Forum

Signing and matting prints

Posted by David Hipwell on January 9, 2010 at 4:50pm in Marketing & Sales of Your Art and Crafts
For years now, I have been signing prints in pencil in the white area of a print. Now a gallery owner friend said she thinks it is better to sign, title and number a print in gold or silver right on the ink of the print. This allows you to bring in the matting in much closer to the edge of the printed portion of the print. Or you can totally elimite the white of the print and have the mat just over the border of the print. In my opinion the less white border around a print the better it looks. Eliminating it could pose a problem for non custom framed prints.....Ie if you use precut mats like I do. Any comments?

Mexico 332.JPG (small).JPG

You need to be a member of Art Fair Insiders to add comments!

Join Art Fair Insiders

★
★
★
★
★
Votes: 0
Email me when people reply –
Follow

Replies

  • Raya March 11, 2010 at 9:00pm
    I’m a painter. On original art I sign inside the art, I either scribe into thick wet paint or use an unobtrusive color and sort-of HIDE my signature. Some people get really angry if there’s no signature, I’ve had buyers bring a painting back to me to sign.
    On canvas I’ve also begun putting a very thin handprint in acrylic on the backside and then sign and title over that…I had a bad case of a framer telling a client that my original was a reproduction (I’ve licensed images in the past and do not recommend it to anyone!) I lost that sale because the client believed the framer over my gallery and me!
    Reproductions…If your actually doing a limited edition of that image then treat it like any other fine art print and number and sign in the white. But if you aren’t and with today’s printing processes why bother with the limited edition concept?…Sign inside as your adviser suggests, it allows for the client to have a choice in the framing.
    Now if you’re a fine art print maker (etcher, litho or mono printer) or a photographer that’s different and the old standards should apply.
  • Michael Peychich March 2, 2010 at 4:05pm
    If your work is limited to one style only you may be recognized by your work, I believe that an artist need not be so restricted in artistic expression that someone looking at his or her work will automaticly know that the work is yours. I am not saying it is wrong to be limited in style if that style allows your to completely satisfy your artistic desires. I work with a verity of styles and would never expect that someone would recognize all the work as mine. If they did I would find it troubling. However I would hope that the quality would be high and that when they encounter an image of mine that they did not recognize as mine they would think its a great image I'm not surprised it was done by Michael. As for signature, I sign the matt but that to is a matter of artistic expression.

    William S. Eickhorst said:
    Linda:

    I hate to be a stickler, but anything you attach to the image, including a signature, becomes part of the image. Did you compose the photograph with the signature as part of the composition? If viewers can't recognize your work without relying on a signature, no matter how small, what does that say about the work itself? What do you other photographers think?
  • Alison Thomas March 2, 2010 at 5:40am
    I forgot to add that I sometimes get requests to sign the print itself so I carry a light and a dark acid free pen to shows for that purpose.
  • Alison Thomas March 2, 2010 at 5:39am
    I do overkill for this. I sign and number the print istelf in the white portion which is then covered up by the mat. I sign and number the mat in pencil on the lower right. And I provide a COA with the print which tells the materials plus the title and number of the print. If someone remats a print they have the option of placing the mat so my signature is visible (or not).
  • John Tunney March 1, 2010 at 11:35am
    I'm a photographer and digital artist. I usually float my images in the mat, meaning I leave about a half inch space between the image and the mat all the way around. I think it looks great, sortof like double matting. I sign and number the image in the white space. I know that a lot of photographers sign the mat, but I figure there's never going to be much of a market for signed mats.

    John
  • Tim Wilson January 13, 2010 at 8:43am
    William, you just pointed out where I was thinking of going with my post without me having to go there. lol
    "What is the signature alone worth? Unless its the signature of someone famous, like Abraham Lincoln, its not worth anything" Then why worry about signing it at all...Not trying to be a S.A. but in all honesty, what is your signature worth to the final product.

    Now, on the other hand, those who became famous for their work didnt start off that way and most if not all of their work is signed on the image itself...if my memory serves me well. (I hope)

    William S. Eickhorst said:
    Tim:

    The purchaser is buying the work, not the signature. What is the signature alone worth? Unless its the signature of someone famous, like Abraham Lincoln, its not worth anything. If its that important to have a signature, the artist can always sign the back of the work - then if if gets rematted someday the owner still has the signature or can tell who did the work.
  • Linda Anderson January 13, 2010 at 12:57am
    Thanks Michael for this useful info. Best to you in 2010!
  • MICHAEL ALAN STIPEK January 12, 2010 at 6:54pm
    Photographers have one problem if they have their images on photographic or emulsion/resin coated (RC) paper: any pen or pencil that you sign on the image will eventually etch its way through the emulsion and cause the edges to curl back. It's a form of reticulation. It's best to sign on the mat, in pencil. If a gallery, frameshop or customer wants to remove the mat, just have your name and ph. number or email address on the back of the matted image and that person or persons can contact you to work with you on another signature placement.

    For painters' reproductions, whether numbered or just signed, on any form of paper, whether an Arches 300# or just plain printer paper from your home computer, you can sign either on the mat, if you have one, or print a white space below the image and sign/number that. That has been the practice of reproductions by watercolorists for many decades.

    If you don't have any kind of border or mat and frame the print to the edges, I suggest signing the back of the framed image. However, if you have a canvas mounted reproduction (giclee' is the same thing) or a laminated/coated image, you can sign the front, preferably small, but I suggest using an archival or gel pen so the ink doesn't eventually eat its way to the substrate. At least in your lifetime!
  • Linda Anderson January 11, 2010 at 1:09pm
    I am a photographer. I always place my signature on my work - the photo itself. I typically use a white acid free gel pen in either of the bottom corners. I keep it small and unobtrusive. The few times I have a white or light area in those corners I use a darker acid free gel pen. I do the same with my artwork printed on canvas. While I am not "famous", I do have a following in the midwest and have received feedback that some have noticed my signature and have commented "Oh, that's a Linda Anderson - I have her work too"
    Signature is important William.
  • Tim Wilson January 11, 2010 at 9:52am
    The only issue I see with signing the mat & not the image..what if the buyer decides to replace the mat at a later date...no more signature...and if they later sell that piece then the new buyer wont know who did it..
This reply was deleted.