How do you protect your prints?

[mjs1973]

As someone just getting started with portrait work, I'm wondering how everyone protects their work. I have seen proofs with the studios name printed on the front of the proof, and others with the name on the back of the photo. Do any of you have your name somewhere on the print? I was thinking of having a rubber stamp made, and then just stamping the back of the prints when I have them made. Just wondering what you think of that idea. Will an ink stamp on the back of the print cause any problems with the print itself?

[92135011]

I think so...
Acid or solvents sound like bad news to prints.
Although...I'm not exactly sure what ink contains. Maybe you need a special type of ink (maybe not). But, on the other hand, why would anyone need proofs to be super archival? probably no one going to look at them in a few years time anyways. Prints for customers on the other hand, need to be archival.

[another view]

I take it you mean copyright protection. You can have a rubber stamp made but you'll need a special ink so that it dries on the back of photo paper. I checked this out a while back and got nowhere, so I don't know where to tell you to look. You could stamp a sticker and put that on the back of the image - but of course it can be peeled off. Having the image stamped with gold foil in the corner is an option, but I think that's something the photographer does with a special (and pretty expensive) machine, not the lab. Some labs doing digital printing will offer a white logo or name in the corner, which is added before printing.

What do I do? Honestly, nothing. When I got into shooting weddings, I was worried about this, so that the couple wouldn't take the proof book to Kinko's (etc) and make their own prints. First off, I can't control the quality (which wouldn't be very good from a scanned small proof) but also I'd be out some money. I decided after the first one to give up the negatives (and later full-resolution CD's) with the proofs, and charge extra up front. That way I don't have to deal with print orders, either. I'm not saying this is the answer for you, but it made my life easier! After all, for under $100 the couple can get a pretty decent scanner...

[92135011]

although i think stickers are bad too.
When we were posting prints on paper backing, we used a film that was placed between the paper and print and pressed with heat to make it stick. Most adhesives contain substances that damage the print over time, or so they say. BTW, it doesnt matter that the sticker can be peeled off. I see copyright signs as a notification rather than a real security alarm. Remember, you can still copy something if the back says copyright protected. Ignoring such sign is illegal either way.

[mjs1973]

Thanks for the imput guys. Sounds like charging a little more upfront, and letting them deal with the ordering would be the easiest way to go. Thanks again for the input.