 18, 2012, 04:08:01 PM »
ReplyReply

Personally, I wouldn't dream of drop-shipping Slobodan. I have a feeling he wouldn't be too keen on the idea, either.   Wink Wink Wink
Logged
jule
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 738


WWW
« Reply #25 on: June 18, 2012, 05:08:54 PM »
ReplyReply

And again, why? If it was good for hundreds of years for paintings, why not for photographs? Why is it good for, say, oil on canvas, but not photo on canvas? What I can accept as the reason, is that it is a matter of personal preference, rather than a well-reasoned argument.
Great question which I will offer an opinion and continue on another thread shortly...because my intention was to not hijack this thread.

Julie.
Logged

popnfresh
Guest
« Reply #26 on: June 18, 2012, 06:14:41 PM »
ReplyReply

Sign on the back? What's the gallery visitor supposed to do, take the print off the wall and turn it over to see the signature? When I sign a print it means two things: I made the print, and I endorse the result. I'm willing to argue whether or not the signature should be on the print or on the margin, but a signature on the back is absurd.

Why should it be absurd? The fact that it's signed at all establishes provenance. And provenance is the only thing that matters. Signing on the back is an aesthetic decision by the artist. There's no particular need for a gallery visitor to take a back-signed print off the wall to look at the back unless they suspect it's a fake. But even so, what would seeing the signature prove? It's just as easy to forge a signature on the front as one on the back. An art buyer's best protection is to buy from a reputable gallery.
Logged
Slobodan Blagojevic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5782


When everybody thinks the same... nobody thinks.


WWW
« Reply #27 on: June 18, 2012, 09:36:56 PM »
ReplyReply

... There's no particular need for a gallery visitor to take a back-signed print off the wall to look at the back unless they suspect it's a fake...

How about just to find out who's the photographer?

Btw, I am not trying to be antagonistic, all my questions above are open-ended ones.
« Last Edit: June 18, 2012, 09:39:52 PM by Slobodan Blagojevic » Logged

Slobodan

Flickr
500px
popnfresh
Guest
« Reply #28 on: June 18, 2012, 10:18:29 PM »
ReplyReply

How about just to find out who's the photographer?

Btw, I am not trying to be antagonistic, all my questions above are open-ended ones.

Most fine art galleries I've been in have little signs on the wall next to work that have the title of the piece, the type of medium it's on, the name of the artist, the date and sometimes the price. Sometimes when a gallery is mounting a whole show devoted to an artist's work they'll have the artist's name on the wall large enough so that anyone entering the gallery can see it. Sometimes the price is only listed on the price list for the works they're currently exhibiting. Most galleries will have a few copies of the price list handy for people to peruse. Every gallery does things a little differently. But usually it's pretty clear whose work you're looking at, even if a signature isn't visible.
« Last Edit: June 18, 2012, 10:26:13 PM by popnfresh » Logged
Slobodan Blagojevic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5782


When everybody thinks the same... nobody thinks.


WWW
« Reply #29 on: June 19, 2012, 01:10:04 AM »
ReplyReply

Why are we so obsessed with galleries? There are other places where photographs are on display: friends and acquaintances' homes, caffees, restaurants, offices, hospitals, airport terminals... Do I really need to come to every piece and take it off the wall to see who is the photographer!?
Logged

Slobodan

Flickr
500px
popnfresh
Guest
« Reply #30 on: June 19, 2012, 11:07:03 AM »
ReplyReply

Why are we so obsessed with galleries? There are other places where photographs are on display: friends and acquaintances' homes, caffees, restaurants, offices, hospitals, airport terminals... Do I really need to come to every piece and take it off the wall to see who is the photographer!?

I don't know. Do you?
Logged
Dave (Isle of Skye)
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 1012


Don't mistake lack of talent for genius.


WWW
« Reply #31 on: June 20, 2012, 08:52:58 PM »
ReplyReply

Can I say that even though I apply a scanned hand written signature on the images I post in this forum and elsewhere on the web, that it is only something I do for the web. Yes it may be tacky Russ I agree, but how else am I supposed to promote myself as the creator of the image when the average viewer may only look at an image on screen for a few seconds. Therefore I feel it has to be garish and yes even a little bit tacky to have any chance of being seen.

For my canvas mounted prints, I put the name of the image on the back of the frame and my website, I also sign the front for those hanging in galleries. For people who buy directly from me I ask them if they would like me to sign the image and where, although I still put the image title and website details on the back of the frame.

I am really not trying to have a go at you Russ, but have you actually seen a high quality canvas print up close? The detail in my images are as good as anything you will see on most other media, you can look at the image through a magnifying glass (and yes I do actually offer them a magnifying glass to look at the print). But whether I am right or wrong in this respect, I think we are totally missing the point here, because in general, the people that look at and hopefully buy my work are not one of us pixel peeping photographers, they are your average Joe who stands about six foot away to look at the print and think how it would look on their wall and does it clash with their curtains etc. So I think looking at microscopic detail with our faces squashed into the print and discussing where or indeed if we should sign it, has more to say about us as obsessive photographers, than it does about the viewing pubic, don't you agree?

Dave
« Last Edit: June 20, 2012, 09:01:27 PM by Dave (Isle of Skye) » Logged

Photography Tuition holidays on the Misty Isle of Skye
http://www.photography.info
RSL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6207



WWW
« Reply #32 on: June 21, 2012, 07:03:12 AM »
ReplyReply

Personally, I wouldn't dream of drop-shipping Slobodan. I have a feeling he wouldn't be too keen on the idea, either.   Wink Wink Wink

Right, Pop. Punctuation, punctuation, punctuation...
Logged

Pages: « 1 [2]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad