Baren Digest Tuesday, 22 May 2001 Volume 13 : Number 1427 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Shireen Holman Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 10:31:27 -0400 Subject: [Baren 14505] Re: Baren Digest v15 #1421 As long as you don't try to sell these as prints, it's okay. I went to a gallery recently where someone was selling exactly that - signed, numbered prints, made by scanning her watercolours and printing them out on watercolour paper. They do look nice, but they are simply reproductions, like posters, and the buyers should know that. Shireen *********************************************** Shireen Holman, Printmaker and Book Artist email: shireenh@earthlink.net http://www.shireenholman.com *********************************************** ------------------------------ From: "Larry Giacoletti" Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 15:51:30 Subject: [Baren 14506] Re: Baren Digest v15 #1421 "As long as you don't try to sell these as prints, it's okay. I went to a gallery recently where someone was selling exactly that - signed, numbered prints, made by scanning her watercolours and printing them out on watercolour paper. They do look nice, but they are simply reproductions, like posters, and the buyers should know that." Well, now we cross over into the "Digital print" debate- Is the work in Photoshop and printed on a Iris printer (or bubble jet) a "Print"? Can this compare to an artist working on a block, inking it and printing it? (Don't know) It's still a machine that technically "Makes" the print right? Just some thoughts Larry ------------------------------ From: "Larry Giacoletti" Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 15:51:51 Subject: [Baren 14507] Re: Baren Digest v15 #1421 "As long as you don't try to sell these as prints, it's okay. I went to a gallery recently where someone was selling exactly that - signed, numbered prints, made by scanning her watercolours and printing them out on watercolour paper. They do look nice, but they are simply reproductions, like posters, and the buyers should know that." Well, now we cross over into the "Digital print" debate- Is the work in Photoshop and printed on a Iris printer (or bubble jet) a "Print"? Can this compare to an artist working on a block, inking it and printing it? (Don't know) It's still a machine that technically "Makes" the print right? Just some thoughts Larry ------------------------------ From: "bemason" Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 09:25:11 -0700 Subject: [Baren 14508] ink jet prints Hi Larry, Glad you are posting and out of lurker status. This ink jet printer deal has been beaten to death here many times, but I will again add my 2 cents worth. I think the computer is a new tool, sort of like a printing press many years ago. If you are an artist and your tool of choice is a computer, then the output is your real work. How one editions and number these works are the choice of the artist and the responsiblity of the arist to actually limit them. If you take another media and scan it into the computer, the out put is a poster or reproduction. Somewhere in the middle is the artist who puts an exsisting image in a computer, manipulates it and then prints it out as an ink jet print or makes plates and prints by hand (my choice here!) At some point we will have all these different processes catagorized as will collectors and museums. The critical thing is that buyers know what they are getting. If someone wants to pay $1000 for a poster, that is fine as long as they realize what they have is an expensive reproduction on very nice paper. The problem always lies with the uncsrupulous seller who misrepresents a poster for a hand pulled print. So much said and nothing decided, as usual... The weather here is fabulous..83 today.Woweee!!! Best to all, Barbara ------------------------------ From: baren_member@barenforum.org (Murilo Pereira) Date: 21 May 2001 17:48:26 -0000 Subject: [Baren 14509] Senhor David Bull Message posted by: Murilo Pereira Dave, please do me a favour, am askin'u and all the rest: how can I give form to a woodengraver virtual course? for what clients? whom could be attracted to? it could only be a theoric course or will it be a practice course too? I'm in the Brazilian Virtual University course for virtual teachers and have this question to resolve. Help me with all with your great woodcut and virtual experience. I MUST participate on a Baren exchange, help me in that too. I 'm looking forward to hear from you. Everybody, thanks for helping. Best wishes, Murilo, Florianópolis.- ------------------------------ From: Daniel Dew Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 16:54:33 -0400 Subject: [Baren 14510] Tips Galore Thanks for all the tips and encouragement on self promotion. I was starting to feel guilty that I had been pushing and promoting my own show, but ya'll really did make me feel better and I used many of your suggestions also. As a matter of fact, I'm meeting with the Art Editor of the local paper tomorrow at 2:00. I don't know what I'll say, but what the heck, I've never been accused of being too quiet. Once again, thanks everyone! dan dew ------------------------------ From: barebonesart Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 15:01:03 -0700 Subject: [Baren 14511] Re: Baren Digest v15 #1426 > I disagree that it is a sin not to be archival. The work is what counts and > some non archival papers will last some good time. Whooops! I guess I'm guilty of sin. Actually, I agree that whatever works gets used, but if it is something highly acid I buffer it or use one of the many methods to make it less apt to disintegrate in a few years. What I was specifically addressing in my answer which said "it is a sin to not be archival" was the substrate, or format you're working on. Unless you're doing something to make a statement and want it to disintegrate in no time, then why would anyone use copy paper to print on? If you're spending that much time on a block, or plate, why not print it on a good piece of paper? Like I said, unless you're making a statement and there's a good reason to use garbage paper, then I would encourage everyone to use that which is archival. I was raised to have respect for my work, and that is the category I think this falls in - I have been known to stray, but not far. . . . Sharri ------------------------------ From: "Garth Hammond" Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 20:26:07 -0600 Subject: [Baren 14512] Re: Baren Digest v15 #1421 charset="iso-8859-1" RE:Well, now we cross over into the "Digital print" debate- Is the work in Photoshop and printed on a Iris printer (or bubble jet) a "Print"? Can this compare to an artist working on a block, inking it and printing it? (Don't know) It's still a machine that technically "Makes" the print right? Just some thoughts Larry Larry, Stop thinking! :) : ) :) Garth ------------------------------ From: "Patricia" Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 15:49:04 +1000 Subject: [Baren 14513] Re: Baren Digest v15 #1421 charset="iso-8859-1" I have never tried to sell these prints as orignals just given them to friends and relatives for presents. However I have used the watercolours as the starting point for other computer generated prints. What I call computer generated prints are images I have scanned into my computer, layered, juxtaposed and generally stuffed around with them. Personally I can't see that this is much different to collage except that you are able to produce multiples. I have never tried to sell these as 'orignal prints', although technically they are. Sorry if this is re-hashing previous discussions. Patricia ------------------------------ From: Sunnffunn@aol.com Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 01:49:35 EDT Subject: [Baren 14514] Re: Baren Digest v15 #1426 Well, I have had situations where I had a nice block and traditional paper did not work. So I have used paper that is not traditional and might not be acid free. i am running one now on a lovely paper, but i do not think it is archival. I choose the paper that works for the project, best. I am the artist and I want it to go into the future, but it has to work today. Sometimes the right paper is not archival, as much as I would hope for it. My question now is what about my exchange piece. I thought I would use this lino block piece, but the paper is not archival, because that is what I chose to run this with. So do I send this print or do a different one to be certain I have one that is archival. I have 2 others ready to run. One is my first woodblock, a small one, such as it is. The lino is a far better print artistically but the other would be archival??? do I go with the art or the preservation? Marilynn ------------------------------ From: David Bull Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 16:41:55 +0900 Subject: [Baren 14515] Re: Vrtual courses ... Murilo Pereira wrote: > Dave, please do me a favour, am askin'u and all the rest: > how can I give form to a woodengraver virtual course? Well, I don't think I'm the right person to answer _this_ one, but I do think that we have a lot of people here on [Baren] who can. Some of you out there in the academic world - do you have any experiences here to share with Murilo? Anybody running any such courses, either 'virtual' or 'real'? ** > I MUST participate on a Baren exchange, > help me in that too. This is much easier to answer. Mark off July 1st on your calendar - that is the date when sign-up begins for the next [Baren] Exchange - #11. (#9 is now being collated, and #10 is 'under construction'). All you have to do to get into #11 is simply enter your name on the sign-up page that will be opened on that day. Here is the schedule of exchanges for the rest of this year: http://barenforum.org/exchange/index.html Dave ------------------------------ From: "Garth Hammond" Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 06:28:28 -0600 Subject: [Baren 14517] Re: Baren Digest v15 #1426 charset="iso-8859-1" RE:The lino is a far better print artistically but the other would be archival??? do I go with the art or the preservation? Marilynn The only way I can respond is from experience and asking you a question. "How would you feel in 5 years if you were the customer"? I know I am not the only one who has had the following experience. I have bought ART which I assumed was created with integrity by an artist who knew what they were doing which has disintegrated and is now worthless/diminished for viewing or resale. Now that was my money (life force if you will) I spent on something that I could enjoy hopefully for a long time. Because the communication was not clean I feel ripped off. they either lied to me or did not know that the prints were not archival. This is the other side of the question you are dealing in. i don't think it is just a question of "I am the artist". We are making a product that is sold on the market and as such represents VALUE. That is why definitions are so important. It is important to know what an edition is, It is important to tell customers etc what/how the product is created. In some ways it is pretty simple. If you use a term you don't understand incorrectly then you are ignorant. We all are ignorant to greater or lesser degree so that is what we are doing here. If you use a term dishonestly to imply value where there is none you are misleading people and probably lying. by doing this you corrupt the market and introduce fear and distrust into the buying process. I think it is very important discussion even if it gets resaid 10 times. So who would you rather buy Art from? I think the expectation of value is a very worth while topic; something we need to keep in the back of our heads as we move to end product. thanks for listening : ) Garth ------------------------------ End of Baren Digest v15 #1427 *****************************