Today's postings

  1. [Baren 32642] Re: numbering prints (eli griggs)
  2. [Baren 32643] Re: Digester in action! (Dave Bull)
  3. [Baren 32644] RE: New Baren Digest (HTML) V38 #3768 (Jan 16, 2007) ("Lee Churchill")
  4. [Baren 32645] Re: New Baren Digest (HTML) V38 #3768 (Jan 16, 2007) (LAiNE)
Member image

Message 1
From: eli griggs
Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2007 05:25:17 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Baren 32642] Re: numbering prints
Send Message: To this poster


--- Maria Arango wrote:


"do whatever you want and make up an elaborate
explanation for what you're doing"

I do not keep an order of printing for my prints.
Instead, I simply sign and date all the prints in a
run, by either the date I sign them, or the date
printed, preferring the former, as that is when I
consider the print to be completed.

I also believe in the practice of 'open editions',
even though it was not until recently that I needed to
make a second run of a few prints.

I simply number the prints with the initials O.E.
(open edition) alongside and keep track of what was
printed, signed and trashed in a log book. When (if)
those prints are gone, I'll print more.

My simple little prints are not nearly so desirable as
Maria's and others here, and I will only print a dozen
or so - never more than about 40, wanting to expend
limited resources as best I can.

In large part, David Bull influenced my viewpoint
about open editions several years back, in a thread
about editions. I found that he made a good case for
keeping and printing from perfectly good blocks,
without building in a contrived scarcity into an
image. It may be that he has changed his viewpoint, I
admit to having picked an chose threads for awhile
now, but I do think it is a good idea to get the best
from a print, so long as the block(s) are in good
shape.

Cheers
Member image

Message 2
From: Dave Bull
Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2007 22:45:14 +0900
Subject: [Baren 32643] Re: Digester in action!
Send Message: To this poster

> In large part, David Bull influenced my viewpoint
> about open editions several years back, in a thread
> about editions. I found that he made a good case for
> keeping and printing from perfectly good blocks,
> without building in a contrived scarcity into an
> image. It may be that he has changed his viewpoint,

Never!

:-)

Dave
Member image

Message 3
From: "Lee Churchill"
Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2007 08:37:13 -0700
Subject: [Baren 32644] RE: New Baren Digest (HTML) V38 #3768 (Jan 16, 2007)
Send Message: To this poster

Dear Laine,

I just got my boar card, it's even lovelier in real life!! Thank you very much.



As for shipping:



>Is it really a good idea to lie when shipping something? I know when I sent
>a package internationally that I sold if I mark it as a gift then I am
>breaking the law.

Good idea or not I know companies from all over the world who will put whatever value you want on a package. I have direct experience with American, Turkish, and British companies. I won't name any names, just in case, but having also been "honest" and ended up paying over $140 on "hazardous item" import for a $65 dollar item (that didn't have any hazard labels or MSDS sheets when it arrived) I decided that was my share of import for awhile! I do however very much agree with Charles' estimation of the randomness of the Duty people. Hiromi International accidentally double sent my order of paper several years ago, one package got stuck with hefty duty but the other didn't get stopped at all (exact same contents and shipping info.)





and numbering prints:



At school I was taught the system as Maria explains it with a couple exceptions - Artists and state proofs were the pre-BAT prints, theoretically the state proofs should be drastically different but the A/P could be almost exactly the same as the BAT but 'should' show some slight variations that make them 'proofs' rather than 'final' prints.

Cancelling the block or plate meant scratching a big "X" through it and printing it as proof that no more images can be created from that matrix.

The traditional way:
-number prints as they come off the press and keep the order
-first good print is named BAT (bon a tirer=good to pull)
-second print that matches the BAT is number 1 in the series
-prints that are not good, blurry, off register, etc. are simply pulled off
and called either proofs or working prints or kitty-litter liners or, my
personal favorite a.g.'s (artist's goofs). I made that last one up in case
anyone is checking.
-the edition ends with the last print
-the artist can pull an additional few prints not to exceed 10% of the total
edition and keep/archive/sell them as a.p.'s (artist's proofs)
There are printer's proofs and other nomenclatures for those who have the
luxury of having a printmaking studio pull their prints.



Personally, I feel I am only in the early stages of learning to print - I'm simply not good enough to work in this way. I start with a big pile of papers (usually 30-40, so big for me but I know not for others) I print the first layer and ditch the ruined ones, do the second layer, ditch the ruined ones (and the problems over time have been various - from not inking enough, printing upside down, creasing the paper, poor registration, poorly mixed colours, needing more carving...) and so I continue with my print and ditch routine until I finish the final layer. However many I have left is my edition, at worst 1/3 are left, usually I'm happy with about , I stack them best on top to worst at back and then number them. My professors would be scandalized, well not really, but a bit embarrassed at least...! But I figure while I am printing on my desk in my home office, I am giving myself some leeway. When I am working with a Master Printer in a studio and actually selling work (ha!) then I will worry about the fine details of editioning!
Member image

Message 4
From: LAiNE
Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2007 00:47:32 +0900
Subject: [Baren 32645] Re: New Baren Digest (HTML) V38 #3768 (Jan 16, 2007)
Send Message: To this poster

Glad to hear the boar arrived safely in your hands!!! Happy New Year,
and enjoy!

LAiNE

lainegreenway.com
blog