Transparency submissions

[wes_carroll1]

What is your method of submitting large and medium format transparencies to publishers? The few I have submitted, I cut windows in black poster paper and left the transparency in it's plastic sleeve. I attached a business card to each window mat with a description and transparency number typed on each card. I'd like to hear what method others use. How do you mark your transparencies so they can be identified if they become seperated from their packageing? Are there any products available that could simplify a submission? I know Light Impressions has some window mats, but they seem rather expensive for what you get. The last time I submitted large format, some transparencies were lost, and a couple were damaged. I've never had problems when submitting 35mm.

[john_mcdonald]

I worked in the nightmare of publishing for years at a bimonthly magazine, which

tempers the following response. Unless you know the editor to be very reliable,

your images are at great risk of loss, and even if you know the editor to be

reliable, are at risk of abuse at the publisher. If they are important images to

you, ones that you wish to use again, you should send dupes. Good dupes are

more than good enough for most all publishing needs. If your images make it into

the publication, they will have been handled by many people who are not

obsessively concerned about archival conditions. They are generally in a hurry,

and just want to get the image out of the sleeve, remove any obvious dust with

whatever is handy, and get the image scanned.

 

<p>

 

A 35mm image scanned in its frame is never separated from its label. The

medium format or large format image must make it from the scanners back to

its correct sleeve, which can be quite a journey.

 

<p>

 

Where I worked, a publisher of several magazines, the images were first scanned

at low resolution for placement in house, then sorted and numbered, then sent

overseas. Scanning experts there scanned the images at high resolution for the

printer, and the images were returned in a box, generally well organized. But it

was up to me as the editor, being personally familiar with the images and the

photographer, to get them sorted and returned. At this point, a minimum of two

or three months had passed since the initial submission, and more likely a year.

The transparencies definitely suffered from all the handling and cleaning fluid.

 

<p>

 

One editor who worked for years at the same publishing house always had a

pristine desk. One day well after he had left for another job, someone was

cleaning out the cavernous warehouse and found a huge file cabinet filled like a

dumpster with years of floppy disks, slides, and transparencies.

 

<p>

 

Anyway, if the images are important I suggest sending dupes, and labelling them

the best you can.

[jnorman2]

i never send original CTs to anyone. publishers can normally make

their decisions using labelled 35mm dupe slides of your work, or they

can view the image electronically (the most common form of my

interaction with publishers these days), or via print submittals. if

the publisher wishes to use my work, i take care of whatever scanning

needs they specify, and FTP them a *.tif file in whatever size/dpi

they require (typically 300dpi at near the physical dimensions of the

size to be printed - normal file size is around 16-40MB). if a

publisher specifically requests a LF CT for review, you should have

them detail for you exactly how they would like the CT presented and

labelled. however, as i said, i would be very wary of submitting any

original CTs, as publishers (as well as galleries and museums) can be

notorious in their mishandling of this type of photographic material.

[bruce_pollock1]

While it's always risky sending original transparencies through the

mail to anyone, I think the risk is lessened where you know the

publisher to whom you are sending them. Most of my stuff has been

sent to smaller local publishers who I have been able to build a

relationship with and so far (touch wood) I've had no problems with

lost transparencies.

 

<p>

 

However, I too was looking for high quality presentation sleeves for

4x5 transparencies and have landed on the Clear File system sold by

<a href="http://www.iconusa.com/online/bmasktranssleeves.htm">Icon

Distribution</a>

 

<p>

 

They run US$14.00 for 10 masks and sleeves which I don't think is

unreasonable. They look good and really protect the transparencies -

I like them a lot.

[tim_atherton2]

Also make sure your paperwork is completely in order and watertight,

with signed delivery memos etc. Once they have had to pay for a

damaged transparency, they sure won't do it again. But it should

NEVER get that far For example, they should be sent and sign a "dear

client" letter before they receive anything, in which they

acknowledge they are responsible for the images while they hold them,

and also the value

 

<p>

 

see

 

<p>

 

http://www.editorialphoto.com/

 

<p>

 

http://www.sethresnick.com

 

<p>

 

for paperwork and workflows

 

<p>

 

Also, these days, unless thye are very trusted clients, they don't

get originals - dupes or high res scans.

 

<p>

 

 

try these guys too for cardboard mounts, sleeves and sleeve locks etc:

 

<p>

 

http://www.tssphoto.com/sp/index.html

[adam_gibbs]

Franklinphoto.com sell latex cohesive mounts that run at about $0.50

each if you buy 100. The price goes down the more you purchase. You

can then either mount the transparencies in their protective sleeve

or mount them and put a 5X7 glassline sleeve over the whole thing.

When sending you can put the mounted slides into Print File 5X7

sheets. Labelling/captions any label program works well as long as it

is neat and presentable. Another method is to get Franklin to custom

print the mounts, expensive but very professional looking. Hope this

is helpful.

[tim_atherton2]

Also make sure your paperwork is completely in order and watertight,

with signed delivery memos etc. Once they have had to pay for a

damaged transparency, they sure won't do it again. But it should

NEVER get that far For example, they should be sent and sign a "dear

client" letter before they receive anything, in which they

acknowledge they are responsible for the images while they hold them,

and also the value

 

<p>

 

see

 

<p>

 

http://www.editorialphoto.com/

 

<p>

 

http://www.sethresnick.com

 

<p>

 

for paperwork and workflows

 

<p>

 

Also, these days, unless thye are very trusted clients, they don't

get originals - dupes or high res scans.

 

<p>

 

 

 

<p>

 

try these guys too for cardboard mounts, sleeves and sleeve locks etc:

 

<p>

 

http://www.tssphoto.com/sp/index.html

[wes_carroll1]

Thank you for all your suggestions. I'm sure there will probably be

more to come. I will certainly consider all options you have given

me. I am at the point of questioning if I want to even bother with

sending material to publishers. I sent in a submission last month

and that was the first I've sent in for several years. I didn't send

anything but 35mm slides. I didn't want to risk losing any more

large format transparencies. Considering how low the pay usually is,

it really makes you wonder if it's worth the bother. I'd at least

like to make my hobby pay for itself.

[david_grandy5]

I'd give a lot of thought to having a high quality drum scan made

from the image. Have them make it a tiff or Photoshop file and then

have it burned to a CD. Then you can make as many copies as you'd

like.

 

<p>

 

A few years ago I had to do a series of medium format images for a

coffee table book. The client was a bank and they needed to send

these images to Alabama for publication. Once I heard that, I was

extremely nervous about sending those guys our original

transparencies and yet I didn't want to send dupes. So we did have

the high quality scans made and we did send them a CD. And they

LOST that CD within days of receiving it!

 

<p>

 

Had we not had a back up everything would have had to be reshot.

Although that sounds like a windfall for me I can assure you that

this somehow would have been MY FAULT! A reshoot is ALWAYS the

photographers fault even when it isn't.

 

<p>

 

Now the digital debate is fine, but EVERY photograph that you see in

a book or magazine has been scanned or they were digital to begin

with. Every one of them! A lot of magazines want transparencies in

sleeves or pages to edit. Life is easier and then can review them

very quickly. If the publication insists that you send

transparencies this way then you have to do it; but I think that the

liability that they are looking at may change their minds.

 

<p>

 

You could also send low res images if you're worried about them

swiping something. But the last thing that I'd want to do is put

original transparencies in the mail.