Today's postings

  1. [Baren 27851] Finish or be Finished ("Love Me")
  2. [Baren 27852] Re: Familiar edition question (DADI #
  3. [Baren 27853] RE: Baren Digest (old) V31 #3044 ("marilynn smih")
  4. [Baren 27854] Re: New Baren Digest (HTML) V31 #3044 (Apr 22, 2005) (Barebonesart #
  5. [Baren 27855] defining 'edition' (Mike Lyon)
  6. [Baren 27856] Re: Wood Engraving Course in Cambridge, England (Aqua4tis #
  7. [Baren 27857] Re: Ref : A familiar question on editions (Julio.Rodriguez #
  8. [Baren 27858] Re: Ref : A familiar question on editions (Bette Norcross Wappner)
Member image

Message 1
From: "Love Me"
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2005 23:48:39 +1000
Subject: [Baren 27851] Finish or be Finished
Send Message: To this poster

With all the agony of deciding whether an edition has to printed in its entirety before it can be numbered, spare a thought for those foolhardy folk who set out to create an entire series. I am up to view 13 of my landscape series and I am a little concerned about whether I will reach 36. It would be professional suicide to quit before the end. Imagine Dave Bull reaching 38 of the 100 poets and throwing in the towel, having to refund money to irate collectors. It makes putting edition numbers on prints seem trivial.

Unichi Hiratsuka had the best approach, when asked by his daughter to date or number prints he would mischievously jot down any likely combination of numbers, rewriting his own history at will. No art scholar can afford to take the numbers at the bottom of a print too seriously.

Member image

Message 2
From: DADI #
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2005 10:19:06 EDT
Subject: [Baren 27852] Re: Familiar edition question
Send Message: To this poster

cpiers wrote:
>Dang, I think this is the most strongly opinionated viewpoint on something I
>have ever shared on Baren. :o)

go Connie,

Dale Phelps
Member image

Message 3
From: "marilynn smih"
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2005 07:46:05 -0700
Subject: [Baren 27853] RE: Baren Digest (old) V31 #3044
Send Message: To this poster

Indeed there is an art to inking and pulling a print. But after 20 or 30 pulls I am ready to move on and learn something new. I have no problem with those making money out there, bravo for them! I create and hope someone will like what i do enough to want to own it.

In following this discussion there seems to be a disparity in the definition of a giclee print. I thought it was a computer run copy of say a watercolor or an oil painting. If it is something done from a computer paint program with original ideas and creative use of a new medium that is well what is that? It would seem in the print world many things are labled print.

Editions seem to be the individual choice of the artist. Fickle me some times i editions some times i just sign my name. Either way there are a imited number of prints because i am not going back. Perhaps because I have not been into printmaking all that long and my learning curve is growth and the old stuff just is not as good technically. Oh well off to finish my roosters.

I stopped dating work when shows would say they did not want work over 5 years old. Who cares when it was done if i did it and the work is good????
Member image

Message 4
From: Barebonesart #
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2005 15:27:03 +0000
Subject: [Baren 27854] Re: New Baren Digest (HTML) V31 #3044 (Apr 22, 2005)
Send Message: To this poster

Each of us has their own way of dealing with the numbering, whether it be O/E (open edition), V/E (variable edition), 1/20 (numbered edition), or just signed. Many of the 19th century artists who were mainly painters who dabbled in prints signed theirs on the back - often you will see "signature verso" in a catalog or ebay listing. There are as many ways to deal with the numbering/signing as there are artists - is that not a form of rebellion in itself? BTW Picasso signed his on the front with the traditional edition system - or he did on all the ones I have seen, so far.

Giclee and other digitally produced prints are another question. Those that are reproductions of paintings: bah humbug. If something is meant to exist as one it should be left at one. BUT, there are wonderful digital prints that are composed entirely using the computer as the matrix, then printed on a laser or ink jet printer, and the matrix within the computer is destroyed after the run has been completed. They are the same as any other print - intended to exist in multiple, limited in number, matrix destroyed. If you have not seen Dorothy Krause and (forgot her working partner's name - she's in Seattle), if you have not seen their prints or read their new book "Setting Up the Digital Studio" (I think) then you are missing out on the wonderful world of digital printmaking. I stand with Bill Ritchie, this will some day be just another way of making prints. A very difficult way to do them and have them be successful and not cliched, I might add.

The first grade did wonderful prints yesterday. I will try to get some photos up someplace. Almost everyone wanted to be an artist when I got through with them. It must look like a very easy and fun way to make a living - it will not be me who pops that bubble!

Member image

Message 5
From: Mike Lyon
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2005 11:15:46 -0500
Subject: [Baren 27855] defining 'edition'
Send Message: To this poster

I was struck by several members' assertion that the edition size some of us
note on our prints is generally understood to mean that no more than that
number will be produced and that it is generally understood that the actual
number produced may be substantially lower...

For whatever it's worth, I typed "define: edition size" and "define:
edition" in Google -- here are the 'printmaking' portion of Google's
response -- in every case, "edition" and "edition size" appears to mean
actual prints produced and not "maximum intended", I think:

Definitions of edition size on the Web:

The size of an edition is the TOTAL number of pieces printed by the
publisher and includes all artist proofs (AP), printer's proofs (PP),
"Roman numeral" pieces and all other pieces signed and numbered of that
image. Therefore, though your piece may have an edition number of 150/295,
the TOTAL edition size may be substantially higher than 295, depending on
the number of AP's, PP's, etc.

The size of an edition is determined to some extent by the technique used.
Intaglio printing yields many less successful prints due to the limited
life of the plate. Editions of less than 100 are considered small. The
contemporary artist often limits editions to 150-350.

The total number of prints printed, or pulled, of one particular image.
Lower edition sizes are more desirable as they generally tend to become
more collectable and more valuable in terms of resale.

The number of prints created of an image, annotated by a numeric code. The
first number being the example number, or the number of the individual
print in the edition and the second being the number of prints (examples)
created. Thus 24/200 indicates that the example at hand is print #24 of 200
made. It is a misconception that lower print numbers are of better quality
or higher value as the intent is to create each print as identical and the
example number no longer indicates it's sequence in the creation of the
edition. Editions are generally numbered in

The edition size is the total of all proofs (every piece) printed. This
includes the regular edition, BAT, trial proofs, roman numerals, museum
pieces, artist proofs, printer's proofs, hors commerce and various other
designations such as European edition and Asian edition. The "Total
Edition" is another way of expressing all proofs printed.

The total number of prints printed, or pulled, of one particular image.
Separate edition sizes are recorded for the signed and numbered prints,
artist's proofs and printer's proofs.

Definitions of edition on the Web:

all of the identical copies of something offered to the public at the same
time; "the first edition appeared in 1920"; "it was too late for the
morning edition"; "they issued a limited edition of Bach recordings"

In printmaking, an edition is a set of prints off one plate, composing a
limited run of prints.

An edition of a print includes all the impressions published at the same
time or as part of the same publishing event. A first edition print is one
which was issued with the first published group of impressions. First
edition prints are sometimes pre-dated by a proof edition. Editions of a
print should be distinguished from states of a print. There can be several
states of a print from the same edition, and there can be several editions
of a print all with the same state. For limited editions, cf. below.

All copies of a title issued by the same publisher on the same date.

A set of identical prints, sometimes numbered and signed, pulled by, or
under the supervision of the artist.

In printmaking, the total number of prints made and approved by an artist,
usually numbered consecutively. Also, a limited number of multiple
originals of a single design in any medium.

The copies in an edition that are signed and numbered (7/100).

The authorized number of impressions made from a single image, including
all numbered prints and proofs; a limited edition has a specified number
noted on the impression. Edition size: number of prints in the edition.

Number of prints made from an original. This number generally does not
include any artist proofs or any special editions.

The whole number of copies of a printed work from the same set of type or
plates. These are not necessarily printed at the same time. See BOOK.

The total number of identical prints pulled and authenticated by the
artist. (Signed and numbered.)

The total number of prints made of a specific image and issued together
from a publisher.

The total prints of a completed single image or series of images that are
numbered and signed by the artist and not retained for the proofs (see:
artist's proofs; hors commerce proof; printer's proof; publisher's proofs;
trial proof; working proof). top

The authorized number of impressions produced. The edition includes all
numbered pieces artist's proofs (ap) hors de commerce examples (HC, ie
outside of usual commerce) and printers proofs (PP).

This is the body of prints or sculpture essentially identical to the right
to print impression or standard used for the edition or prototype. Two
numbers are used in the signing procedure: the upper number follows a
consecutive sequence beginning with 1 through the total in the edition
(example: 3/25); the lower number indicates the total number of pieces in
the edition.

Mike Lyon
Kansas City, Missouri
Member image

Message 6
From: Aqua4tis #
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2005 18:36:18 EDT
Subject: [Baren 27856] Re: Wood Engraving Course in Cambridge, England
Send Message: To this poster

congratulations andy
Member image

Message 7
From: Julio.Rodriguez #
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2005 19:03:17 -0500
Subject: [Baren 27857] Re: Ref : A familiar question on editions
Send Message: To this poster

Ha, Ha, Harry.......congratulations, with one short paragraph you manage
to bring around the discussion on two of the most heated and most discussed
topics on the whole seven year history of Baren....that is "editions" and
"Giclees"........had you managed to throw in the words "digital print"
somewhere in your would have surely hit the "trifecta". Well, I
guess on how you define 'digital print' maybe you did !

For my own, I don't worry too much about these things, sometimes I number
the prints, and sometimes I don't....and when I do, it's more as a record of
how many I printed...not so much to give any $ value to the print

hey...I used to number my prints know...the last one
printed was numbered 1/35 since I thought it was the end of the run and it
would certainly be impeccable....thus I would turn my good stack over and
the first one printed had the highest number in the edition like
35/35....till one fateful & sad day...when I made a counting error and
before I knew it I was numbering prints 0/35, -1/35, -2/35, etc..... I
am still wondering why my collectors never complained...

thanks......Julio Rodriguez (Skokie, Illinois)
Member image

Message 8
From: Bette Norcross Wappner
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2005 21:02:39 -0400
Subject: [Baren 27858] Re: Ref : A familiar question on editions
Send Message: To this poster

Hi Harry....bravo! Great discussion and much much learned!

Hi Julio and everyone - Ha! then I won't mention the debate about "to
cut or not to cut on the bevel side of the to blade" :))) Much learned
on that one too.

[stormy Kentucky]