Can I say that even though I apply a scanned hand written signature on the images I post in this forum and elsewhere on the web, that it is only something I do for the web. Yes it may be tacky Russ I agree, but how else am I supposed to promote myself as the creator of the image when the average viewer may only look at an image on screen for a few seconds. Therefore I feel it has to be garish and yes even a little bit tacky to have any chance of being seen.
For my canvas mounted prints, I put the name of the image on the back of the frame and my website, I also sign the front for those hanging in galleries. For people who buy directly from me I ask them if they would like me to sign the image and where, although I still put the image title and website details on the back of the frame.
I am really not trying to have a go at you Russ, but have you actually seen a high quality canvas print up close? The detail in my images are as good as anything you will see on most other media, you can look at the image through a magnifying glass (and yes I do actually offer them a magnifying glass to look at the print). But whether I am right or wrong in this respect, I think we are totally missing the point here, because in general, the people that look at and hopefully buy my work are not one of us pixel peeping photographers, they are your average Joe who stands about six foot away to look at the print and think how it would look on their wall and does it clash with their curtains etc. So I think looking at microscopic detail with our faces squashed into the print and discussing where or indeed if we should sign it, has more to say about us as obsessive photographers, than it does about the viewing pubic, don't you agree?