Lisa - I agree with Eric. The IFPDA site has a lot of good info on numbering. Like Eric I am basically a printmaker but I use the same system in photography. I see no reason to do otherwise. Most photographers do not number their prints. I do and after the edition is printed, I pull one extra which I call the cancellation print, deface the negative then glue the negative to the print. (Funny thing but this the best seller of the lot.) Having been trained as a printmaker and taught to number, it is a hard habit to break just because I am now taking photographs. I figure that when the edition is done, it is done. Load the camera and move on.
To edition or not to edition is the question. I prefer that if you are going to produce fine art prints they should be editioned but do not really get bent out of shape one way or another. In our gallery we have both systems with the majority of photographers not editioning their work and that is fine. It is a personal preference pure and simple. In printmaking however, it is more of a tradition to number editions if the print is an original hand pulled print. The IFPDA nor any other site I know about discusses pricing. You will find that mostly on forums like this one and since this is dedicated to photography I am sure you can get a lot of sound advice. I too would be interested in hearing other views on this subject. Ray > Lisa Reddig writes: > > Does anyone know anywhere online I can learn about the rules of editioning > > and pricing prints? > > A good overview of how it works in printmaking is at > > http://www.artline.com/associations/ifpda/text/whatisprint.html > > in the last section called Numbering and Other Inscriptions. i would be > curious to read a discussion of how this differs from what's more > commonly done in photography, as my bias is as a printmaker. > > --Eric > > _______________________________________________ > Pinhole-Discussion mailing list > Pinhole-Discussion@p at ??????? > unsubscribe or change your account at > http://www.???????/discussion/ >
