All Aboard the Lightning Express
Because of technological developments in the printing process, the question arises then about the value of giclee prints and lithographs. Clearly the intent in both cases is to make an original available to a wider public at a lower price. True giclee requires scanning the original oil or acrylic painting and then using a special printer rather than a screen or plate to make copies that retain all the tonalities of the original without any dot screen pattern. Special light fast inks are used which provide a broader range of color than a standard inkjet printer and if not exposed to constant sun the colors will remain true for anywhere from 25 to 75 years. The same is true for digitally painted originals or even digital reproductions, making it possible to own a true copy of a fine art work at a fraction of the cost. Giclee can be printed on canvas, paper (specialty papers), metal, acrylic surfaces and cloth. Giclee on canvas is as close to an original as it is possible to get without having the original painting. While it is possible to print thousands of copies as giclee prints, generally speaking, fewer giclee copies are produced than lithographs unless the artist has licensed a particular image. On the other hand, giclee prints can be handled like lithographs if the artist arranges to have only a limited number printed and then sells them as numbered limited editions. Offering giclee as limited editions is a way of keeping the value of both the original painting and the prints higher than they would otherwise be.
A lithograph - even in modern lithography - is an original art work created directly on the stone or plate, inked by hand and printed by hand one at a time. Though it is possible to transfer an image from an inkjet printer to a lithographic plate, it's still a time consuming and painstaking process. According to Ebay, "A lithograph is an authorized copy of an original work created by the artist himself or other skilled craftsmen. A lithograph is rarely worth more than the original artwork it reproduces, but if the print quality is excellent and the production numbers are low, it may still have significant value in the art world." Fine art lithographic print making is still done today, most often in numbered limited editions, making them valuable as collector pieces.
The piece included in today's blog brings the debate to a new level because it is neither a totally original art work (manually or digitally created) nor a true reproduction as a photographic copy or a giclee print would be. It is not an original in the sense that the subject matter, composition or design are the product of my own imagination. What it is is something called a "derivative work" - an art work that uses components of other works to make something new - in this case a digitally painted interpretation of a 150 year old lithograph. The original is a "chromolithograph" printed by Currier and Ives produced in an unlimited edition. An "original" print is currently on display at the Library of Congress and is in the public domain. So since this work is not a faithful photographic copy of the original, nor a new lithograph that faithfully and accurately duplicates the original, it is not a reproduction. What is original to me is the medium by which I recreated or reinterpreted the lithograph - that is by digitally painting the new image from scratch. That gives the finished product a number of elements that are uniquely my own - my painting style, the texture of the digital work, the depth of color, the changes or adaptations of the original composition which include leaving out things that were in the background or painting an entirely new sky, for example.
So if you were to buy a giclee canvas of this railroad image, what would you be getting that would make it worth more than a few dollars? Well for one thing, you would get a "painting" in the sense that a canvas made from a digital painting retains the look - texture, brushmarks, depth and feel - of a painting rather than the smooth surface you'd get with a photographic reproduction. You'd get a painting that would retain its color longer than the original lithograph which has faded until there is very little color left...though of course, the fact that the original has yellowed with age certainly adds to its value. In fact, as Dr. Angela Stanton (who is also a digital painter of some renown) says, "Digital paintings have many advantages over paintings that were originally painted on canvas or paper and then photographed and posted for sale as print. The most important of these advantages of digital over "real" is that since digital was created digitally, it will look printed on canvas or paper exactly as you see it on the monitor and not flat! Digital photography of highly textured items like oil or acrylic paint removes all textures and makes them appear flat. You don't get this problem with digital art. You get exactly what you see!" Of course, I totally agree - lol - but then, it's in my best interests to do so!
What it boils down to is that few of us can afford original art - most things that would appeal to us that are not boilerplate "factory" paintings are going to be very expensive. For good reason - good artists deserve to be well paid for their time and talent. But it should make any artist feel good that more people get to share the joy of that art because they can buy a giclee print of the original or they can own one of a limited number of lithographs of that same piece. It is no less art for being a recreation or digital creation or for being a faithfully rendered giclee print from the original.
No comments:
Post a Comment