--- Go to the Opening Page of the [Baren] web site ---

Message 1
From: "Harry French"
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 17:15:33 +0100
Subject: [Baren 27811] Ref : A familiar question on editions
Send Message: To this poster

I have been keeping bad company recently with a Giclee printmaker who has just had a very successful exhibition of his work. In a throw away comment I mentioned my latest thoughts on an autographic edition of prints i.e. declare an edition of say 50 and print them as and when required to save time, money and space.
He went balmy and thought I should stick to last centuries agreed terms of a formal edition.....cheeky blighter!
Was he right?
Harry
Lincoln
England
UK

• [Back to message index]

Message 2
From: Mike Lyon
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 11:21:06 -0500
Subject: [Baren 27812] Re: 'Hanga Manga' is online!
Send Message: To this poster

Dave Bull wrote:
>http://woodblock.com/manga
>What do you think, might this sort of thing be actually useful, or just
>for a kind of 'joke'?

VERY useful and very easy to follow! Photos are great, and the text
balloons make it EASY to read what's happening -- for a complete teaching
version on-line, it'd be useful to include a very brief video alongside
each important step -- I've been using "Sorenson Squeeze" add-on to MM
Flash for some time to make VERY compressed streaming video clips (mostly
for karate stuff) including player controls built right into the movie --
it works very well, not free but less than $100... Stand alone version is a
bit 'pricey' at about $450 but oh-so-VERY capable and easy
http://www.sorenson.com/ !


Mike Lyon
Kansas City, Missouri
http://mlyon.com

• [Back to message index]

Message 3
From: Mike Lyon
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 11:56:06 -0500
Subject: [Baren 27813] Re: Ref : A familiar question on editions
Send Message: To this poster

Harry French wrote:
>In a throw away comment I mentioned my latest thoughts on an autographic
>edition of prints i.e. declare an edition of say 50 and print them as and
>when required to save time, money and space. He went balmy and thought I
>should stick to last centuries agreed terms of a formal edition.....cheeky
>blighter!

Weeeellllll... I know a LOT of 'printmakers' who make only a handful of
impressions planning to 'complete' an edition later in the event orders
ever come in... I never have liked that approach, as these 'speculators'
rarely complete an edition and as a result, the edition size they've
penciled onto their prints turn out to be 'false and misleading'. Popular
prints theoretically command higher prices when the number in the edition
is smaller. The economic strategy of 'limited edition' is supposed to
increase the value of each impression due to limited availability
(Keynesian supply and demand economics-101 -- supply inelasticity maximizes
price elasticity) so 'open editions' tend to keep prices fixed at
relatively low levels because supply always equals or exceeds demand (so
long as the printer is active). On the other hand, limiting supply in the
face of demand tends to inflate the price... So I think it's a better
economic strategy to limit a first edition to the number of good prints
actually pulled... When stock is exhausted, it's not unethical to produce
a 2nd (or 3rd or whatever) edition -- appropriately labeled as such --
although later editions generally will win lower prices than a first
edition of a popular image and also tend to hold down the 'value' of the
first edition.

Personally, by the time I've completed an edition (regardless of size), I'm
only interested in pursuing my next project and would have little desire to
pull out previous blocks and then attempt to duplicate those first few I'd
pulled... It's difficult enough for me to complete a decent edition of
similar impressions all at one printing! So I've leaned toward producing
reasonably small (10 to 50 prints) editions and lately, as some of my early
editions have actually 'sold out', I have (secretly) enjoyed the sort of
panic which sets in when buyers feel a little desperate to obtain the last
available examples! :)

So I think it's a much better practice to just go ahead and print your
prints, determine which make it into an edition, signe and number them, and
then move on, Harry.

Cheekily blighted,

Mike


Mike Lyon
Kansas City, Missouri
http://mlyon.com

• [Back to message index]

Message 4
From: Wanda Robertson
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 10:51:07 -0700
Subject: [Baren 27814] Re: Ref : A familiar question on editions
Send Message: To this poster

Pshaw! Cheeky indeed! And are you going to listen to advice from a
Giclee printmaker? :-) I don't know how many other people declare a
certain # in an edition and only print part of it - but I do it. The
main thing is to keep precise records on how many you printed/what
pigments or color method you used - etc. etc. I think good record
keeping is the biggest priority if you choose to do this. Of course, if
it's a reduction (suicide) print - it will be a precise number not to
be repeated. Usually less than you planned on...

Sometimes the blocks suggest a different color method or need another
block to bring your image in line with what you had envisioned - then
you get into the "numbering properly" conundrum. This has been
discussed a lot - check out the archives.

My .02 worth, anyway,
Wanda

• [Back to message index]

Message 5
From: "Maria Diener (aka Arango)"
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 10:58:01 -0700
Subject: [Baren 27815] Re: Ref : A familiar question on editions
Send Message: To this poster

The popular market, and that includes many high-end "collector's galleries"
has done well to blur the definition of "limited edition."

I tend to agree that for a printmaker whose time/money/space are limited it
is impractical to print the entire edition at once. Take your reg'lar wood
engraver and you are talking stacks and stacks of printed paper sitting
around. If the intent is to run an edition of 200 and the printmaker is
honest, then 200 it is, whether they are all printed this week or over the
course of several years.

I do not understand how printing only a few at a time is false and
misleading yet running a second "limited edition" is ethical? If running
successive limited editions is not unethical then the term limited edition
means nothing at all. This is the M.O. of the Giclee reproduction industry.
And thinking about it, the sole concept of limiting an edition before the
matrix is exhausted could be thought as dishonest as well, a mere marketing
strategy to artificially inflate the price of a piece of paper with some ink
on it.
A few centuries ago, the matrix was cancelled to prevent just such a thing,
the successive runs of "limited editions" until the matrix could give no
more. I have even heard of scanning Goya etchings, transferring to a new
plate and continuing to run more "limited editions" of his etchings. I would
still kill for an original Goya etching, although I have a handsome
collection of restrikes that don't suck. And really, Goya himself probably
didn't pull that first edition original etching either, so...

I began printing only a few of each block and then moving on to the next
image, like Mike, I like to get on with new ideas. However this proved
stupid because now I'm "stuck" having to go back and printing the remaining
of the editions when my creativity is on something new entirely. As I began
getting rid of prints at a faster pace, I started to print the whole edition
at once and moving on. Block is filled with goop and out to market it goes.
Temptation gone, dilemma solved.
If an image sells extremely well, I might make something similar, such as
the bristlecone series I have going. To make another image identical as
something that was snatched up quickly and call it another original limited
edition is simply dishonest. Many contemporary painters do just that,
selling the same "original" over and over and over ad nauseum. Everybody has
their own stretchable definitions now a days it seems.

As I keep making more blasted prints, my editions are now smaller. I mean,
how much printed paper can a person have sitting around the house!? Ditto
for blocks, after a while, a big stack of woodblocks becomes nothing but a
fire hazard. I take all the above a lot less into consideration than my own
desire to move on (already) to the next image running around in my head.

The good thing, however, about the loosening of definitions is that artists
are freer to do as they please. More and more, nobody cares whether there
are 20 of something or 20000 of something; not the galleries, not the
popular market, not some collectors, not the artists themselves, apparently.
It is now left up to the artist to do whatever they feel is right and, more
importantly, whatever feeds the family and the printmaking police is left in
a dark corner stomping their feet in vain.

Nuff rambling... Cut! Print!!! Be happy!

Maria


Maria Arango
www.1000woodcuts.com
Las Vegas Nevada USA

• [Back to message index]

Message 6
From: Robin Morris
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 11:40:43 -0700
Subject: [Baren 27816] Re: Ref : A familiar question on editions
Send Message: To this poster

Sheesh- isn't that what the giclee guy does?
Print to order? Or does he do 50 and sit on them for years?I like the
idea- why need a printmaker have a stack of 50 of everything ? what if
one doesn't sell much- and he ddoesn't want to give them away of
course...it is a waste of his time, money paper ink etc. isn't it?
Although why not an edition limited to 50, say, but also dated with
actual print date, but have a small number that were done with the
proofs- at a higher price for those who want the "original
original"...they can say-mine was printed earlier...nyanya!
and Giclee, from my very limited knowledge is akin to a fine machine
made book. fine but identical and not handmade. No machine press is
turning out books like handpresses do, and probably giclee lacks appeal
in many of the same ways. But Im preaching to the choir from the peanut
gallery.

RM

• [Back to message index]

Message 7
From: "Diane Cutter"
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 15:03:19 -0400
Subject: [Baren 27817] Re: Ref : A familiar question on editions
Send Message: To this poster

Harry...

I print as 'needed' and cannot do an entire edition at once. In my particular case, living here in un-air conditioned tropical spendor, mildew and mold are my great enemies. For a long time I wasted a lot of paper, throwing out foxed editions, and now, wisely, only print about 3-5 prints beyond what I immediately need. Like mentioned, the MO to keep sanity is to keep good records. I write all my information in indelible ink on the back of the plate (title, date, paper, ink, edition size) and then track where the different prints have been sold on my handy-dandy 3x5 cards... I will admit that going back and printing old plates is a bit tedious, but a good CD blaring helps a lot.

I think your giclee acquaintance sounds very rigid, indeed, stuck in another century!

Diane...

www.dianecutter.com
www.WetCanvas.com - internet artist community

• [Back to message index]

Message 8
From: ArtfulCarol # aol.com
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 15:11:35 EDT
Subject: [Baren 27818] Re: Ref : A familiar question on editions
Send Message: To this poster

I learned that the edition number is the number you intend to print. 20 to
30 is what I can manage with my method of hand printing and that is what I
usually indicate.

Happy Printer
Carol L.

• [Back to message index]

Message 9
From: Mike Lyon
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 15:19:13 -0500
Subject: [Baren 27819] Re: Ref : A familiar question on editions
Send Message: To this poster

Maria wrote:
>I do not understand how printing only a few at a time is false and
>misleading yet running a second "limited edition" is ethical? If running
>successive limited editions is not unethical then the term limited edition
>means nothing at all.

Hi, Maria --

So there's no misunderstanding, I did NOT mean to suggest that printing
only a few at a time is false or misleading -- only to suggest that when an
"edition" is printed that way (printing enough only to satisfy near-term
demand) the edition often is never completed... So let's say that you
print 10 and sign and number them 1/100, 2/100, ... 10/100, intending to
print another 10 and another as they are sold... But the edition turns out
to be not-that-popular, and so you grow old and die before printing
examples 10-20? So now, you have 10 prints 'out there' all marked as
though they came from an edition of 100 when the "Truth" is that they came
from an edition of only 10. THAT is what I meant, and I think that
situation is commonplace!

So long as a second edition is marked "2nd edition" or the like and does
not pretend to be "1st edition", I see nothing amiss, and it's more
'honest' than someone who wants to appear to be a big-time printmaker with
a lot of large editions in the resume who's only completed a handful of
(mis-labeled) impressions. As an example, take Hokusai's mid-19th Century
oban size "Great Wave off Kanagawa" -- an early printing in decent
condition might be purchased for around $100,000 (or more) today. But a
'later' re-carved edition (NONE of these, early or later was printed by
Hokusai, of course) in pristine condition can be had for only a few hundred
dollars... David Bull's prints mostly fall into this category of "later
printings", I think -- and he's one of the most bend over backwards to be
ETHICAL guys I know!

-- Mike


Mike Lyon
Kansas City, Missouri
http://mlyon.com

• [Back to message index]

Message 10
From: FurryPressII # aol.com
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 16:51:34 EDT
Subject: [Baren 27820] Re: Ref : A familiar question on editions
Send Message: To this poster

NO!!!

JOHN C.,

• [Back to message index]

Message 11
From: "Maria Diener (aka Arango)"
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 13:57:29 -0700
Subject: [Baren 27821] RE: A familiar question on editions
Send Message: To this poster

Mike wrote:
> So long as a second edition is marked "2nd edition" or the
> like and does
> not pretend to be "1st edition", I see nothing amiss,

So then the question becomes, is there a limit on the number of limited
editions that a printmaker can "ethically" run? And what then is the
difference between leaving an edition open and running an unlimited number
of limited editions? Let's get a factory and run 1000 limited editions of
1000 prints each? And that's it, I swear! A la Thomas Kinkade?
It's "limited" 'cause I say it is...even if there are many more printed?
Sorry I just don't get that.
What do you tell the collector who bought 1/100 and finds out ten years
later there have been, not 100, but 10000 printed and still going strong in
successive limited editions? Oh yeah: "But your 1/100 of the first edition
is worth much much much more than the 1/100 of the 121st edition!"? 'Cause I
say it is, dagnit! Or more to the point, how much wood would a woodchuck...?
Oh never mind ;-)

All I'm saying is that "limited" is a word that means something specific,
unlike a marketing term that has chamaleonic properties. Either there is a
limit to an edition or there isn't. Now there stops my rant, because I
really don't care what anyone else does as long as they don't begin to
actually believe the marketing booga-booga as gospel truth. Most of the time
in the real world, people ask me what it is that they are buying _after_ the
credit card has been run through my brand new spankin'
wireless/digital-radio powered credit card swiper...zap! "now, what do you
call this art again?"

And to get back to what's important, I'm out of scroll-saw blades; they just
don't make them like they used to back in the real iron age.

Maria


Maria Arango
www.1000woodcuts.com
Las Vegas Nevada USA

• [Back to message index]

End of [Baren] Digest