you'll love this...which is the REAL photo?

magnadoodle · February 20, 2008

Here's the question: if i take one image and then manipulate it 2 or 3 different ways in photoshop, contrast, colour etc - then which one is the REAL one?

I ask this because i'm about to exhibit some of my photos, which will mean selling them, and therefore selling them as limited edition prints. How will someone feel if they buy a photo (say in b&w) from a limited edition, only to find later that that same image is also selling in sepia? or with high contrast?

I'm struggling with this idea of 'one version'. Any thoughts?

thanks.

LiquidAir · February 20, 2008

Personally seeing more than one version of the same image in a gallery would be a big turn off and I wouldn't buy anything larger than a postcard of an image sold that way.

BPerron · February 20, 2008

magnadoodle wrote:

Here's the question: if i take one image and then manipulate it 2 or 3 different ways in photoshop, contrast, colour etc - then which one is the REAL one?

I ask this because i'm about to exhibit some of my photos, which will mean selling them, and therefore selling them as limited edition prints. How will someone feel if they buy a photo (say in b&w) from a limited edition, only to find later that that same image is also selling in sepia? or with high contrast?

I'm struggling with this idea of 'one version'. Any thoughts?

thanks.

Personally I only think that Limited Edition stuff like photos, works if you are a very established photographer and people know who you are and your work is out there...Otherwise I think limited edition can turn alot of people off and seems a bit presumptuous....

Duffy Pratt · February 21, 2008

If I was buying a limited edition, my assumption would be that there is some master file (or negative) that underlies the edition, and that the limited edition would be the only series of prints sold from that master. What is "real" has nothing to do with it.

Duffy

SloYerRoll · February 21, 2008

Duffy Pratt wrote:

If I was buying a limited edition, my assumption would be that there is some master file (or negative) that underlies the edition, and that the limited edition would be the only series of prints sold from that master. What is "real" has nothing to do with it.

Duffy

Van Isle · February 21, 2008

In this case "right or wrong" could be debated endlessly by lawyers who don't care. What you should base your actions on, in this case, is the perception from (potential) clients. How would they react? Do you think an answer like "well, this one is USM 45% and THIS one is USM 50%, so..." is going to make for happy, money-spending clients?

In this case perception is reality. I think what you are debating is the likelihood of getting caught, in which case you already know what you're doing is "wrong" for you and your clients.

My .02

VI

Duffy Pratt · February 21, 2008

To be fair, you can avoid alot of problems by just being clear and upfront with your purchasers. I know there are series of hand signed prints that are limited as to that series, but they don't preclude other prints being made. (This happens quite often with lithographs, and may happen with photography as well.)

And a limited edition could have something to do with the quality of the paper and the printing process, or the amount of supervision that the photographer put into the process, especially when dealing with darkroom prints. A fine print directly supervised by Ansel Adams won't lose alot of value because the same picture is included in some coffee table book on inferior paper.

Duffy

RogersDA · February 21, 2008

magnadoodle wrote:

Here's the question: if i take one image and then manipulate it 2 or 3 different ways in photoshop, contrast, colour etc - then which one is the REAL one?

I ask this because i'm about to exhibit some of my photos, which will mean selling them, and therefore selling them as limited edition prints. How will someone feel if they buy a photo (say in b&w) from a limited edition, only to find later that that same image is also selling in sepia? or with high contrast?

I'm struggling with this idea of 'one version'. Any thoughts?

thanks.

You should also be interested in specific laws/rules regarding what can be called limited editions and what you might have to do beyond controlling the quantities sold.

See the web site at the Art Publishers Association for some quick information.

dadwtwins · February 21, 2008

RogersDA wrote:

You should also be interested in specific laws/rules regarding what can be called limited editions and what you might have to do beyond controlling the quantities sold.

See the web site at the Art Publishers Association for some quick information.

What a great site for information all of us should know. I really think this should be a great sticky link on this forum for everyone to go over that plan to sell their photos.

Sam · February 21, 2008

magnadoodle wrote:

Here's the question: if i take one image and then manipulate it 2 or 3 different ways in photoshop, contrast, colour etc - then which one is the REAL one?

I ask this because i'm about to exhibit some of my photos, which will mean selling them, and therefore selling them as limited edition prints. How will someone feel if they buy a photo (say in b&w) from a limited edition, only to find later that that same image is also selling in sepia? or with high contrast?

I'm struggling with this idea of 'one version'. Any thoughts?

thanks.

You sure are bouncing around with your questions.

There is no "real, or absolute" definition of a limited edition photograph.

In other forms of printing the classic definition is to print the total number of prints designated in the limited edition, and then destroy the plates.

It's not the same with photography, at least it hasn't been.

I haven't heard or read about any photographers printing the entire edition at one time. Over time printers, inks, paper, etc change. So if you produce 1/250 today, and years from now print out 203/250 with different print technology, paper, etc., is the print the same? Can it still be considered part of the original limited edition even if it looks different?

Many will claim the limited number only applies to the designated size, and will print say 250 of each size, therefore actually selling many times more that the implied 250. In addition to this some will offer the same limited edition image on cheaper paper in open additions.

Basically limited edition photographs, and Giclee prints is a marketing (plan, method, scam, etc.) designed to increase perceived value, and assist them in charging higher prices.

I would caution you to carefully think this limited edition thing through before just saying oh sure let me write some numbers on those prints for you.

Assuming your honest, and ethical, once you have committed to the limited edition marketing plan you can't go back. At least for the prints you have already designated as limited edition. You will need to define "limited edition" for yourself, let the gallery, clients know exactly what this definition is, and maintain all the documentation needed for this.

Now I am not saying my definition is the only one, but my definition is pretty simple. Once an image has been defined as a limited edition (lets use 250) the photographer can only print 250 total. They can be any size the photographer wants, but the total can not exceed 250. Replacing damaged prints for clients is in my opinion acceptable.

I have read about several who use this definition, and will start the series with both larger , and smaller sizes. As the edition sells out they will stop printing the smaller sizes, and only print the larger more expensive sizes. I personally don't see any ethical issues doing this way.

Typically galleries will only sell limited editions because it increases the implied value, price, of the print. Also be aware of the pricing structure of galleries. They will normally take 50% of the sale price. Once you have sold prints at that price level you can't honestly sell the print for less at different venues. If you try the galleries will drop you like a hot potato, and your clients will be ticked off.

All I am saying is think the whole issue through, and make an informed choice.

Sam

magnadoodle · February 22, 2008

Hello all. thanks for your responses.

van isle: just to be clear, that's not at all what i was saying. quite the opposite. i have no intention of cheating anyone - it's actually about choice.

i'm with liquidair, that if i saw more than one version of the same print - let's say sepia and colour - in a gallery, i'd think, gee, doesn't this guy have any other photos? At the same time, when i'm buying, I like to have the CHOICE - there are some images that i prefer in colour than in b&w, say, and i think giving people the choice is a good thing. I just don't understand how one does that. it seems very new, because with digital photography you COULD make two different types of the same image and different people would like different versions.

duffy pratt: interesting, i hadn't thought of it that way. that does make sense. but i still go back to this question of two versions. shouldn't people be given the option of having it differently processed?

i would like to do that. one thing i was thinking was framing the version i like (say, colour) and then including a small postcard of the other version (sepia, say) next to it, so people can see there are 2 different versions. it's not fooling anybody, it's giving them choice.

what have other people done in this situation?

magnadoodle · February 22, 2008

LIMITED EDITIONS

I thought i'd post my thoughts on this separately. i think i've been pretty upfront about not knowing too much about galleries etc. I'm certainly still learning and i'm not trying to fool anybody.
about limited editions, i actually thought that one HAD to sell prints as limited editions. maybe that seems naive and i didn't like the idea of it at all - after all, and to be frank, i'm not convinced i have all that many good shots, so i'd like to keep the possibilities open.

i'm just looking for the simplest, straightest way to do this. i thought looking on the internet there would be a straightforward way to exhibit, because i assumed people do it all the time. it looks like there are instead variations.

from my point of view, i'd like to keep it simple. put up the images and let people buy them. later, if i do another show and want to use some of the same images, put them up again and let people buy them. no fuss, no muss.

but of course it isn't like that and the art world - as Sam suggests - has rules of its own. i don't want to break them by not knowing them. so if the limited edition thing isn't necessary, then i will happily discard it.

again, what have other people done?

thanks. i appreciate the discussion.

you'll love this...which is the REAL photo?

Comments