Signature on photos

[Rattus79]

My advice for scanning a signature:

Use a Calligraphy Pen, something with a decent width to it. It makes the selections in PS easier if it has more pixels to work with.

Scan it at the highest resolution possible

Use a very clean piece of paper, preferably gloss. You will have less marks/dust etc to clean up and confuse a quick selection.

do 2 final versions.
One with a white background, and one with a black background. That way you can apply a white signature on a dark background and a black signature on a light background using layers and blend modes.

Saving as PNG allows you to completely remove the background (neither white nor black) JPEG does not!

A cheats way of doing the selection:
Menu: Select > Colour Range
Set it to shadows and it should automatically select all of the text (as well as any dust marks)
Deselect any dust marks, and use the background eraser tool - Right click the eraser tool - to remove the background completely. Be thorough, any dust marks will show up.

[William W]

I have had a request for a image with my signature and numbered.

My query is what is the best way to apply a signature to your image. Digitally on the image or after its printed?

Your call as to what is better, but my 'signature' is my signature (i.e. written by me) - I use these (usually the gold one).

An unsolicited comment on numbering: - one can't really, until all the prints are printed and signed and the dye (file or neg.) is destroyed. That's the predicate of a Limited Run and numbering each of them.

WW

[Doktaduck]

I'd have to agree with the people suggesting you "sign" the photo, and not print your signature.
In this case it seems that the person is looking for that unique and personal touch. If I ever asked for a photo which was signed, then that is what I would expect.

That said, some people not into photography etc.. might actually only be talking about a watermark.

I have been surprised at the people that have asked or told me I should put my signature on the front of an image (I thought it would spoil it, lol).

This statement is what made me think that they are referring to a watermark (laymens signature).

If you are mounting and selling an image, I'd be inclined to actually Name the image and "sign" -digitally is fine in the border, centered and under the image.

If you are doing a limited edition, or a special one-off image run, then I would do the same, however I would also add an actual "written" signature that might cross into the image itself.

[welly]

My personal opinion is that signatures should be on the back of the image as a sign of authenticity or out of the frame on the mat. Not sure I like these gaudy watermarks all over images. It's fine for the web but not when you're printing an image for a friend, family or customer.

[Shelley]

Thanks for all the comments and thoughts. Always helpful to hear others thoughts when coming to a decision. I don't think I will be inundated with signatures required on my images. Also William, I don't think it would be a limited edition, more like the 1, 2 or 3rd copy. If I ever get to that privileged state where I can do limited editions, lol, I will have a very big party.

My personal opinion is that signatures should be on the back of the image as a sign of authenticity or out of the frame on the mat. Not sure I like these gaudy watermarks all over images. It's fine for the web but not when you're printing an image for a friend, family or customer.

I was asked to sign . Usually you don't watermark printed images for a paying customer. Usually on the web a watermark is used to promote the photographer who took the image and also to show visual ownership of and hopefully discourage copying - but that is another thread I imagine.

[geecee]

A hand written signature might be more authentic but signing with a marker sounds dicey to me. Is it likely to affect the image over time? I have seen some framed images signed on the matt.