Comments on: A Closer Look at “Limited Editions”

By: Why Use a Limited Print Edition and When to Use it « ChromaticSoul

Why Use a Limited Print Edition and When to Use it « ChromaticSoul — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 17:55:03 +0000

[...] After you’ve read that post, jump on over to A Closer Look at “Limited Editions.” [...]

By: On Limited Editions « Red Skies at Night

On Limited Editions « Red Skies at Night — Sat, 14 Jun 2008 10:32:15 +0000

[...] On Limited Editions Filed under: photos — ejeschke @ 12:28 am There’s a great discussion happening over on Brian Auer’s blog regarding Limited Edition Prints. What makes them limited, what makes them an edition, and what implications does that have in this digital age of reproduction. See also part II. [...]

By: Brian Auer

Brian Auer — Sat, 14 Jun 2008 02:51:22 +0000

I think a lot of us are on the same page with this topic. Unfortunately, it’s not a widely discussed topic and the inner workings of fine art terminology can be somewhat difficult to decipher when applied to modern fine art photography.

Getting this kind of feedback from the great minds that frequent this site is much appreciated and a very exciting thing to witness.

By: My Camera World

My Camera World — Sat, 14 Jun 2008 01:30:54 +0000

It is really good to see how engaged as photographers we are and our willingness to discuss complex topics for which I would suspect if you had a world view there would not be a one size fits all answer.

We all have an approach the suits our style and needs.

As an example, I don’t on purpose use the term limited Edition when selling certain images with limited print runs.

I clearly state, that I sign and number each print as being y/x for images that are larger than 8×10. Should it be damaged while I am living I will replace it and re-sign and number as they originally received, provided I receive the damaged version back.
There will be 2 promo images that are unsigned and numbered that will never be sold.

I have a log of all images I sell, size, series number, persons name and address (if they want)

I also state that I do sell unsigned images that are 8×10 or less never larger, but for the numbered versions there will never be made more than the run I have pre-determined.

The above information as well as instructions for archival mounting and preserving they receive as a printed note on textured paper.

This is just my model and none of the buyers has been concerned or raised any issues.

Niels Henriksen

By: Damien Franco

Damien Franco — Sat, 14 Jun 2008 00:41:35 +0000

Wow Brian,

It seems you have opened a much needed can of worms. Throughout observing the ongoing conversation I’ve found myself wondering if “limited editions” should even be an applicable term in the present day as pertaining to photography (especially digital photography). I’m cetainly interested in how this will play out, although I think our photo-blogosphere has little impact towards those higher powers in the elite fine-art realm. I do know of a few film photographers that do hold true to “limited editions” by permanetly archiving their negatives after running thier specified number of prints. That being said, I don’t know that I could ever do that if in twenty to thirty years from now I had a resurgence in interest in my fine-art works. It’s a personal battle that I will probably hold with myself for many years to come.

By: Cody Redmon

Cody Redmon — Fri, 13 Jun 2008 22:12:37 +0000

It’s great to see the e-mail communications on this, they really help explain Janne’s stance more clearly. At first I thought it was just about idealism, but there are definitely some valid points regardless of whether or not I subscribe to them myself. Era, medium, technology, target audience…there are many factors to consider when getting down to the nitty-gritty of definition. It’s good that you introduced the printmaking side of things, as this is where the term ‘limited edition’ really originated. I discussed the topic at length with a local photographer friend of mine who made this same point. He also presented the idea of “Original Works” as it applies to hand-processed prints vs. commercial reproductions. “Original Works” implies more about the work itself than it does the run length (”limited”), but without entering the fray of definition disputes. All you need to do then is limit your run length and you’re complying with both standards and definitions that can’t really be argued. There’s no innate claim of scarcity, but to me I still get that impression because “Originals” are definitely not “Reproductions” and no artist in their right mind would sit in a darkroom and bust out 10,000 hand-made prints of the same image.

This is a bit more about the definition and application of ‘limited” itself, but he noted that there’s often an implied price jump for limited pieces as they become scarcer. If you only have 10 of 50 prints left, those typically cost a bit more than the first ones to sell…but again this is a common practice in that lithographers employ, so there’s that gap again between medium of art and definition of terms.

Thanks again for the great topic, Brian.

By: What Exactly is a “Limited Edition” Print?

What Exactly is a “Limited Edition” Print? — Fri, 13 Jun 2008 15:47:54 +0000

[...] Exactly is a “Limited Edition” Print? « Print From Home or Print On Demand? A Closer Look at “Limited Editions” » By Brian Auer • June 11th, 2008 photo credit: [...]