Today's postings
- [Baren 26737] Exchange 24 signup is officially underway! (Mike Lyon)
- [Baren 26738] Re: New Baren Digest (Text) V29 #2908 (Jan 1, 2005) (Eve Rhetto)
- [Baren 26739] Re: Exchange 22 Participants ("DIANE CUTTER")
- [Baren 26740] RE: Baren Digest (old) V29 #2908 ("marilynn smih")
- [Baren 26741] Re: Exchange 22 Participants (b.patera # att.net)
- [Baren 26742] Re:OOPS (b.patera # att.net)
- [Baren 26743] Re: prints ? paintings ? original work ? (Lawrence Finn)
Message 1
From: Mike Lyon
Date: Sat, 01 Jan 2005 09:37:19 -0600
Subject: [Baren 26737] Exchange 24 signup is officially underway!
Send Message: To this poster
Connie Pierson wrote:
>According to the Time Zone Converter, 3:00pm is 7:00am here in the Pacific
>time zone.
My mistake, Connie -- and the Time Zone Converter is absolutely
right! So... as of 30 minutes ago, Exchange #24 officially opened for
sign-up!
So everyone may now sign-up for Exchange #24 (edition of 31 woodblock
prints due May 1, 2005) here:
http://barenforum.org/exchange/exchange_sign-up.html
Thanks for the heads-up!
-- Mike
Mike Lyon
Kansas City, Missouri
http://mlyon.com
>According to the Time Zone Converter, 3:00pm is 7:00am here in the Pacific
>time zone.
My mistake, Connie -- and the Time Zone Converter is absolutely
right! So... as of 30 minutes ago, Exchange #24 officially opened for
sign-up!
So everyone may now sign-up for Exchange #24 (edition of 31 woodblock
prints due May 1, 2005) here:
http://barenforum.org/exchange/exchange_sign-up.html
Thanks for the heads-up!
-- Mike
Mike Lyon
Kansas City, Missouri
http://mlyon.com
Message 2
From: Eve Rhetto
Date: Sat, 1 Jan 2005 11:15:17 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Baren 26738] Re: New Baren Digest (Text) V29 #2908 (Jan 1, 2005)
Send Message: To this poster
Okay, this is the moment I've been waiting for-- I'm a
new member and have signed up for the exchange. I am
writing so as to not be a 'mystery name' that the
exchange page refers to. I'm really looking forward
to being a part of this and will do my best to make a
quality print. Happy new year!-- Jamie Oberschlake
new member and have signed up for the exchange. I am
writing so as to not be a 'mystery name' that the
exchange page refers to. I'm really looking forward
to being a part of this and will do my best to make a
quality print. Happy new year!-- Jamie Oberschlake
Message 3
From: "DIANE CUTTER"
Date: Sat, 1 Jan 2005 18:31:22 -0400
Subject: [Baren 26739] Re: Exchange 22 Participants
Send Message: To this poster
No problem on my part... It will be a treat, whenever they arrive. Thanks for the update.
Diane Cutter
Diane Cutter
Message 4
From: "marilynn smih"
Date: Sat, 01 Jan 2005 14:50:30 -0800
Subject: [Baren 26740] RE: Baren Digest (old) V29 #2908
Send Message: To this poster
Wondering if Hanga is worth it? Japanese cutting tools, brushes that look
like they should polish shoes, rice paste and water and pigments used for
water. Skill in how to apply pigment to the block and knowledge as to how
to wet ones paper. Cutting kento marks onto a board for registration and
carving with a slanted blade knife, tilted away from the design, the right
paper, the right combination of everythnig, so much to know, so much to
learn.
Than comes the magic moment when you pull off that print and you have a
gentle image, just right.
A challenge unsurpassed. Is it a bit like having carved on lino, than
finally finding a wonderful piece of wood that works, no comparison. The
sumi ink is a wonderous thing, black and sure and lovely. Why do people
love watercolor so? It has a look so unlike oil, all its own. And to
master water and pigment is a task. It has a gentle quality and the easy
ability to be transparent, delicate or strong and heavy, a duality found
nowhere else.
Yes I proofed my block, using only dry newsprint and to my ecstasy all those
fine lines and delicate carving were there. Now paper is wet and waiting
for tomorrow when hopefully it will be just right to print. I hope now for
a lovely velvet black, with all the wonder one finds when everything works
well. An ecstasy found nowhere but the artists studio. Yes I am a mildly
crazy hooked on printing, how odd and weird for one who was the total
essence of a messy painter? Yes Hanga is worth it.
The smell of wood is worth it, the nicks on the fingers and the new
callouses are worth it, so is the ink, now black under my fingernails.
Happy year of the rooster!
like they should polish shoes, rice paste and water and pigments used for
water. Skill in how to apply pigment to the block and knowledge as to how
to wet ones paper. Cutting kento marks onto a board for registration and
carving with a slanted blade knife, tilted away from the design, the right
paper, the right combination of everythnig, so much to know, so much to
learn.
Than comes the magic moment when you pull off that print and you have a
gentle image, just right.
A challenge unsurpassed. Is it a bit like having carved on lino, than
finally finding a wonderful piece of wood that works, no comparison. The
sumi ink is a wonderous thing, black and sure and lovely. Why do people
love watercolor so? It has a look so unlike oil, all its own. And to
master water and pigment is a task. It has a gentle quality and the easy
ability to be transparent, delicate or strong and heavy, a duality found
nowhere else.
Yes I proofed my block, using only dry newsprint and to my ecstasy all those
fine lines and delicate carving were there. Now paper is wet and waiting
for tomorrow when hopefully it will be just right to print. I hope now for
a lovely velvet black, with all the wonder one finds when everything works
well. An ecstasy found nowhere but the artists studio. Yes I am a mildly
crazy hooked on printing, how odd and weird for one who was the total
essence of a messy painter? Yes Hanga is worth it.
The smell of wood is worth it, the nicks on the fingers and the new
callouses are worth it, so is the ink, now black under my fingernails.
Happy year of the rooster!
Message 5
From: b.patera # att.net
Date: Sun, 02 Jan 2005 01:32:08 +0000
Subject: [Baren 26741] Re: Exchange 22 Participants
Send Message: To this poster
Great! Will be looking for your prints. Let me know when they are in the mail.
Regards,
Barbara P.
Regards,
Barbara P.
Message 6
From: b.patera # att.net
Date: Sun, 02 Jan 2005 01:33:45 +0000
Subject: [Baren 26742] Re:OOPS
Send Message: To this poster
OOPS! Wrong message to wrong person... sorry.
Barbara P.
Barbara P.
Message 7
From: Lawrence Finn
Date: Sun, 02 Jan 2005 23:35:20 +1100
Subject: [Baren 26743] Re: prints ? paintings ? original work ?
Send Message: To this poster
Interestingly it is only forgery if it is signed. You can do anything you
like but sign it! So bring that legal view to the artistic notion of
originality and the free wheeling genius of artists and then the whole
argument against forgery becomes rather silly and sort of falls down...
I'll put it another way, I can go out and buy really old paper, say from
the 1600 - 1700's (it can be found but it isn't cheap), I can then make my
own pigment for printing, the recipes are available, easily accessible, I
can then photographically place a wood cut by Durer onto a nice piece of
cherry and cut it really accurately and carefully then print it onto my
nice old paper with my home made ink. Get a cage full of fly's and place
them over the lot for a week, expose the prints to the sun, after I drop a
few drops of rusty iron water on them. I can then put them in the attic for
the pigeons and such to dust them for me. Get them looking a bit tatty and
battered. I can then tell some pork pies about finding them in my granny's
trunk or some such and then I can try and fob them off to some dealer. So
long as I don't sign them there is nothing that you can do about it. As
long as I say nothing about the providence of the prints then there is no
misrepresentation. If the dealer or the buyer is so silly that they think
that they are buying the real thing then good. However if I sign it then I
would have to go through a more elaborate process to translate them into cash.
When I was first at art school all my etching plate was given to me by my
head of dept. I caught him forging Bruegal engravings, so to get me to
remain silent, he would give me the plate he had messed up in the exposure
process. It's all good, I prospered from his criminality (they were signed
but printed onto modern paper, I don't think that he was very smart!). he
did get into trouble eventually but not for that, poor guy.
Art is such an economic force now, what do I care that there is a student
some where that now has the hand skills of Rembrandt or Durer (they have to
have the skills to pull off the forgery). Good luck to the whole lot of
them. Of course the integrity of Jeff Koons, Mark Kostabi, or Pablo
Piccasso etc will remain untainted. Hah! Any one for a can of faeces or a
urinal that has fallen over, they wouldn't be too hard to forge, but to
forge a Rembrandt, that takes some skill, acumen and guile!
Many artists have made money with the odd forgery, and the good artists
pull it off, the bad ones get caught, that's a lot better than some jumped
up critic giving you a gold star and a pat on the ass. Artists with the
skills to pull off a forgery may not be exhibiting their originality but
then we seldom see the whole oeuvre of forgers, some are really interesting
artists in their own right, they are showing that they have the hand skills
of masters when they get it right. The rest is marketing (welcome to the
modern art world).
Since the renaissance, artists have been taught in the studio often by
copying the work of their master, who then would sign it (if he thought he
could get away with it) and fob it off to guileless idjits that couldn't
see the difference between the masters work and the students. As for
cultural appropriation that is really a much broader debate and I won't
enter into it here.
So aside from kicking the byjesus out of art students for copying photos
and paintings of masters I think the forgery debate is a bit overly
dramatic and very out of touch with reality. Artists and humans learn by
copying, it is how children learn and it is as natural as breathing. The
notion of the genius is another story another much more intense discussion
and debate. It is worth noting that many forgers were splendid artists in
their own right (or at least adequate to the task).
As an aside and also in a slightly contradictory vein, I knew a master
engraver (one of the very last true trade engravers from Britain) you could
give him any picture of an engraving and he could and did copy it to the
very last detail perfectly, he sat down one day to do some engravings of
his wife, they were the most inadequate drawings I have ever seen. He could
not draw in the creative sense to save his life but if I asked him to
engrave the hilt of a sword, or copy an early Australian colonial engraving
there would be no way that you could tell that it was not the real thing.
I hope though that this gives you all another angle...
Caveat Emptor, Regards and happy new year
Lawrence Finn
PS look up the forger C.S Goldie, he's very amusing...
like but sign it! So bring that legal view to the artistic notion of
originality and the free wheeling genius of artists and then the whole
argument against forgery becomes rather silly and sort of falls down...
I'll put it another way, I can go out and buy really old paper, say from
the 1600 - 1700's (it can be found but it isn't cheap), I can then make my
own pigment for printing, the recipes are available, easily accessible, I
can then photographically place a wood cut by Durer onto a nice piece of
cherry and cut it really accurately and carefully then print it onto my
nice old paper with my home made ink. Get a cage full of fly's and place
them over the lot for a week, expose the prints to the sun, after I drop a
few drops of rusty iron water on them. I can then put them in the attic for
the pigeons and such to dust them for me. Get them looking a bit tatty and
battered. I can then tell some pork pies about finding them in my granny's
trunk or some such and then I can try and fob them off to some dealer. So
long as I don't sign them there is nothing that you can do about it. As
long as I say nothing about the providence of the prints then there is no
misrepresentation. If the dealer or the buyer is so silly that they think
that they are buying the real thing then good. However if I sign it then I
would have to go through a more elaborate process to translate them into cash.
When I was first at art school all my etching plate was given to me by my
head of dept. I caught him forging Bruegal engravings, so to get me to
remain silent, he would give me the plate he had messed up in the exposure
process. It's all good, I prospered from his criminality (they were signed
but printed onto modern paper, I don't think that he was very smart!). he
did get into trouble eventually but not for that, poor guy.
Art is such an economic force now, what do I care that there is a student
some where that now has the hand skills of Rembrandt or Durer (they have to
have the skills to pull off the forgery). Good luck to the whole lot of
them. Of course the integrity of Jeff Koons, Mark Kostabi, or Pablo
Piccasso etc will remain untainted. Hah! Any one for a can of faeces or a
urinal that has fallen over, they wouldn't be too hard to forge, but to
forge a Rembrandt, that takes some skill, acumen and guile!
Many artists have made money with the odd forgery, and the good artists
pull it off, the bad ones get caught, that's a lot better than some jumped
up critic giving you a gold star and a pat on the ass. Artists with the
skills to pull off a forgery may not be exhibiting their originality but
then we seldom see the whole oeuvre of forgers, some are really interesting
artists in their own right, they are showing that they have the hand skills
of masters when they get it right. The rest is marketing (welcome to the
modern art world).
Since the renaissance, artists have been taught in the studio often by
copying the work of their master, who then would sign it (if he thought he
could get away with it) and fob it off to guileless idjits that couldn't
see the difference between the masters work and the students. As for
cultural appropriation that is really a much broader debate and I won't
enter into it here.
So aside from kicking the byjesus out of art students for copying photos
and paintings of masters I think the forgery debate is a bit overly
dramatic and very out of touch with reality. Artists and humans learn by
copying, it is how children learn and it is as natural as breathing. The
notion of the genius is another story another much more intense discussion
and debate. It is worth noting that many forgers were splendid artists in
their own right (or at least adequate to the task).
As an aside and also in a slightly contradictory vein, I knew a master
engraver (one of the very last true trade engravers from Britain) you could
give him any picture of an engraving and he could and did copy it to the
very last detail perfectly, he sat down one day to do some engravings of
his wife, they were the most inadequate drawings I have ever seen. He could
not draw in the creative sense to save his life but if I asked him to
engrave the hilt of a sword, or copy an early Australian colonial engraving
there would be no way that you could tell that it was not the real thing.
I hope though that this gives you all another angle...
Caveat Emptor, Regards and happy new year
Lawrence Finn
PS look up the forger C.S Goldie, he's very amusing...