Category: Arts and Entertainment > Visual Arts
Asked by: volare-ga
List Price: $5.00
02 Jul 2006 16:34 PDT
Expires: 01 Aug 2006 16:34 PDT
Question ID: 742862
What is considered the right way to sign photographs? On the verso or, why not, on the recto? If you sign it on the verso and have it mounted, which actually means having it sealed for good, who will ever be able to know in future times that the photograph has been signed? If that photograph is sold and resold, how can one be sure that the back of it contains the signature of the author? Even if the photograph is accompanied by a certificate of authenticity, which is rarely the case, that does not guarantee that under the sealed mount there is a signature of the author, does it? Thank you for any help you can provide.
|There is no answer at this time.|
From: iamdeux-ga on 03 Jul 2006 14:01 PDT
There is a few ways to sign your photography. If you want to sign it for sell or for use it like wallpaper it will be good to increase canvas and add your sign at bottom. Like National Geographics do (like this: http://lava.nationalgeographic.com/pod/pictures/sm_wallpaper/T0499_1.jpg). Or if you don`t want to sell your photography - put watermarks (not good way for good photo, because it lose all charm), or put your name/logo/url/email to not loaded by the important elements angle of image (like this: http://gallery.photo.net/photo/4633343-md.jpg). If someone has bought your photo and has resold it someone you have the right to bring an action against it. And if you have initial materials of a photo (a film; raw-files; jpg-files of the big sanction; images removed at the same time and similar to it) can win. Or if you have already protected your image any license.
If you feel that you have found inappropriate content, please let us know by emailing us at firstname.lastname@example.org with the question ID listed above. Thank you.
|Search Google Answers for|