# Sold photo - customer wants print numbered



## ottor (Nov 19, 2013)

B&W Print on metallic paper, matted on white, and framed, sold at my gallery.. The Gallery called and the client wants me to come in and 'number' the print. First, let me say that I think the numbering of current/modern photographs are kina foolish and misleading. This isn't the kind of *art* where the original 'plate' will deteriorate, as the first printing of a digital file will be as good as the last. Hell, the numbering of photographs just started recently... Ansel didn't even number his photographs (As far as I know).. However, the argument goes like this: if it is limited it must be good. And if it is good it must be expensive. And if it is expensive it needs to be limited. And if it is limited it is good..

However, that said, I'm all for "Giving them what they want"...

My question is as follows. When you number an image printed on Metallic photo paper, and then print another on Luster, or pearlescent paper, does that numbering sequence continue, or do you number the exact finished process, and begin another with another type of finish. You know that a photograph printed on Metallic paper, and one that is printed with a Matte finish look totally different. Are they, in the numbering world, the same product - or different, with different numbering series? What about one printed on paper, say, 5/100, and then you have one finished on Canvas, is that now 6/100 ?

I'm gonna run now, and go number a mat on a photograph where it really doesn't mean anything, but was just wondering .... and thinking.

thanks,

r


----------



## sm4him (Nov 19, 2013)

I agree with your sentiments, but I have NO idea about the answer to your question. Personally, I guess I'd consider it as a limited edition of metal prints versus a limited edition of luster prints, so I'd probably number them separately. If I were inclined to ever number them at all. But trust me, if I had a limited edition of 100, and someone wanted to buy #101, I'd figure OUT a way to make it happen. 

Oh, and I hope you numbered that mat as "2/100." If they want the FIRST one in the limited edition, that costs extra. :lmao:


----------



## amolitor (Nov 19, 2013)

A standard that is pretty widely used is to consider the print dimensions the key factor. If you are selling an 8" x 10" print, and you number it 1/50, you commit to selling no more than 49 more prints of this picture in an 8" x 10" format. 16" x 20" is OK, 10" x 12.5" is also OK, and so on.

A limited number of "Artists's Proofs" are also acceptable, usually 2-3, which should be labelled as such.

Limited editions come in two varieties: The most common never some close to selling out. The rare few sell out, and then the artist wishes they'd numbered that first one 1/500 rather than 1/25.

An idea Mike over at ToP has come up with is to make it unlimited, but to increase the price over time. The first 10 sell for $100, the next 10 for $500, and so on.


----------



## KmH (Nov 19, 2013)

ottor said:


> I think the numbering of current/modern photographs are kina foolish and misleading.


Serious collectors don't find it foolish or misleading.
Numbered and sequenced limited editions help define the value of what they collect.

From a business perspective, it is a time honored sales technique.


----------



## orljustin (Nov 20, 2013)

ottor said:


> My question is as follows. When you number an image printed on Metallic photo paper, and then print another on Luster, or pearlescent paper, does that numbering sequence continue, or do you number the exact finished process, and begin another with another type of finish. You know that a photograph printed on Metallic paper, and one that is printed with a Matte finish look totally different. Are they, in the numbering world, the same product - or different, with different numbering series? What about one printed on paper, say, 5/100, and then you have one finished on Canvas, is that now 6/100 ?



I doubt there's anyone selling anything here that a number on a print would really mean anything or make it more "valuable".


----------



## amolitor (Nov 20, 2013)

When you're buying Art it's not at all unreasonable to want some reassurance that you're not buying something that's going to be everywhere next year. This isn't Decor, this is Art.

That's all a number is, a reassurance that this won't be all over the place.


----------



## Steve5D (Nov 20, 2013)

orljustin said:


> I doubt there's anyone selling anything here that a number on a print would really mean anything or make it more "valuable".



And you're probably exactly correct.

It needs to be pointed out, though, that no one here is buying it. 

If a client wants a numbered print from me, you can bet your last dime that's what he's going to get. If I make it "#82/250", the client is happy, and I'm content in the knowledge that I'll probably not need to sell 251 of those prints...


----------



## pixmedic (Nov 20, 2013)

orljustin said:


> I doubt there's anyone selling anything here that a number on a print would really mean anything or make it more "valuable".



Really? 
 the customer who purchased Ottors print from the gallery seems to think otherwise.


----------



## Justman1020 (Nov 20, 2013)

"Your work is only worth what someone is willing to pay" 

true statement. You may think its worth more or less, but the above statement is true. Someone's willing to pay more for putting a number on it? Put a number on it.


----------



## Light Guru (Nov 20, 2013)

I would explain to the customer that your prints are not numbers because you do not limit prints of an image to a set number of prints. if they still insist on it being numbered then have some fun and number it like this 







-1/


----------



## amolitor (Nov 20, 2013)

You're not just "writing a number on it" you're making a commitment, a legally binding. To a very large extent you get to set the terms of that commitment, but before you go scribbling numbers on things you should think it through.


----------



## pixmedic (Nov 20, 2013)

I know next to nothing about galleries or selling prints in them, so if someone could educate me on this..... 

If you put a number on a print, say, 1 of 200.
are you saying that you already HAVE 200 prints of that picture, and that one is just the first?  Or are you saying that you will only print a maximum of 200 and as of right now, that one could be the only one?


----------



## KmH (Nov 20, 2013)

That one is the 1st of a limit of 200 that will be made, usually _in that size_.


----------



## amolitor (Nov 20, 2013)

You can probably make an argument for any substantial visual difference separating "editions", but as KmH points out, usually the size is used as the indicator. The number /200 indicates that no more than 200 will ever be made available for sale in this edition, which is usually _in that size._

Color versus b&w would probably be fine. Glossy paper versus matte would be.. iffy. Silver vs. platinum? I dunno! I bet that one's never been tested in court!


----------



## pixmedic (Nov 20, 2013)

Ok.  So you dont ever have to actually print 200 of them, but thats the max number you can do in one particular size. 
What leads someone to pick a larger or smaller number?


----------



## Steve5D (Nov 20, 2013)

pixmedic said:


> Ok.  So you dont ever have to actually print 200 of them, but thats the max number you can do in one particular size.



Correct...



> What leads someone to pick a larger or smaller number?



The number chosen suggests a level of exclusivity. A smaller number can translate to a higher price.

I have a photograph of a guitarist that I shot a few years ago:







I have it limited to 100 prints. The first is hanging in my office. The second was given to the guitarist. The third was donated to a benefit concert in Illinois for a silent auction (where it sold for $650.00). The fourth, fifth and sixth ones were sold to people who simply wanted to buy it. 

The first three were not numbered. The three that were sold were numbered 4/100, 5/100 and 6/100.

I took that photo, if I recall correctly, four years ago. At the rate I'm going, if I'm doing the math right, I'll sell print #100 in the year 2070.

"100" seems like a pretty safe number...


----------



## ann (Nov 20, 2013)

:thumbup:

more than safe i would say  

For years I have use the number 25, i always keep no. 1 and altho i sell from time to time, I have not come close to 25   This includes silver gelatin prints, platinum prints, van dyke, whatever


----------



## ottor (Nov 21, 2013)

amolitor said:


> You're not just "writing a number on it" you're making a commitment, a legally binding. To a very large extent you get to set the terms of that commitment, but before you go scribbling numbers on things you should think it through.



Well, I think I made him a happy puppy ... I checked my invoices and I've actually printed this shot 5 times before ... in different sizes. I gave him 6/125. I also started a file of photos/prints that have limited runs, and the number I sell. I talked to the lady at the gallery also and she mentioned that I should begin numbering *all* of my photos - she says it makes the photograph appear more valuable .. note that she said 'appear'. However, "Art" is subjective, and if someone will pay more for one that's numbered, than that inherently makes it worth more... When I number the photos, I'll always make it a reasonable figure, with due consideration given. 

I appreciate all the comments ... 

r


----------



## ottor (Nov 21, 2013)

What leads someone to pick a larger or smaller number?

"The number chosen suggests a level of exclusivity. A smaller number can translate to a higher price."

________________________


That would make sense, however, wouldn't the other also be true? ... When you come towards the end of the run, wouldn't they then become even more desirable (expensive), because shortly the printing process will end and they'll become less available.. ??

I dont' know ..... but - after these replies, as well as talking to the Gallery owner, I'm gonna begin the numbering program. Certainly wouldn't hurt as long as I do it with integrity, and ... who knows - perhaps I can raise my prices a little... :mrgreen: _It 'is' a unique photograph however_, but I still can't imagine printing more than the 125 that I put on the print.. After all, I'm 67 ... I'll be happy if I live long enough to pick up the photos that I sent to Costco this morning !! 

ldman:

r


----------



## manaheim (Nov 21, 2013)

I number mine X/50, and I will only ever sell 50 of that print, regardless of size.

I've told customers before if they ever want to resize theirs that they own the serial and they can give me the old one to destroy and I'll print them a new one at whatever size they want (lesser fee- basically covers the difference plus some handling money).  No one has ever taken me up on this.

To date I believe my highest number is like 12 or 13.  I doubt I'll hit 50 before I die on most of my images.


----------



## Steve5D (Nov 25, 2013)

ottor said:


> That would make sense, however, wouldn't the other also be true? ... When you come towards the end of the run, wouldn't they then become even more desirable (expensive), because shortly the printing process will end and they'll become less available.. ??



That might be true, but that doesn't really have anything to do with the number of prints made available.

Using that approach, should a person only print a single example of every image, because that would mean it would meet the end of its run a lot sooner and would, therefore, be worth more money sooner.

My experience has taught me that the fact that a print is simply numbered far outweighs the number assigned to it...


----------

