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

Message 1
From: Nancy Osadchuk
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2007 11:40:34 -0700
Subject: [Baren 32628] Re: shipping to/from Canada
Send Message: To this poster

Charles has already said what I would have, only better. The buyer pays the GST and Canada Customs charges $5 just to hand the parcel across the counter. Good luck.
Nancy O

• [Back to message index]

Message 2
From: "Marissa "
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2007 14:12:36 -0500
Subject: [Baren 32629] Re: shipping to/from Canada
Send Message: To this poster

Is it really a good idea to lie when shipping something? I know when I sent
a package internationally that I sold if I mark it as a gift then I am
breaking the law. It stinks because I recently sent a $100 order to Canada
and the buyer got charged over $20 in fees because I had no choice but to
mark the value of items on the customs form. It stinks but I am not about to
put myself in danger by lying to save the buyer money.

~marissa

• [Back to message index]

Message 3
From: Charles Morgan
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2007 12:37:19 -0800
Subject: [Baren 32630] Re: shipping to/from Canada
Send Message: To this poster

What is the lie? The question that was asked had to do with how to
ship work for an exhibition ... the question was NOT "how do I get
purchased art across the border to the purchaser and avoid customs".

Contrary to your scenario, no one has bought the material that is
being loaned for the exhibition. It is not being falsely listed as a
"gift". It is being honestly loaned for exhibition purposes, NOT
primarily for commercial purposes, and that fact needs to be emphasized.

When I say "no commercial value", I am distinguishing myself from
those who push worthless giclee reproductions in "editions" of 1000
or more, as "art" in order to make a fast buck. I am distinguishing
myself from those who sell t-shirts made by Chinese child labor. I am
distinguishing myself from those who sell cast brass Buddhas from
India. Frankly, I produce art because I like it, because it is fun to
me. I do not produce art as a primarily commercial venture. If that
frame does not fit you, then do not take my advice. Instead, say to
customs: "Hey, I am primarily out to make money, so you should be
charging me duties and taxes."

In some straightforward sense, everything is for sale ... including
those sculptures of Rodin that are currently on tour in Canada. You
just have to be willing to pay enough .... But having said that, one
has to recognize that the primary purpose for which those sculptures
are touring is NOT to foster their sale, but rather as loans to
museums for exhibition purposes. So those sculptures were not subject to duty.

Some of us may HOPE the artwork we are loaning for exhibition will
strike a chord with a viewer and they will want to own it ... but
that is not the primary reason for putting the work in an exhibit, at
least not for me. And HOPE is a far cry from a real sale. When I say
"no commercial value", then I am expressing more of a truth than most
of us like to admit about our own work. If governments could tax us
on our hopes, then none of us would have a dime.

If in fact a gallery is representing you, and you are supplying them
with your work primarily for the purpose of flogging it, then you
would be advised to say so up front to the customs folk. And in that
case, it is the gallery that will be paying the duties, not you, and
they will simply tack that on to the price of your work.

Nothing I suggested should get you into any trouble with the
authorities. I do not believe you can point to any US law that my
suggestions would violate.

My advice is worth exactly what you paid for it. If you choose to
ignore it for whatever reasons (aesthetic, philosophical,
psychological, moral, religious, ...), you have not wasted your money.

Cheers ..... Charles

• [Back to message index]

Message 4
From: baren_member # barenforum.org
Date: 16 Jan 2007 23:25:50 -0000
Subject: [Baren 32631] Numbering prints

I know that I have read that some of you never number your editions of prints. For those who do I have a question. Do you number them in exactly the order in which they were printed? I saw in the February issue of Art Calander that there was an article by a Carolyn Proeber (editor of the magazine). She placed great importance on the numbers being in the order of printing. I never have done that and in multiple block prints I am sure that they are not always printed in the same order. I would be interested in hearing other folks's opinions and practices. Carolyn by the way was extremely supportive of original prints such as relief prints.

Dale Phelps, Waterloo, IA

• [Back to message index]

Message 5
From: LAiNE
Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2007 08:42:33 +0900
Subject: [Baren 32632] Re: Numbering prints
Send Message: To this poster

Hello!

First, a big thanks to everybody I've received new years cards
from...... they are great! Its really fun getting all of these little
pieces of art from around the world here in Japan!

When I'm running editions I always number according to the order in
which they were printed. I see it more as a personal choice, and I
always find it interesting to see progressions in individual prints
when the edition comes to an end. I keep a strict order and stick to
it for each color. It sounds like it may be difficult, but it really
isn't....... just keep your prints in the same order throughout.

happy printing!
LAiNE

lainegreenway.com
blog

• [Back to message index]

Message 6
From: Julio.Rodriguez # walgreens.com
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2007 18:05:21 -0600
Subject: [Baren 32633] Re: hanga printmaking on YouTube
Send Message: To this poster

For those old timers here at Baren you may recognize a familiar face at
YOUTUBE demonstrating woodblock printmaking in the japanese style:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dliF74ojOho

thanks...Julio

• [Back to message index]

Message 7
From: ArtfulCarol # aol.com
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2007 19:43:58 EST
Subject: [Baren 32634] Re: Numbering prints
Send Message: To this poster

As far as I know, numbering prints has nothing to do with the order in which
they are printed. The numbers are a way of identifying and keeping track
of them.

In my experience with collectors, some want #1 and think that is the first
one, yet others want to have a print numbered in the middle of the edition.
Carol Lyon
Irvington, NY

• [Back to message index]

Message 8
From: Barbara Mason
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2007 17:45:19 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Baren 32635] numbering prints
Send Message: To this poster

I think they get mixed up in the studio no matter how careful you are...so to say they are numbered as they are printed is a stretch. Maybe if you have several people doing it to keep them in exact order. But then what happens to the ones you toss because they are not up to standard, do you count those and have a hole in the edition???? When they are drying they certainly have the option of getting mixed up. The numbers are for the galleries and collectors, not the printmakers anyway. It is a silly system but seems one we are stuck with. But if any collector asked me, I would say, "sure they are in order"...that is what they want to hear. If Maria can sell "wood slices" we can keep our prints in order. Give the customer what they want.
Best to all,
Barbara

• [Back to message index]

Message 9
From: "Maria Arango"
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2007 19:33:10 -0800
Subject: [Baren 32636] RE: numbering prints
Send Message: To this poster

I have found a vastly different approach to numbering from a variety of
printmakers, both professional and the rest of us :-)
I number my prints because that's what my collectors demand, whether they
know the traditions or not or even know why the heck the little numbers are
important. Yet another reason to number is that many competitions,
festivals, calls for entries, etc., will require that multiples are numbered
and the editions be limited. The system can be viewed as stupid and false
or, in my case, as totally irrelevant to why I make art and a completely
unimportant matter. They want numbers? Give them numbers.
Mine are usually numbered as they come off the press because I hang them as
I pull them. When I stack them, the first few prints tend to suck and as
soon as I get to the first good one, there I start my numbers.

The traditional way:
-number prints as they come off the press and keep the order
-first good print is named BAT (bon a tirer=good to pull)
-second print that matches the BAT is number 1 in the series
-prints that are not good, blurry, off register, etc. are simply pulled off
and called either proofs or working prints or kitty-litter liners or, my
personal favorite a.g.'s (artist's goofs). I made that last one up in case
anyone is checking.
-the edition ends with the last print
-the artist can pull an additional few prints not to exceed 10% of the total
edition and keep/archive/sell them as a.p.'s (artist's proofs)
There are printer's proofs and other nomenclatures for those who have the
luxury of having a printmaking studio pull their prints.

I have found that mostly collectors and galleries are only concerned with
the following:
-that there is only one edition pulled from the block and the block be
cancelled (photographers and digital artists are commonly known to pull
several "limited editions" from a "master", depending on how it sells)
-that the edition is small (100 or less), the smaller the better
And they highly covet the first prints of the editon, especially number 1 if
they can get it. Some seem concerned about the quality of the later prints;
I usually tell them that my cherry blocks could potentially give off many
more prints than I ever print. This is leftover from old times when the
first prints were nice and crisp and the block began to deteriorate after a
few hundred prints were pulled from it, thus giving "softer" prints or
prints that lacked the detail and crispness of the first born.

The modern way:
-do whatever you want and make up an elaborate explanation for what you're
doing

Maria

PS Incidentally, wood slices are one-of-a-kind originals :-)


Maria Arango
www.1000woodcuts.com

• [Back to message index]

End of [Baren] Digest