[Baren]: The mailing list / discussion forum for woodblock printmaking.

Baren Digest            Thursday, 17 September 1998    Volume 04 : Number 284

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

From: Gayle Wohlken <blueman@pantek.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 09:14:43 -0400
Subject: [Baren 1695] Re: Baren Digest V4 #283 

Hi, this is Gayle (blueman) Wohlken--

I don't edition because I like to get a print I'm happy with 
to use for my books--but sometimes people want one of the
prints and I make them one.  I don't number these.  I used
to just put the word "proof" in the middle because it seems
they don't all come out identical anyway.  Since I hand 
burnish with a wooden spoon, and take my time doing it,
I do get variations.  No two ever looks exactly alike so I feel it 
would be unethical to make an edition.  

By the way, I make limited edition books, and these are
numbered and signed--and I consider them somewhat as 
art and have sold them in galleries.

Gayle Wohlken

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

From: Sheryl Coppenger <sheryl@seas.gwu.edu>
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 11:09:07 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Baren 1696] Re: Numbering, paper 

Before I start, I want to say that I agree that people who sell editioned
prints at fairs (or anywhere) and then print more identical prints when
they sell out are pretty slimy.  That assumes it's not a red flowers/
blue flowers thing.

My first and primary printmaking method is lithography.  I have a copy
of the Tamarand Book and use it.  However, I'm not entirely comfortable
with "the rules".  For instance, printing identical editions on different
paper -- the Tamarind says use roman numerals for the second paper.
That prevents the edition on one paper from being confused with the
edition on the other paper, but it's still in a manner of speaking a
way to "cheat" and have a bigger edition.  Someone who buys 1/75 doesn't
necessarily know there's a V/XXV out there.  

My first few lithograph editions have the numbers messed up according to 
this rule because I printed mostly on white BFK but threw in the 
occasional sheet of grey or cream BFK as well.  I figured they all were 
pulled from the same stone in the same run on the same manufacturer's 
paper, so it was one edition.  Others would say I have 3 editions of the 
same B&W image.  But I'm not sure I'm comfortable selling someone 1/20 on 
white paper and having them see the identical image 1/10 on cream paper 
down the road.  Nowadays I'm more likely to print an entire edition on
one paper, so the question is moot.

I have no problem with state editioning if I add or remove something on
the stone or block.  But if I change ink or use different paper in the
chine colle' that's not *exactly* a state change although it is a different
edition.  And it means that there are *essentially* identical prints out
there with different numbering.

BTW, I don't always destroy the light prints as dictated by the Tamarind.
I hand color some, and they go out unnumbered.  When there aren't any light
prints I still reserve a few for that purpose.  They're seldom sold.  Most
wind up with relatives or friends or as donations.  I also don't number 
some color lithographs because I don't do a lot of them and I like to play.  
As I print I split editions a lot and change inks and papers, so each one
is almost different at the end.  I call them monoprints and don't number
them (although some do edition monoprints/monotypes).  They're definitely
limited in number, because I don't have enough stones available to finish
the print.  I have to regrind and redraw, or do reduction between colors.
There's no good way to decide on some variation to edition, because I
don't know how they turn out until after some of the stones are gone.

I think guidelines are great as guidelines, but as long as the artist is
fairly consistent and doesn't try to fool anyone there can be some
deviation from those guidelines.  I make a good-faith effort to be
professional and ethical, but since the chances I'll be struck by 
lightning probably are much higher than the chance my work will ever
be auctioned by Sotheby's I don't see any reason to get heartburn about
whether different paper means different edition and such as that.  In
general people who aren't foolish are going to buy my work because they
like the image rather than because of the number.  I put on the number
mostly so that people will know whether it was a large run or a small one
(that does affect my pricing), and also because my unnumbered work is a 
one-of-a-kind in some sense.

YMMV

Sheryl Coppenger    

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

From: Graham Scholes <gscholes@islandnet.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 08:22:18 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Baren 1697] Humour. 

Both Marnie and I felt this was worth a moment of your time.

  A fellow was walking along the beach when he picked it up and a genie
popped out and said he'd grant him one wish.   The fellow thought and
finally  said: "I'm afraid of flying and I get seasick on boats. It would
be nice to go to Hawaii, so could you build me a highway across the
Pacific Ocean?"   The genie considered the request, but decided it would be
too difficult. "It would cost billions and take a very long time.  Don't
you have another wish I can grant you?"   "Well," the fellow said, "I've
always wanted to know what makes women tick. Why are they the way they
are?"   The genie replied, "Will that be two lanes or four?"

Graham

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

From: Graham Scholes <gscholes@islandnet.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 08:26:31 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Baren 1698] Re: Baren Digest V4 #283 

>Hi, this is Gayle (blueman) Wohlken--
>

Gayle,

We know who you are.... Daves posting was dealing with the names of people
that did not match the e-mail address.
You don't have to title your postings as you did here.

Go back and read Dave B's posting for clearification.

Graham

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

From: "Don S Rich" <DARICH@prodigy.net>
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 08:30:09 -0700
Subject: [Baren 1699] editions 

Dear Julio,

I think you are confusing two separate issues.  When we say a numbered
edition may not be reprinted or extended we are talking about an edition of
original prints.  When you talk about books and second printings you are
talking about reproductions of the originals.  Different story there. 

With the original art work the edition number given indicates the total
number of prints created.  In the case of the book it indicates that it is
the first printing of the book.

In the case of an original letterpress printed limited edition book which
is signed and numbered ,it is considered fine art and the rules for
original art apply.

Andrea Rich

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

From: "suzie aar" <thankful1@worldnet.att.net>
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 09:03:21 -0700
Subject: [Baren 1700] Re:   Baren Digest V4  

>Susie, perhaps your unaware of the numbers of prints  through out the Ukiyoe
>period. They were all by custom unlimited. Popular editions have never stopped
>to this day. It not unscrupulous. They simply don't  number them. Basically
>any contemporary print is rarer than any Hiroshige or Utamaro.
>People may tell you the date of printing as evidence of age, etc.. But some
>editions were sold out in one day in Edo.
>The were printed again that night.
>D

Hello, this is George Aar (God knows if this were my computer and not my
wife's I would have smashed it with a hammer years ago).

Daniel,
I think you misunderstood me. I don't think it's unscrupulous, immoral, or
unethical for an artist to print as much as he wants of his open edition. I
think it just cheapens it . Look at the examples you gave. In Edo period
Japan were woodblock prints highly prized works of art?
Not from what I've read. And why not? Well, there's plenty more where these
come from.

Regards,
George Aar

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

From: Ray Esposito <brassring@brassring.org>
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 11:49:45 -0400
Subject: [Baren 1701] Re: Humour. 

Graham wrote:
>Both Marnie and I felt this was worth a moment of your time.

Graham:

Give us a break.  You sent me this "joke" some time ago and I told
you.....well I won't repeat that here.  So, having been shot down, now you
send it to everyone in the hope someone will think it is funny.  And to
involve Marnie!!!!  Have you no shame?  :-)>>>>

Cheers

P.S.  I am off to Snow Hill to close on the properties.  Will be back next
Friday.   Don't everyone get too exorcised until I get back.  Gee...next
week should be tame but don't forget folks....Batman is still here.
								Robin

Ray Esposito

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

From: Don Furst <furstd@UNCWIL.EDU>
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 12:49:16 -0500 (EST)
Subject: [Baren 1702] why limit your edition? 

It may be the case that some people deliberately limit their edition sizes to 
artificially impose scarcity of a product.   

The more likely motive, however, is to avoid printer's exhaustion.  When I
set an edition size  of 20, 40, or 50 impressions, I can do the physical
labor of inking and printing during two or three studio stints.  Printing
larger editions than these would be  tedious and exhausting. Once the set is
printed, I can move on to new projects.  Closure (pardon the pop psychology
buzzword) has occurred. 

Don Furst

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

From: Ramsey Household <cjramsey@pacbell.net>
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 10:09:40 -0700
Subject: [Baren 1703] Re: Humour. 

Graham Scholes wrote:
> Both Marnie and I felt this was worth a moment of your time.

This is Carolyn,

Sorry, but I think this is one of those male dominant things,  and I don't
think this forum is the place for it.  The woman here have all had  well
reasoned and rational things to say.  They have not flamed anyone either.  You
wouldn't say these things about a racial or ethnic group, why woman?

PS I think you could insert MEN in this joke instead of women and it would work
just as well.

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

From: Ray Esposito <brassring@brassring.org>
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 13:44:11 -0400
Subject: [Baren 1704] Re: Humour. 

Carolyn wrote:
>Sorry, but I think this is one of those male dominant things,  and I don't
>think this forum is the place for it.

Come on Carolyn, lighten up.   Graham can speak for himself but I want to
addres sthe tone of your post.

As to the "woman here have all well reasoned and rational thing to say",
that is as dumb a statement as I have seen on Baren so let's not open that
can of worms.  If you want adversed examples they can be supplied.  To
suggest the guys are incapable of "reasonened and rational" thought is
ridiculous.  Both male and female have made reasoned and rational
statements and both have said some really dumb things.  Your silly post is
a perfect example of the later.  Let's move on and not open a new area of
tension.  It was a joke.  If you don't like them, use the delete button..

Ray Esposito

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

From: Ray Esposito <brassring@brassring.org>
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 13:49:40 -0400
Subject: [Baren 1705] Re: why limit your edition? 

Don wrote:
>It may be the case that some people deliberately limit their edition size to 
>artificially impose scarcity of a product.     etc.

Don:

Excellent points.  My editions are usually 3 to10.  I had a recent edtion
that honored Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.  Each of the ten prints were
editioned at 15 which is high for me.  I also find printing to be tedious
and exhausting, and, to tell the truth, rather boring, but more than that,
my particular joy is making the plates.  By the time I run off 10 prints, I
am thinking about the next plate and am anxious to get started.  I am
looking forward to the print exchange.  An edition of 29 will be really
strange for me.

Cheers

Ray Esposito

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

From: Ramsey Household <cjramsey@pacbell.net>
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 12:06:48 -0700
Subject: [Baren 1706] Re: Humour. 

Ray Esposito wrote:
> As to the "woman here have all well reasoned and rational thing to say",
> that is as dumb a statement as I have seen on Baren so let's not open that
> can of worms.    etc.

I think you just proved my point.

Carolyn

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

From: Graham Scholes <gscholes@islandnet.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 12:31:26 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Baren 1707] Re: Humour. 

Ray wrote:
>Give us a break.  You sent me this "joke" some time ago 

Ray I don't remember doing that.  As a matter of fact I know I didn't
because with both our memories makes one good one and we both agree it was
never sent.

This is good though because your other friend must have sent it.....!!!!!!

Have a good trip.

Graham

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

From: Graham Scholes <gscholes@islandnet.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 12:35:42 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Baren 1708] Re: Humour. 

Carolyn wrote:
>PS I think you could insert MEN in this joke instead of women and it would
>work
>just as well.

I received it with MEN and changed it.

I'm sorry if I offended........after all it is only a joke.

My wife though it was kind of cute and sees absolutely nothing wrong with it.

Graham

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

From: Matthew.W.Brown@VALLEY.NET (Matthew W Brown)
Date: 17 Sep 98 15:39:33 EDT
Subject: [Baren 1709] Editions/advertising 

Jean,
	I appreciate your posting about the legal definition of "work of visual
art", particularly the part about the magic "200". Interesting. 

Julio wrote:
>If we choose to be artists, we need to live within the anomalities of 
>our times & commercial structure."

For me this has meant limitng editions; there just hasn't seemed to be any real
option from the marketing point of view. For instance, one key marketing venue,
the League of NH Craftsmen (with 8 shops and a good fair), requires limiting
editions. It's limit your editions or you're out.

On Marketing (a little advertisement):
	I will be in NYC with my prints at a street fair Sat., Sept 26, 10 - 6,
Bleeker St. in the Village, on the corner of either Charles or Perry and
Bleeker, (the Fair is between W. 10th and 8 th Ave, they close the street).
April thinks she will be out of town that weekend so we aren't planning a hanga
get-together, but if anyone is in the City, come visit my booth!

Also on that weekend Michael Verne (The Verne Collection, Cleveland, Ohio) will
be in Boston at the International Fine Art Show at the Cyclorama in the South
End (539 Tremont St.), Sept. 25-27, 11- 6. Michael sells prints of mine, and
also of a Dan Kelly who I think is the same Dan we know on the  Baren, (am I
right here Dan?) along with many other hanga prints both new and old. Admission
to this Show is $10, but the list of dealers is pretty impressive.

Matt

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

From: Graham Scholes <gscholes@islandnet.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 12:40:42 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Baren 1710] Re: why limit your edition? 

Don wrote:
>The more likely motive, however, is to avoid printer's exhaustion.  etc.

You sure hit it on the head.  I hate doing the same thing over and over.
I have to move on to create new images.  How else can an artist grow.

Graham

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

End of Baren Digest V4 #284
***************************