Signing Your Prints on the Reverse, Part 2 of 3
As noted in my last post, photographs exhibited in higher end contemporary galleries are signed on the back, or reverse of the print. In addition to contemporary practices, there are two other reasons that you should consider when deciding whether to sign the back of your print as opposed to the front, these are; market and concept. This post will briefly discuss concept.
When you create a photograph to hang in a contemporary space you need to realize that everything about your work has a “meaning”. Everything that you do “contextualizes” your photograph, and how it is viewed and interpreted by the viewer. This includes the signature on your print as well as your decision whether or not to use a mat and frame. If you sign and/or edition your work on the front you are “referencing” a certain time period in photography. If you frame your photographs in black frames with a mat, and under glass you are “referencing” a specific period of photography. If you are going to reference that time, then you need to be able to explain “why” you are doing so. Are you commenting on that period? Are you addressing social issues of the time, creating nostalgia, or speaking about memory or loss, creating an homage in reference to an artist or photographic style? Is your signature on the front part of your concept? Does it move you closer to the “why” of your photography?
Much of contemporary photography is not about creating images that represent something, it is about creating photographs that comment on something. When you are making commentary, every choice, every symbol (and your signature is a symbol), every detail, is part of that commentary. So the decision to sign on the front goes beyond whether you or your client simply likes it there, it becomes part of your concept, part of the conversation that the photograph creates.
5 Responses to 'Signing Your Prints on the Reverse, Part 2 of 3'
Subscribe to comments with RSS or TrackBack to 'Signing Your Prints on the Reverse, Part 2 of 3'.
Silly me and I always thought that visual arts is about what you see and what you present for viewers to see. Looks like there is room for a sequel to Tom Wolfe’s “The Painted Word”.
It is strange to think that visual people such as photographers can so easily step outside of their normal regiment. We will study every aspect of an image crucially and then, once framed, matted or otherwise “finished”, we enter our routine mind and sign without thought to the visual.
Thanks for the post.
I couldn’t disagree more with the author’s conclusions.
The presentation of photographic art has had many choices and those choices grow, but most of the formats have been around for decades. Mats and Frames are a standard imposed on the photographer by the gallery or physical protection needs, there is no commentary unless the frame is unduly ornate detracting from the image. Floating, tiled, canvas etc.
With respect to the artist’s signature, beyond a convention, it seems to me that an artist should be proud enough of his work to sign it where people can see who created the image without having to remove the image from the wall, not to mention contact the artist to buy another print.
If a photographer is competent enough to be able to sell an image to a customer, they are competent enough to judge how to sign the work and present it. Otherwise, why not just sell the signed print and leave the framing to the customer/gallery and charge the same price, or better yet raise the price for passing the artistic discretion to the customer. It would certainly be more profitable and less hassle.
Tthe author is the one who is placing limits and conventions on photography by declaring a new standard, as if to denigrate all work prior to his proclamation or current/ contemporary observations.
Photographs that make comments belong in the media or documentaries and are poor subjects for art. Photographic art should challenge and evoke emotions and feelings.
James,
There are indeed many choices available to photographers, and many galleries that ask photographers to mat and frame, the post was speaking to a specific kind of contemporary photography that exists in a specific kind of gallery. It also pointed out that contemporary business models change, as we need to be aware of that as artists. I would suggest you look at the photographs being shown at galleries such as David Zwirner or Matthew Marks, or any number of contemporary art galleries exhibiting photography to begin to give you an idea of some of the kind of work I am speaking of. These galleries, and gallerists, as well as a number of museums and non profits are indeed concerned with the “conversation” that a photographs creates with its audience as well as the “concept” of the piece, and the “context” or the image, or where it is positioned both in terms of its place in photographic history, and the photographic conversation as well as where it was created to exist physically, and does exist physically. A mouthful I know.
In terms of signing your print, I am not saying that signing on the reverse is the only way to do so, but I am saying that it is the appropriate way for the contemporary gallery context. Those are two very different things. Each photographer should create and sign their work as they wish, but they should also make those choices as informed artists, understanding the implications of their choices and how they might be viewed in certain galleries or museums. Whether we like it or not these our choices will indeed have an effect on when and where your work may be exhibited, and at what price point.
This leads me to the third post on signing your prints, your market, in the near future it will be coming to a local ASMP Strictly Business Blog near you!
As always, thank you for taking the time to state your opinion, it is what makes the blog work and these conversations valuable.
Thomas
Whether to sign on the print or the reverse has become a huge question for me as I’m preparing for my first exhibition in the high end fine art market.
Thomas himself saw the prints in question and recommended signing on the reverse. I have also consulted with another high end NY gallery expert and they concur, citing signing on the front was more towards the commercial market.
But they also said it was OK to sign on the mat as well even at the high end. That left me confused. So I went back to the postings on this subject and thought about the concept and how I would look at the image for the first and hundredth time. My conclusion – in my case, its all around the image, I don’t want to distract that. Therefore I’ll be signing on the reverse
Thank you Thomas.
Carol