iamzero
Full Member
Posts โข 9,190
Likes โข 8,542
May 2011
|
Screenprints Vs Giclee, by iamzero on Jan 24, 2012 0:26:07 GMT 1, Well I love my Charming Baker Giclee's as much as my Goldie screen prints. Would it be possible to screen print my Dignity Rides... I don't believe it would?
Well I love my Charming Baker Giclee's as much as my Goldie screen prints. Would it be possible to screen print my Dignity Rides... I don't believe it would?
|
|
aj2010
New Member
Posts โข 363
Likes โข 13
September 2010
|
Screenprints Vs Giclee, by aj2010 on Jan 24, 2012 0:42:36 GMT 1, If Banksy released a giclee print the screenprint snobs would be all over it like a rash. I have some fantastic giclee prints.
If Banksy released a giclee print the screenprint snobs would be all over it like a rash. I have some fantastic giclee prints.
|
|
kenzler
New Member
Posts โข 740
Likes โข 132
September 2011
|
Screenprints Vs Giclee, by kenzler on Jan 24, 2012 1:03:33 GMT 1, For me it comes down to how much input the artist has with the work. I have 3 giclee prints out of my Collection. One has nothing added Apart from name of release, name and number (doug Hyde), others are hand finished. Bottom line I don't mind how it's produced but I'm trying to buy something the artist has worked.
For me it comes down to how much input the artist has with the work. I have 3 giclee prints out of my Collection. One has nothing added Apart from name of release, name and number (doug Hyde), others are hand finished. Bottom line I don't mind how it's produced but I'm trying to buy something the artist has worked.
|
|
mkeeley
New Member
Posts โข 20
Likes โข 3
January 2012
|
Screenprints Vs Giclee, by mkeeley on Jan 24, 2012 1:38:50 GMT 1, Doesn't it also depend what is being reproduced? I thought something like, say, Jeremy Geddes work couldn't be screen printed and would have to be Giclee.
Doesn't it also depend what is being reproduced? I thought something like, say, Jeremy Geddes work couldn't be screen printed and would have to be Giclee.
|
|
pezlow
Junior Member
Posts โข 5,388
Likes โข 254
January 2007
|
Screenprints Vs Giclee, by pezlow on Jan 24, 2012 7:28:40 GMT 1, I certainly used to think this but now I'm of the view that what matters is the artistic input. If the artist decides to produce a Giclee or even a photocopy of their work then we should respect that.
Also screenprinting is itself a fairly straightforward process and don't forget that it was considered to be an industrial process only until Warhol started to use it as a method of mass producing art.
I certainly used to think this but now I'm of the view that what matters is the artistic input. If the artist decides to produce a Giclee or even a photocopy of their work then we should respect that.
Also screenprinting is itself a fairly straightforward process and don't forget that it was considered to be an industrial process only until Warhol started to use it as a method of mass producing art.
|
|
cassiuslegrande
Art Gallery
New Member
Posts โข 118
Likes โข 4
January 2007
|
Screenprints Vs Giclee, by cassiuslegrande on Jan 24, 2012 10:39:29 GMT 1, Sure i agree some prints could be photocopied its thats the purpose of the work. Peter kennard does that with his COA's which asks interesting questions. But Giclee i think is over used and should be used only as it a last resort. Again its personal taste and for me i like my art to be handmade, i like to think of those lucky accidents or that critical precision required and the secondary creation process. Virtually anything can be screenprinted, an amazing example of this is are Matt Small's portraits
www.nellyduff.com/index.php/art/artists/matthew_small/6
Sure i agree some prints could be photocopied its thats the purpose of the work. Peter kennard does that with his COA's which asks interesting questions. But Giclee i think is over used and should be used only as it a last resort. Again its personal taste and for me i like my art to be handmade, i like to think of those lucky accidents or that critical precision required and the secondary creation process. Virtually anything can be screenprinted, an amazing example of this is are Matt Small's portraits www.nellyduff.com/index.php/art/artists/matthew_small/6
|
|
|
Rsyok
Junior Member
Posts โข 3,372
Likes โข 504
January 2008
|
Screenprints Vs Giclee, by Rsyok on Jan 24, 2012 12:10:11 GMT 1, Well I love my Charming Baker Giclee's as much as my Goldie screen prints. Would it be possible to screen print my Dignity Rides... I don't believe it would? I think the magic happens when Jealous mixes screen printed inks & varnishes on Baker giglee prints. Wasnt the Banksy 'Cans' thank you print a giglee ?
Lovely Matty print Cass !
Well I love my Charming Baker Giclee's as much as my Goldie screen prints. Would it be possible to screen print my Dignity Rides... I don't believe it would? I think the magic happens when Jealous mixes screen printed inks & varnishes on Baker giglee prints. Wasnt the Banksy 'Cans' thank you print a giglee ? Lovely Matty print Cass !
|
|
balibob
Junior Member
Posts โข 1,782
Likes โข 326
November 2010
|
Screenprints Vs Giclee, by balibob on Jan 24, 2012 12:31:00 GMT 1, Some very interesting points being made here and to be honest some that I haven't considered before. But when it comes down to it, if its an image I like and from an authorised edition, I'm not that concerned about the printing process. I can see the argument for screen printing over giclee though.
Some very interesting points being made here and to be honest some that I haven't considered before. But when it comes down to it, if its an image I like and from an authorised edition, I'm not that concerned about the printing process. I can see the argument for screen printing over giclee though.
|
|
vince11
New Member
Posts โข 92
Likes โข 13
February 2011
|
Screenprints Vs Giclee, by vince11 on Jan 24, 2012 15:21:49 GMT 1, hello! We at Sergeant paper Art store - www.sergeantpaper.com we sell original Artworks, Screenprints as well as Giclee prints.
I agree with some of the stuff that has been said above, but if for some artists screenprint is the only way to go, because of the way they work and because they use or make their own inks (fluo, gold etc) that you can't find in a printer, that s fine, and I have a true respect for a nice screen print. But I believe in other cases for some other artists a giclee print is the way to go. It is not even a question of Hierarchy, it s just a different technic. I had this kind of discussion with costumers at Sergeant Paper art store, and like many of you they were against Giclee prints, however they couldn 't really tell the difference between one or the other when hanged on the wall.
The important thing is that in either case screenprint or giclee print, it has to be done seriously using the right technic for the right reasons, and more especially using the best quality in inks and Archival art papers.
I saw screen prints that didnot last in time because they were printed on poor quality paper. I think this argument applies to every artistic technics.
Some of you have said above that a 300โฌ euro Giclee print is ridiculous, I believe personally that if it s well done, with good paper and inks, signed and numbered by the artist in a limited edition then it s an artwork and price depends on who the artist is.
best Vincent
hello! We at Sergeant paper Art store - www.sergeantpaper.comwe sell original Artworks, Screenprints as well as Giclee prints. I agree with some of the stuff that has been said above, but if for some artists screenprint is the only way to go, because of the way they work and because they use or make their own inks (fluo, gold etc) that you can't find in a printer, that s fine, and I have a true respect for a nice screen print. But I believe in other cases for some other artists a giclee print is the way to go. It is not even a question of Hierarchy, it s just a different technic. I had this kind of discussion with costumers at Sergeant Paper art store, and like many of you they were against Giclee prints, however they couldn 't really tell the difference between one or the other when hanged on the wall. The important thing is that in either case screenprint or giclee print, it has to be done seriously using the right technic for the right reasons, and more especially using the best quality in inks and Archival art papers. I saw screen prints that didnot last in time because they were printed on poor quality paper. I think this argument applies to every artistic technics. Some of you have said above that a 300โฌ euro Giclee print is ridiculous, I believe personally that if it s well done, with good paper and inks, signed and numbered by the artist in a limited edition then it s an artwork and price depends on who the artist is. best Vincent
|
|
Goooogle Male
New Member
Posts โข 728
Likes โข 247
December 2010
|
Screenprints Vs Giclee, by Goooogle Male on Jan 24, 2012 15:39:34 GMT 1, how odd that this thread should pop up now. Last week I nearly pulled the trigger on a lovely looking ralph steadman that Jealous had at London Art Fair, but then realised that being a giclee it was nothing more than a signed poster, sold at ยฃ480!! A price i would have snapped up an iconic signed steadman print for.
I appreciate it is full colour and limited edition etc, but I just couldn't justify the cost for something i felt wasn't really art from the artist (just a hi res scan/print of an old image he did for a book years ago and probably had no imput into the process of creating). Also the vibrancy of the image was what attracted me, and the thought it woud fade was enough to complete the no-sale decision for me.
Am i alone or would others share this opinion with me.
FYI - here are the prints: www.jealousgallery.com/artist.asp?ID=246&F=Top%20artist
how odd that this thread should pop up now. Last week I nearly pulled the trigger on a lovely looking ralph steadman that Jealous had at London Art Fair, but then realised that being a giclee it was nothing more than a signed poster, sold at ยฃ480!! A price i would have snapped up an iconic signed steadman print for. I appreciate it is full colour and limited edition etc, but I just couldn't justify the cost for something i felt wasn't really art from the artist (just a hi res scan/print of an old image he did for a book years ago and probably had no imput into the process of creating). Also the vibrancy of the image was what attracted me, and the thought it woud fade was enough to complete the no-sale decision for me. Am i alone or would others share this opinion with me. FYI - here are the prints: www.jealousgallery.com/artist.asp?ID=246&F=Top%20artist
|
|
Zippy
Junior Member
Posts โข 6,669
Likes โข 2,483
April 2006
|
Screenprints Vs Giclee, by Zippy on Jan 24, 2012 15:51:32 GMT 1, It's good to see a thread with everyone putting forward their thoughts and opinions without it going 'off track' or getting personal.
It's been interesting reading the views of 'both sides' ie the Collector and the Artists.
Thanks to everyone for their contributions and for making this the first thread of the year worth reading!
It's good to see a thread with everyone putting forward their thoughts and opinions without it going 'off track' or getting personal.
It's been interesting reading the views of 'both sides' ie the Collector and the Artists.
Thanks to everyone for their contributions and for making this the first thread of the year worth reading!
|
|
Cedric Mnich
Junior Member
Posts โข 1,158
Likes โข 98
June 2009
|
Screenprints Vs Giclee, by Cedric Mnich on Jan 24, 2012 16:09:14 GMT 1, Totally agree with vince11. You would see the paper get yellow before inks fade away... Considering giclee prints as mere posters is incorrect because I think posters are offset printing, not digital printing and posters are printed on cheap paper, not art paper. Of course, screenprinting is an art in itself and certainly gives even more value to the art because of the technique... Now, that said (as aj2010 said before) it would be funny seeing the next Banksy print labelled as "giclee print". I doubt anyone would snob it for these technical reasons ;-)
Totally agree with vince11. You would see the paper get yellow before inks fade away... Considering giclee prints as mere posters is incorrect because I think posters are offset printing, not digital printing and posters are printed on cheap paper, not art paper. Of course, screenprinting is an art in itself and certainly gives even more value to the art because of the technique... Now, that said (as aj2010 said before) it would be funny seeing the next Banksy print labelled as "giclee print". I doubt anyone would snob it for these technical reasons ;-)
|
|
elwheel
Junior Member
Posts โข 1,912
Likes โข 232
September 2008
|
Screenprints Vs Giclee, by elwheel on Jan 24, 2012 17:50:42 GMT 1, Sure i agree some prints could be photocopied its thats the purpose of the work. Peter kennard does that with his COA's which asks interesting questions. But Giclee i think is over used and should be used only as it a last resort. Again its personal taste and for me i like my art to be handmade, i like to think of those lucky accidents or that critical precision required and the secondary creation process. Virtually anything can be screenprinted, an amazing example of this is are Matt Small's portraits www.nellyduff.com/index.php/art/artists/matthew_small/6
Now that is skill.
Sure i agree some prints could be photocopied its thats the purpose of the work. Peter kennard does that with his COA's which asks interesting questions. But Giclee i think is over used and should be used only as it a last resort. Again its personal taste and for me i like my art to be handmade, i like to think of those lucky accidents or that critical precision required and the secondary creation process. Virtually anything can be screenprinted, an amazing example of this is are Matt Small's portraits www.nellyduff.com/index.php/art/artists/matthew_small/6Now that is skill.
|
|
iamzero
Full Member
Posts โข 9,190
Likes โข 8,542
May 2011
|
Screenprints Vs Giclee, by iamzero on Jan 24, 2012 19:02:58 GMT 1, Wasn't Banksy's Applause a Giclee print?
It will be interesting to see how Goooglemale feels about the Steadman print once it has sold out and is more difficult to get hold of and that 'I wish I'd bought that when I had the chance' feeling kicks in...
Or is it just me that gets that feeling, like when I should've bought Panda Boy a few years back?
Wasn't Banksy's Applause a Giclee print?
It will be interesting to see how Goooglemale feels about the Steadman print once it has sold out and is more difficult to get hold of and that 'I wish I'd bought that when I had the chance' feeling kicks in...
Or is it just me that gets that feeling, like when I should've bought Panda Boy a few years back?
|
|
|
sohohoho
Junior Member
Posts โข 1,693
Likes โข 451
April 2011
|
Screenprints Vs Giclee, by sohohoho on Jan 24, 2012 19:39:26 GMT 1, Wasn't Banksy's Applause a Giclee print?
No, silkscreen.
Wasn't Banksy's Applause a Giclee print? No, silkscreen.
|
|
Goooogle Male
New Member
Posts โข 728
Likes โข 247
December 2010
|
Screenprints Vs Giclee, by Goooogle Male on Jan 24, 2012 20:19:00 GMT 1, Wasn't Banksy's Applause a Giclee print? It will be interesting to see how Goooglemale feels about the Steadman print once it has sold out and is more difficult to get hold of and that 'I wish I'd bought that when I had the chance' feeling kicks in... Or is it just me that gets that feeling, like when I should've bought Panda Boy a few years back?
i'll let you know!
Wasn't Banksy's Applause a Giclee print? It will be interesting to see how Goooglemale feels about the Steadman print once it has sold out and is more difficult to get hold of and that 'I wish I'd bought that when I had the chance' feeling kicks in... Or is it just me that gets that feeling, like when I should've bought Panda Boy a few years back? i'll let you know!
|
|
HRE
Junior Member
Posts โข 1,182
Likes โข 413
March 2007
|
|
|
James Baker
Artist
New Member
Posts โข 118
Likes โข 0
January 2010
|
Screenprints Vs Giclee, by James Baker on Jan 24, 2012 23:55:32 GMT 1, I certainly used to think this but now I'm of the view that what matters is the artistic input. If the artist decides to produce a Giclee or even a photocopy of their work then we should respect that. Also screenprinting is itself a fairly straightforward process and don't forget that it was considered to be an industrial process only until Warhol started to use it as a method of mass producing art.
Spot on Pez. To evaluate artwork on factors such as time and craftsmanship, or 'because its harder' seems incredibly regressive on a street art forum. Art manufacturer should be supply lead industry. Seeking efficiency within an artist's practice can be a real catalyst for originality. Warhol being a great example.
A good thread that touches on some interesting areas.
I certainly used to think this but now I'm of the view that what matters is the artistic input. If the artist decides to produce a Giclee or even a photocopy of their work then we should respect that. Also screenprinting is itself a fairly straightforward process and don't forget that it was considered to be an industrial process only until Warhol started to use it as a method of mass producing art. Spot on Pez. To evaluate artwork on factors such as time and craftsmanship, or 'because its harder' seems incredibly regressive on a street art forum. Art manufacturer should be supply lead industry. Seeking efficiency within an artist's practice can be a real catalyst for originality. Warhol being a great example. A good thread that touches on some interesting areas.
|
|
Deleted
Posts โข 0
Likes โข
January 1970
|
Screenprints Vs Giclee, by Deleted on Jan 25, 2012 8:46:22 GMT 1, hello! We at Sergeant paper Art store - www.sergeantpaper.comwe sell original Artworks, Screenprints as well as Giclee prints. The important thing is that in either case screenprint or giclee print, it has to be done seriously using the right technic for the right reasons, and more especially using the best quality in inks and Archival art papers.
Well, then, what's the best (middle-priced) paper and best (middle-priced) ink/printer Share it !!
hello! We at Sergeant paper Art store - www.sergeantpaper.comwe sell original Artworks, Screenprints as well as Giclee prints. The important thing is that in either case screenprint or giclee print, it has to be done seriously using the right technic for the right reasons, and more especially using the best quality in inks and Archival art papers. Well, then, what's the best (middle-priced) paper and best (middle-priced) ink/printer Share it !!
|
|
sohohoho
Junior Member
Posts โข 1,693
Likes โข 451
April 2011
|
Screenprints Vs Giclee, by sohohoho on Jan 25, 2012 14:03:56 GMT 1, I certainly used to think this but now I'm of the view that what matters is the artistic input. If the artist decides to produce a Giclee or even a photocopy of their work then we should respect that. Also screenprinting is itself a fairly straightforward process and don't forget that it was considered to be an industrial process only until Warhol started to use it as a method of mass producing art. Spot on Pez. To evaluate artwork on factors such as time and craftsmanship, or 'because its harder' seems incredibly regressive on a street art forum. Art manufacturer should be supply lead industry. Seeking efficiency within an artist's practice can be a real catalyst for originality. Warhol being a great example. A good thread that touches on some interesting areas.
I also agree with pezlow to a point, but what if the artist can't justify their chosen method of printing? You might say no justification is needed, but when one's invited to pay money for something, I would disagree. This also applies to James's regressive comment. What if you bought a giclee print of an image that could easily have been screen printed, out of respect for the artist's decision, only to later find out that the artist would have preferred silkscreen, but giclee was easier/more convenient?
I certainly used to think this but now I'm of the view that what matters is the artistic input. If the artist decides to produce a Giclee or even a photocopy of their work then we should respect that. Also screenprinting is itself a fairly straightforward process and don't forget that it was considered to be an industrial process only until Warhol started to use it as a method of mass producing art. Spot on Pez. To evaluate artwork on factors such as time and craftsmanship, or 'because its harder' seems incredibly regressive on a street art forum. Art manufacturer should be supply lead industry. Seeking efficiency within an artist's practice can be a real catalyst for originality. Warhol being a great example. A good thread that touches on some interesting areas. I also agree with pezlow to a point, but what if the artist can't justify their chosen method of printing? You might say no justification is needed, but when one's invited to pay money for something, I would disagree. This also applies to James's regressive comment. What if you bought a giclee print of an image that could easily have been screen printed, out of respect for the artist's decision, only to later find out that the artist would have preferred silkscreen, but giclee was easier/more convenient?
|
|
Pattycakes
Junior Member
Posts โข 1,379
Likes โข 422
June 2007
|
Screenprints Vs Giclee, by Pattycakes on Jan 25, 2012 14:15:35 GMT 1, With very, very few exceptions, Giclee prints are reproductive works based on existing original works. This is the problem with the technique, I loathe prints that are reproductions of paintings, they are lazy, and are exactly why prints and editions are seen as the poor relative to other fine art forms.
With very, very few exceptions, Giclee prints are reproductive works based on existing original works. This is the problem with the technique, I loathe prints that are reproductions of paintings, they are lazy, and are exactly why prints and editions are seen as the poor relative to other fine art forms.
|
|
cassiuslegrande
Art Gallery
New Member
Posts โข 118
Likes โข 4
January 2007
|
Screenprints Vs Giclee, by cassiuslegrande on Jan 25, 2012 23:41:52 GMT 1, With very, very few exceptions, Giclee prints are reproductive works based on existing original works. This is the problem with the technique, I loathe prints that are reproductions of paintings, they are lazy, and are exactly why prints and editions are seen as the poor relative to other fine art forms.
well said printguru +1
With very, very few exceptions, Giclee prints are reproductive works based on existing original works. This is the problem with the technique, I loathe prints that are reproductions of paintings, they are lazy, and are exactly why prints and editions are seen as the poor relative to other fine art forms. well said printguru +1
|
|
|
|
Screenprints Vs Giclee, by stopki on Jan 26, 2012 14:58:34 GMT 1, q:....
please can any one help... im looking to do some nice big giclee prints for something personal..
does any one know where i can get some done please...
in london by the way. please PM or reply to help us out ta
q:....
please can any one help... im looking to do some nice big giclee prints for something personal..
does any one know where i can get some done please...
in london by the way. please PM or reply to help us out ta
|
|
Deleted
Posts โข 0
Likes โข
January 1970
|
Screenprints Vs Giclee, by Deleted on Jan 26, 2012 20:02:24 GMT 1, With very, very few exceptions, Giclee prints are reproductive works based on existing original works. This is the problem with the technique, I loathe prints that are reproductions of paintings, they are lazy, and are exactly why prints and editions are seen as the poor relative to other fine art forms. well said printguru +1
+1
With very, very few exceptions, Giclee prints are reproductive works based on existing original works. This is the problem with the technique, I loathe prints that are reproductions of paintings, they are lazy, and are exactly why prints and editions are seen as the poor relative to other fine art forms. well said printguru +1 +1
|
|
anodyne13
New Member
Posts โข 432
Likes โข 212
April 2008
|
Screenprints Vs Giclee, by anodyne13 on Jan 26, 2012 20:29:46 GMT 1, giclee is just a means of reproduction/production. Like a photographic print, a lithograph, screenprint or photocopy. The artistic intent and the context should be more important than the means of reproduction. I would be more happy to have a Nara or Hockney photocopied print than a hand finished MBW screenprint.
giclee is just a means of reproduction/production. Like a photographic print, a lithograph, screenprint or photocopy. The artistic intent and the context should be more important than the means of reproduction. I would be more happy to have a Nara or Hockney photocopied print than a hand finished MBW screenprint.
|
|
Pattycakes
Junior Member
Posts โข 1,379
Likes โข 422
June 2007
|
Screenprints Vs Giclee, by Pattycakes on Jan 26, 2012 21:40:37 GMT 1, giclee is just a means of reproduction/production. Like a photographic print, a lithograph, screenprint or photocopy. The artistic intent and the context should be more important than the means of reproduction. I would be more happy to have a Nara or Hockney photocopied print than a hand finished MBW screenprint.
It's almost exactly like a photograph, just without all that pesky time in the dark room. As for Lithography and Screenprinting, sorry you're wrong, it's very, very different, unless you're like MBW and various others who are lazy and might as well make Giclee prints, for all the originality their printed work contains.
Hockney hasn't made a decent print since the 80's, Nara, he's in the Lazy MBW camp as far as I am concerned.
giclee is just a means of reproduction/production. Like a photographic print, a lithograph, screenprint or photocopy. The artistic intent and the context should be more important than the means of reproduction. I would be more happy to have a Nara or Hockney photocopied print than a hand finished MBW screenprint. It's almost exactly like a photograph, just without all that pesky time in the dark room. As for Lithography and Screenprinting, sorry you're wrong, it's very, very different, unless you're like MBW and various others who are lazy and might as well make Giclee prints, for all the originality their printed work contains. Hockney hasn't made a decent print since the 80's, Nara, he's in the Lazy MBW camp as far as I am concerned.
|
|
johnnyh
Junior Member
Posts โข 4,492
Likes โข 2,102
March 2011
|
Screenprints Vs Giclee, by johnnyh on Jan 27, 2012 6:07:49 GMT 1, Think the screenprint / litho argument is with out doubt the stronger for art work. Course always will be a couple of exceptions but agree with everyone pretty much as a general rule of thumb.
What will be/is interesting as with the Hockney thing on the IPad and some of the digital artist is surely the giclees will best represent digital work. I have in various galleria or bits of shows seen some really good digital work so do think it's a good medium for it's particular field when used in hat way
Think the screenprint / litho argument is with out doubt the stronger for art work. Course always will be a couple of exceptions but agree with everyone pretty much as a general rule of thumb.
What will be/is interesting as with the Hockney thing on the IPad and some of the digital artist is surely the giclees will best represent digital work. I have in various galleria or bits of shows seen some really good digital work so do think it's a good medium for it's particular field when used in hat way
|
|
Hairbland
Junior Member
Posts โข 2,943
Likes โข 2,731
November 2010
|
Screenprints Vs Giclee, by Hairbland on Jan 29, 2012 2:59:17 GMT 1, So, technically speaking (and I am a tecno-pterodactyl), if a gallery inadvertently uses a hi-res image of an artwork on their website, and i knew the exact dimensions of the print and type of paper of the original giclee, I could use that hi-res image and one of Zippys printers to produce an identical version? Thats part of my problem with this format - even a dunce like me could create one. On the other hand I completely realise the important point James is making.
perhaps, but if a gallery-represented artist any giclee print would be signed, numbered with a COA versus your xerox poster. so it wouldn't be identical.
I picked up a limited numbered signed Marcel Dzama giclee, printed with archival inks guaranteed to not fade for at least 175 years. He does not do silkscreens to my knowledge. If it starts to fade earlier, say in 100 years...well I'll be long dead. More importantly, it's a great print.
But with bigger artists they are often not doing their own silkscreen runs anyway, so whether it is a shop w/staff or a machine it ain't the artist.
So, technically speaking (and I am a tecno-pterodactyl), if a gallery inadvertently uses a hi-res image of an artwork on their website, and i knew the exact dimensions of the print and type of paper of the original giclee, I could use that hi-res image and one of Zippys printers to produce an identical version? Thats part of my problem with this format - even a dunce like me could create one. On the other hand I completely realise the important point James is making. perhaps, but if a gallery-represented artist any giclee print would be signed, numbered with a COA versus your xerox poster. so it wouldn't be identical. I picked up a limited numbered signed Marcel Dzama giclee, printed with archival inks guaranteed to not fade for at least 175 years. He does not do silkscreens to my knowledge. If it starts to fade earlier, say in 100 years...well I'll be long dead. More importantly, it's a great print. But with bigger artists they are often not doing their own silkscreen runs anyway, so whether it is a shop w/staff or a machine it ain't the artist.
|
|
Pattycakes
Junior Member
Posts โข 1,379
Likes โข 422
June 2007
|
Screenprints Vs Giclee, by Pattycakes on Jan 29, 2012 12:18:57 GMT 1, So, technically speaking (and I am a tecno-pterodactyl), if a gallery inadvertently uses a hi-res image of an artwork on their website, and i knew the exact dimensions of the print and type of paper of the original giclee, I could use that hi-res image and one of Zippys printers to produce an identical version? Thats part of my problem with this format - even a dunce like me could create one. On the other hand I completely realise the important point James is making. perhaps, but if a gallery-represented artist any giclee print would be signed, numbered with a COA versus your xerox poster. so it wouldn't be identical. I picked up a limited numbered signed Marcel Dzama giclee, printed with archival inks guaranteed to not fade for at least 175 years. He does not do silkscreens to my knowledge. If it starts to fade earlier, say in 100 years...well I'll be long dead. More importantly, it's a great print. But with bigger artists they are often not doing their own silkscreen runs anyway, so whether it is a shop w/staff or a machine it ain't the artist.
Dzama has made screen prints, etchings, dry points, and lithographs. The giclee you bought is ok as an image, and it's certainly not expensive, but that's about as far as I can get interested in it.
So, technically speaking (and I am a tecno-pterodactyl), if a gallery inadvertently uses a hi-res image of an artwork on their website, and i knew the exact dimensions of the print and type of paper of the original giclee, I could use that hi-res image and one of Zippys printers to produce an identical version? Thats part of my problem with this format - even a dunce like me could create one. On the other hand I completely realise the important point James is making. perhaps, but if a gallery-represented artist any giclee print would be signed, numbered with a COA versus your xerox poster. so it wouldn't be identical. I picked up a limited numbered signed Marcel Dzama giclee, printed with archival inks guaranteed to not fade for at least 175 years. He does not do silkscreens to my knowledge. If it starts to fade earlier, say in 100 years...well I'll be long dead. More importantly, it's a great print. But with bigger artists they are often not doing their own silkscreen runs anyway, so whether it is a shop w/staff or a machine it ain't the artist. Dzama has made screen prints, etchings, dry points, and lithographs. The giclee you bought is ok as an image, and it's certainly not expensive, but that's about as far as I can get interested in it.
|
|