The time has come to discuss... signatures.
Why does a painting need to be ruined, by having a signature on it at all? Hidden away discreetly in a corner - no problem. But more often than not it occupies a space of meaningful content, like a watermark on an image that someone who owns the copyright wishes to prevent you seeing properly, for fear that you might steal it (using paint software, watermarks are remarkably easy to remove, but don't tell "them" that!).
And why does there have to be a trademark signature (I have used the word "trademark" deliberately, fully aware that this is the answer to my question)?
And why does there have to be a trademark signature (I have used the word "trademark" deliberately, fully aware that this is the answer to my question)?
In my pictures you will find dozens of variations of my signature, different fonts, different sizes, even different languages, and with the Argaman paintings different names.
In most of my pictures, I have attempted to make the signature either totally unobtrusive, or part of the design. So, here, it is fitted neatly into the grey shadow in the bottom right hand corner, its colours precisely echoing those of the painting.
Why has no one ever written a PhD thesis, let alone an entire book, on this hugely important subject of the artist's signature?
You can find David Prashker at:
Copyright © 2020
David Prashker
All rights reserved
The Argaman Press
No comments:
Post a Comment