Baren Digest               Thursday, 26 July 2001       Volume 16 : Number 1502


----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Greg Carter <artfool@bulloch.net>
Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 10:00:46 -0400
Subject: [Baren 15253] Re: art materials 

Dear John and the gang,
Let me expand the on the materials conversation.
 I agree with Johns description of art materials and the general concept of
all ways buying the best.  At the same time, I have noticed that when you
explore different materials you will find that they all have specific
qualities that give you different effects.  What I am saying is that what
one artist might see as a limitation, can be controled and used for another
artists sucsess. I have wonderfull expensive rollers that I use along with
cheap speedball ones.  Though I use the large expensive ones most of the
time because it fits my work best,  there are times when the size and
durometer of the speedball rollers are perfect.  I developed a wonderful
relief process when I was in Finland using small cheap rollers that I could
of done no other way.  From that I began to use them in my paintings and
drawings and I could not live with out them.
Artists can always take what is seen as a deficit and use it.  With that
said, I belive a professional artist who sells their work should never
scrimp on permanance and lightfastness in their art materials.

Greg Carter


>On the use of materials.

>When I was out in Seattle I went on a tour of Daniel Smiths and got to talk
>to there chemists, One of the things of interest was the different qualities
>of artist materials out there. And who they were marketing too.  Artist
>materials are broken down into a number of grades for grade school use,
>collage use and professional use.

>An artist should always use the
>best quality materials so that it is the artist that is controlling the end
>result and not the limitations of the materials.


------------------------------

From: Julio.Rodriguez@walgreens.com
Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 14:02:23 -0500
Subject: [Baren 15254] Prints 07/25/2001 02:02:19 PM 

Someone else here mentioned the current digital exchange discussion on PA.
Wow! I can certainly see how the buying public is easily confused when we
(printmakers) ourselves are in such a dilemma over definitions.  Part of
the wonderful discussion has centered on defining requirements and a
vehicle for the digital prints..  cd, dvd, paper, etc..The term "print" is
used so loosely in todays art world that it's a small wonder you can get
two people to agree as to what is what.

Anyone who has previewed a baren exchange online and then received the real
prints in the mail knows what I am talking about.  And what a difference it
is! There is no substitute for the personal touch, the feel of the
paper(s), the smell of the inks, the variance from print to print, the
personal "mistakes" that accompany our works, etc........  I think a lot is
lost when we sit in front of a cold monitor to look at a computer image.
For one thing, a "print" has been touched by the artist's (or printer's)
hand and at the very least there is a connection between the artist and the
person viewing the work.  While I am excited at the new technology and some
of the work being done in the digital field (specially that speciffically
designed for computer viewing), my heart is with the traditional.

To me being a printmaker and making prints equates with "wanting" to make
multiples and on paper.  If I wanted to make "one" of anything I would
still be doing painting or drawings...if I wanted to rid myself of the hard
labor involved in making prints or turn that task over to an efficient
machine like a computer printer, I would then call myself an artist or a
designer..but certainly not a printmaker!  Struggling to make an edition as
perfect as possible, one print after the other, knowing that goal alone
will serve to hone my skills is a very fullfilling challenge. There is
always a battle going on between the "designer" in me  who wants to move on
to the next print and between the "printmaker" who wants to stay put, play
around, do multiple versions, experiment with the materials. To create
something in the computer and save it to a cd or a dvd and call "IT" a
"print" is rather a stretch. Call it "Art" if it meets such criteria,
called it a computer generated or assisted "image", call it a bunch of
eletronically created signals stored on a piece of plastic...but don't call
it a "print". Until ink meets paper...there is no "print".

I ran across this excerpt from a book, which dates to the 60's: (sorry for
those that saw it already in PA)

" Prints exist on paper, and they don't exist until they have been printed
on paper. Each is an  original....Two characteristics are common to all
prints. One is the reverse view.....Pressure is the other thing all prints
have in common.  The pressure can vary from that of a motorized press to
that of a spoon or by that matter that excerpted by only the hand....But
wherever there is a print there has been pressure and in part the print is
the record of pressure applied."
"For although we call those little pads (in our hands) our prints, surely
nothing is a print until it has been printed. The true fingerprint is the
mark on paper, and made, like all prints under pressure....":
(excerpt from "The Bite of the Print", by Frank & Dorothy Getlein.)


thanks for listening to an ear full........Julio


------------------------------

From: "Jeanne Norman Chase" <studiojnc@prodigy.net>
Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 15:48:05 -0400
Subject: [Baren 15255] Re: Prints 
Thanks Julio

My sentiments , exactly.

Jeanne N.


------------------------------

From: Cucamongie@aol.com
Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 17:54:34 EDT
Subject: [Baren 15256] Baren suji, sizing 

Hey folks, thank you to Julio and others who were responsible for the article & about my show, love the group photo also!  And of course thank you
again to all of you baren folk and spouses, etc who came to my opening, you're all great and I wish I had more time to talk with each of you!
As for sizing, I have to say, after speaking with even people who are very experienced at sizing your own paper, it's well worth it to buy paper that's
already sized!! It's very difficult to apply sizing evenly, and there are plenty of great papers at every price range that are already sized.
As for rolling waterbased inks, Akua Kolors work great either rollup or brushed on Japanese style, and for people like Dan who like the "kiddie
stuff", Shiva waterbased inks work fine for rollup, though they're chalky (they're on a par w/Speedball) - I've used these for linocuts.
best wishes
Sarah
best wishes

------------------------------

From: "eli griggs" <eli.griggs@worldnet.att.net>
Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 19:34:20 -0400
Subject: [Baren 15257] Re: Prints 

Hi there:

I wonder if the oxygen/acetylene welding torch caused similar discussions
and upset when it was first adopted by sculptors embracing a new tool, as
opposed as those dedicated to traditional methods of bronze casting, etc?

And just when did watercolour become 'real painting', rather than a
sketching tool?  Was it Durer or J.M.W. Turner that made Western watercolour
'Art' or were they simply willing to see more in the medium than their
fellows?

Does digital art first need to be wielded by an artistic giant to become
legitimate?

I agree that computer generated art does not quite fit in the traditional
pigeon holes of printing methods such as woodcut, etching, lithography, etc.

However, the fact that many artist/printmakers have taken to the
possibilities of creativity, use computers/software and 'printers' to
express that creativity, and describe the results as 'prints', indicates
that a wider vision of printing is needed by today's artist/printmakers.

I do not know if digital art will ever be separated from the lexicon of
printmaking, it seems very unlikely, but what is certain that the majority
of artists most likely to embrace the tools of digital art are printers and
they are doing so with a passion.

Digital artists can not be reasonably held off at arms length, nor denied as
printmakers, whatever we may think of the tools used. The fact-of-the-matter
is, a new medium is emerging in our midst and we can chose to partake or no.

I work in woodcut and belong to Baren because I want to better my art and
communicate to other artist/printmakers who are talking about woodcut.  I
believe that a woodcut print has a special feeling, and that adds to the
pleasure of making and handling such a print.

I also belong to Print Australia and The Monotypes List.  On those list, I
have learned about other methods and enjoy a wider discussion, though I do
not take part in many of the mediums being discussed.

And like me, many members of Baren, belong to other lists and practice other
methods of printmaking.

No one is being betrayed by artist/printmakers exploring digital art, it is
their right to do so, just as it is the right of others not to take part.

 But it is obvious that no matter how badly some traditional printmakers
want to keep the word "print" to themselves, digital artists are determined
to have their moment and will not wait for others to define them or their
work!

A lot of hard feelings have been generated over the marketing of
reproductions of art, in the form of Iris 'prints' and like kind, which has
often been done in ways that are outright fraud.  It is a very real problem
and people are working on ways to get the word out about what is a real
'print' and what is a reproduction.  Educating the public about printmaking
is very important and is something positive we can do.

However, to label all work done by digital methods as something less than
art, 'un-prints' if you will, is unrealistic, and just plain wrong.

Artist create with tools that they chose, not those chosen for them.

Whatever judgement of merit the work deservers, will be delivered by the
public-at-large, by their support or lack of.

My disjointed 2 cents worth.

On a woodcut note, I would be interested in hearing from woodcut artists,
just how are you using computers and 'printers' in your woodcut printmaking?

Eli Griggs
Charlotte N.C.
USA
eli.griggs@worldnet.att.net
eligriggs@gocarolinas.com
www.geocities.com/eli_griggs/mypage.html




------------------------------

From: Jack Reisland <reislandj001@hawaii.rr.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 15:15:45 -1000
Subject: [Baren 15258] Re: Prints 

Oh no! Not the digital vs. hand print debate again! Anyone interested in
this debate please first go to the Baren archives, do a search, and
re-read all the other times that we have aired this debate. Then see if
you have anything new to add.

Jack


------------------------------

From: "Maria Arango" <maria@mariarango.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 21:06:42 -0700
Subject: [Baren 15259] new prints

Well...
These are prints, I swear. New hand-made works hand-printed by hand or
hand-cranked press, hand-mixed ink still wet.

2 more saltimbanquis, to complete the series
http://www.1000woodcuts.com/outwood/owgallery3.html
A strange image inspired by architecture
http://www.1000woodcuts.com/fullsize/newel.html
Records of hikes, soon to be bound in books (yeah, right, "soon" as in next
decade)
http://www.1000woodcuts.com/handprintedcards/mini.html
And a companion to Viva!, another flamencoish image (my husband and I posed
for this one :-)
http://www.1000woodcuts.com/fullsize/bailedelsol.html

Ole,
Maria

<><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
Maria Arango
Las Vegas, Nevada, USA
http://www.1000woodcuts.com
maria@mariarango.com
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><>


------------------------------

From: "pwalls1234" <pwalls1234@i-55.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 23:23:46 -0500
Subject: [Baren 15260] Re: Prints charset

So no talk unless we have something NEW to say??
It will get mighty quiet in these parts-  Unless, of course, all the
ORIGINAL THINKERS speak up.

;-) pete
baton rouge


>Oh no! Not the digital vs. hand print debate again! Anyone interested in
>this debate please first go to the Baren archives, do a search, and
>re-read all the other times that we have aired this debate. Then see if
>you have anything new to add.
>
>Jack


------------------------------

From: FurryPressII@aol.com
Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 06:52:26 EDT
Subject: [Baren 15261] Re: Prints 

right!!!!!!!!!

john of the furry press

------------------------------

End of Baren Digest V16 #1502
*****************************