Baren Digest Friday, 27 July 2001 Volume 16 : Number 1503 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: GWohlken Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 10:41:41 +0000 Subject: [Baren 15262] Re: Digital Art Julio, I totally agree with you about the whole process of hand printmaking. But yesterday, I tried something really fun. I have a painter program and have just put in a new graphics card. Shane (our son) came in from work looking shaggy haired and kind of cute. I said "Hey, stand there in the doorway for a while" and he posed while I did a computer painting of him. Amazingly it turned out like how I actually paint. It had my style of "brushstrokes" in it. So I sent it as a jpeg to our other son and also to Shane's girlfriend (who immediately said it didn't look like Shane, but she liked the "painting"). It was a lot of work and took about as long as the beginnings of a real painted sketch. I wouldn't want to print these out and sell them as paintings, but I might print one out on some interesting paper and put it on the refrigerator for friends to see. It looks just like what I do anyway, but it will never replace an oil painting. It couldn't. Gayle Ohio, USA ------------------------------ From: "Tyrus Clutter" Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 10:41:03 -0600 Subject: [Baren 15263] Digital Not to belabor this topic... Eli is correct, in my opinion, on his view about digital. I think the main = problem people are having is the "photo" reproduced Iris prints that are = being marketed in an improper way. I for one, am happy to use the computer as a tool when it fits my needs in = printmaking (which is quite often). For woodblocks and linoleum I do a = drawing of the key block first, usually a little smaller than what I want = the original to be as I tend to end up drawing lines smaller than what the = material will comfortably hold, then I scan it, enlarge it to the right = size and print it out. From there it gets transfered to the block with = wintergreen oil (thanks for that tip from last summer--I think it actually = works better than the acetone I had been using). This even puts the image = in reverse for me. I can put the same image on several blocks so that it = is in exactly the same spot and then use watercolor to chose where I want = other colors to go. I still carve it myself and the drawing comes from my = hand, but this is quick and eliminates many mistakes I would normally = make. I also use the computer in intaglio and litho processes. I tend to work = the plates over in traditional methods too, and am starting with my own = drawing in these, as well. However, I tend to never teach with the use of the computer for the first = project in any print medium. Most of my students have used computers all = their lives (when I see that some were born in 1980 or later I know how = true this is!) and they are graphic design majors so they want to do = everything on the computer and totally neglect their own creativity. I = figure that making them work with the traditional methods makes them = understand better and then they can use the shortcuts more to their = advantage. It is kind of like what S.W. Hayter did at Atelier 17: a = student was asked to make the deepest, thickest line, with a burin into a = cooper plate, that he or she could. Then the students had to use a scaper = and burnisher to obliterate that line and make the plate print clean = again! TyRuS ><~><~><~><~><~><~><~><~><~>< Prof. Tyrus Clutter Director of Friesen Art Galleries Dept. of Art & Music Northwest Nazarene University 623 Holly St. Nampa, Idaho 83686 TRClutter@NNU.edu (208) 467-8398 ------------------------------ From: "Jean Eger" Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 11:27:33 -0700 Subject: [Baren 15264] shopping cart Maria, Which shopping cart program do you use? Jean http://www.jeaneger.com ------------------------------ From: Julio.Rodriguez@walgreens.com Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 13:43:01 -0500 Subject: [Baren 15265] Re: Prints - again ? 07/26/2001 01:43:33 PM Dear Eli.....I agree with most of what you say...I am with you here...I too enjoy exploring the digital world. My comments are prefaced by the words "I" and "To me.."......indicating that these are my own preferences toward "printmaking". I don't think there is a right or a wrong, winner or loser in this debate, just preferences. Any vehicle that is conductive to creating new work and serves to enhance the artist's creativitiy is in itself worthy of use. I myself used the first Atari's & Amiga's computers back in the early 80's to create computer images (before the Mac or the IBM PC were born!). I have studied painting & drawing at the University level, most recently in 1996 I took sculpture classes at NEIU. Right now I am absolutely in love with doing woodblocks. Again, my preference! In my post I argue only with the definition of a "printmaker", not in contesting an artist's right to use the computer. There is no doubt that good art is being done in the computer by creative artists (just like lot of junk is being done by traditional methods), or that is a great tool, more efficient, etc, etc, etc....but I take exception to equating that "output" to that done manually by a traditional printmaker. If you design and create wonderful images on a computer and create an output via a computer printer, and you call such an output a "print"....then by your own choice you are calling yourself a maker of prints... or a "printmaker". We can load paper on a computer printer and press a button and call ourselves printmakers as we see dozens (or hundreds) of "prints" come out of a machine....but there is not much effort or satisfaction in that for ME...there is no risk taken, there is no sweat ! (unless your printer jams!). Every print will come out looking exactly the same. Some may say that this IS the desired result, again, I will politely disagree and hold to my own opinions. I love the "making" of a print in all of it's phases, not just the design part. Perhaps my prints are not very good right now, but that is because there is lot of me in them and in a very personal way...while I hope that someday I can do without smudges, mistakes & fingerprints......I certainly hope that the viewer will still see the human labor of love involved in the making. There is no denying that digital Art is here to stay and it will find it's rightful place right along with all the other disciplines....just as photography & silk screening did in their own time. thanks..Julio ------------------------------ From: "Maria Arango" Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 12:15:34 -0700 Subject: [Baren 15266] OFFTOPIC! RE: shopping cart > Maria, > Which shopping cart program do you use? > Jean Came "free" as part of signing up with this company to process credit cards for me http://www.charge.com Most credit card processing companies will throw in a free shopping cart. Look at their site for fee structure. Pretty standard. There are also self-standing shopping cart software packages, but then you need a separate entity (bank) to process credit cards for you. M <><><><><><><><><><><><><><> Maria Arango Las Vegas, Nevada, USA http://www.1000woodcuts.com maria@mariarango.com <><><><><><><><><><><><><><> ------------------------------ From: "Bill H Ritchie Jr" Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 12:53:27 -0700 Subject: [Baren 15267] Prints charset Julio, Jeanne, and I think 95% of all people who love printmaking, and seeing and feeling themselves making prints -- my friends, my co-workers, my fellow and female artists, crafts people and designer, please read this. Jack, Pete, I dunno if this will do. The Getleins (Bite of the Print) belonged to a dying world, some five hundred years old, that was based on the union of clever economic, religious and technology experts. From the late 15t C. onward-until people today were led off the road most traveled by commerce--we enjoyed what seemed like endless resources of materials we, like addicts, have come to expect. I feel as an artist that the world and all its people owes me respect, and honors me as an individual, with extraordinary rights--as long as I earn my keep. But if I die, before I am satisfied that I have rendered my best proof--or even some decent trial proofs--then will the achievements still matter? I really doubt it, and I do not count on it, nor do I think it matters a whole heck of a lot to the other billions of human beings on this planet. So, Julio, my hard-working, talented and attentive, studious friend, don't decide yet what a print is, or is not. Let the people (I am one of them) who think and feel they've rediscovered themselves, or something akin to creativity or the creative process, invention and discovery making a DVD call it a print if they want to. When I first opened my eyes to art, I was looking at a print. Virtually every artwork--whether it is an oil painting or a cathedral, a cave or a manuscript, is a print, either a reproduction or hand-made. Most humans' lives are being led in a world of mediated experiences. We, those who have the knowledge and skills to make original prints should just be grateful that we have the courage to risk everything to put ink on paper. As for me, it's really a lot of fun to re-experience the thrill of momentarily forgetting myself and what I know about printmaking because something has gone wrong--in a delightful way. For, Julio, a lot has gone wrong in a way that is not delightful. In fact, horrible, due to the regulation, by defining, coding, measuring and bottling up information for commerce. I'm not really sure what I'm saying here. Sorry. Bill H. Ritchie, Jr 500 Aloha #105 Seattle WA 98109 (206) 285-0658 Professional: www.seanet.com/~ritchie E-Store: www.myartpatron.com General: www.emeraldaworks.com First Game Portal: www.artsport.com ------------------------------ From: "bemason" Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 13:06:59 -0700 Subject: [Baren 15268] Crossing Boundaries print lovers.... The Northwest Print Council is in charge of the vendor fair for this symposium and we hope you will all consider coming to Portland!If you get this twice, I apologize in advance. Best to all, Barbara Mason Sec/Treas NWPC Dear Friends We're writing to encourage you to come to Portland, Oregon this fall to participate in: Crossing Boundaries: East West Symposium in Print Art October 10-13, 2001 For complete registration information see: www.art.pdx.edu/printsymposium This four-day program is a rare opportunity to visit the Northwest to meet fellow artists, collectors and print enthusiasts to discuss the changing medium of print and its impact on our world. Beginning with a community-wide gala at the Portland Art Museum, it continues at Portland State University and Pacific Northwest College of Art with a lively array of artist presentations and performances, panel discussions and exhibitions. Highlights of the program include a keynote address by Susan Tallman, award-winning art critic, columnist and author of "Contemporary Print: Pre-Pop to Postmodern"; as well as a demonstration and exhibition by 1999 MacArthur "Genius Award" winner, Xu Bing. Special exhibitions will complement the conference in 48 galleries and museums throughout the Portland metropolitan area. Early registration is $250 on or before Sept. 7, and $325 thereafter. Student registration is $125, or $175 after Sept. 7. A few student scholarships will be available on the basis of need and merit. Please join us and our colleagues in the beautiful Northwest this fall for Crossing Boundaries: East West Symposium in Print Art, October 10-13, 2001. Each and every person attending the conference will have something important to offer. We've included a schedule of events for your reference, but please check our website for registration information. See you there! Sincerely, Eleanor Erskine and Christy Wyckoff Co-Chairs Crossing Boundaries 503-725-3336 erskinee@pdx.edu wyckoff@teleport.com - -- ------------------------------ From: Daniel Dew Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 16:53:23 -0400 Subject: [Baren 15269] Re: Dialing? I recently read an article in the Atlantic Monthly dealing with the whole concept of the term "dialing a phone number", since most, if not all people, use some sort of "touch tone" phone, is the term too old? I, personally, would love to see the digital folks (who are the new ones on the block) come up with a term of their own to define their work. NO ONE IS QUESTIONING IF IT IS ART OR NOT! Just the definition they choose to use. I propose this: Lithography print Intaglio print Serigraph print Relief print how about : Digital print? Just my ramblings. dan dew ------------------------------ From: barebonesart Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 13:41:37 -0700 Subject: [Baren 15270] Re: Baren Digest V16 #1502 Julio, one correction! Reversal is not a prerequisite of printmaking. Serigraphs are original prints and do not reverse image. Furthermore, they require very little pressure, though I suppose you could consider the little bit that goes into drawing the squeegie over the silk pressure of a sort. No one would contest that a serigraph is not a print, I hope! As for the digital - I have seen some that can match traditional in every sense of the word - there is room for all. 200 years ago a lithograph was not a print, and 30 years ago the arguement was raging as to whether monotypes were truly prints. Times and materials change, but the traditional hangs on tenaciously. And we add another to the list. Sharri ------------------------------ From: Greg Carter Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 22:07:08 -0400 Subject: [Baren 15271] Re: Dialing? Dan, How about Iris print and ink jet print and so on. Greg >I, personally, would love to see the digital folks (who are the new ones on >the block) come up with a term of their own to define their work. > >NO ONE IS QUESTIONING IF IT IS ART OR NOT! >Just the definition they choose to use. > >I propose this: >Lithography print >Intaglio print >Serigraph print >Relief print > >how about : Digital print? > >Just my ramblings. > >dan dew ------------------------------ End of Baren Digest V16 #1503 *****************************