[Leica] A question on signing prints

[abridge at gmail.com (Adam Bridge)]

Uh.....I know this is probably a really dumb question Ted...but WHY
don't you sign the print? The signature belongs with the image not
whatever it might be temporarily mounted on.

But, on a follow up, do you identify a print as being yours at all? I
know Ansel used a rubber stamp on the back of his images (or I THINK I
know this). But with inkjet prints I've not been sure that it's a good
idea.

Thanks, Ted.

adam

On 11/12/05, Ted Grant <tedgrant@shaw.ca> wrote:
> David Cochran asked:
> Subject: [Leica] A question on signing prints
>
>
> > A friend of mine wants a print from one of my photos. I want to know what
> > is the 'protocol" if you wish, to signing the picture.
> > Is it ink or pencil? On front (to be covered by matt) or on the back of
> > the picture.
> > Should I use one of those gold ink pens? Even if Ted says that is the way
> > to go I won't do it...I'm sorry ;-)
> >
> > I want to do it right, just in case I become famous. :-)<<<
>
> David don't ever sign on the photograph itself. And I don't care what 
> anyone
> else says, period.
>
> Sign on the print rebate, including date.. something like "  '05 after your
> name. In pencil if it's a matte surface or as I have done for sometime with
> a "Sharpie" micro point pen, if other surface than matte.
>
> Given that my prints are usually matted and signed on the matte prior to
> framing and glass, it makes it quite simple.
>
> ted
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>