Thats clearly just shoddy professionalism. Forgot to mention, for the benefit of the original post (Daryl), the "standard" edition number is somewhere between as little as 5 up to around 50. 20 is quite common. (that's usually what I make, though not always all at once - I just keep track of what goes where.) I must say though that now, with more digital print making, the number of "prints" of varying archival quality that float around in galleries with no numbers is a little unsettling. On the other hand I don't necessarily bemoan the loss of the "preciousness" of the photograph as an art object. There are certain conceptual advantages to this, depending on what you're doing and why.
Norman
Mike King wrote:
My point exactly and I see it frequently in offerings from "fine art" photographic printers selling their own wares via the Internet.
darkroommike
----------
----- Original Message ----- From: Norman Ford <mailto:njford@netvigator.com> To: List for Photo/Imaging Educators - Professionals - Students <mailto:photoforum@listserver.isc.rit.edu> Sent: Monday, July 07, 2003 11:43 AM Subject: Re: Numbering Prints
Its quite unusual for any photographer to make an edition of 250. A silkscreen printmaker perhaps, but a b/w photographer working on silver print - not very likely. An edition of this size would also significantly reduce the value of the image.
Mike King wrote:
It's been my experience that artists that make numbered series actually produce more prints of any single photograph than those that do not number. And unlike print making there's a huge burn out factor in producing an edition of 250 photographs. I'd really be hating that shot by the time number 250 is produced. Additionally, and just my opinion, it not really a series unless it's produced in one session, easy for a print maker impossible in the darkroom.
darkroommike
---------- ----- Original Message ----- From: "Darryl Gage" <dgage@localnet.com> To: "List for Photo/Imaging Educators - Professionals - Students" <photoforum@listserver.isc.rit.edu> Sent: Saturday, July 05, 2003 7:18 PM Subject: Numbering Prints
Let's say I create prints from the same original negative in silvergelatin,
platinum, and gum bichromate. Would each of these categories constitute a different series or should they all be grouped together as one series? Or should I just count myself lucky if I sell anything and not worry about numbering the prints? Thanks.
Darryl M. Gage Forestville, NY
"Strange and beautiful are the stars tonight..." Blue Rodeo
-- Norman Jackson Ford -
PhD (ABD)
Dept. of Comparative Literature (and Cultural Studies),
University of Hong Kong
Visiting Lecturer, School of Design, Hong Kong Polytechnic University
-- Norman Jackson Ford - PhD (ABD) Dept. of Comparative Literature (and Cultural Studies), University of Hong Kong
Visiting Lecturer, School of Design, Hong Kong Polytechnic University
