FOAK: Fine Art Print
Jason G
There is a particular vintage advertising poster that I would like to hang in
my billiard room. I found it online at a place that offers it as a "poster"
for $8.99 and as a "Fine Art Print" for around $40. I'll be buying my own
matte and frame, as nothing they offer really appeals to me.
So my question is, what exactly is a "fine art print" and how does it differ
from a poster? Is the difference even noticeable once framed behind glass?
--
Jason G
Meet the people your mother always warned you about.
Attend the Fourth Annual Childfree Beach Party!
August 16th, 2003, Oceanside, California. E-mail for details.
PTRAVEL
"Jason G" <jrgusenet@REMOVE_x_THIS_xx_PART_xxx_yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:bfke5...@enews1.newsguy.com...
>
> There is a particular vintage advertising poster that I would like to hang
in
> my billiard room. I found it online at a place that offers it as a
"poster"
> for $8.99 and as a "Fine Art Print" for around $40. I'll be buying my own
> matte and frame, as nothing they offer really appeals to me.
>
> So my question is, what exactly is a "fine art print" and how does it
differ
> from a poster? Is the difference even noticeable once framed behind
glass?
I don't think there's an accepted difference. When I hear "fine art prints"
I think lithographs produced by the artist, i.e. signed and numbered.
However, I don't think you'll be getting something like that for only $40
(though, if it's an unknown artist, and lots of prints were made, you
might). A poster is just that -- something printed on poster paper, printed
by a rotogravure process (lots of little dots make up the image, just as in
a magazine). Museum shops often offer posters of great works of art, and
these can be very, very nicely done.
Since what you're contemplating is an advertising poster, I can think of a
couple of possibilities. The company may have had access to the original
artwork from which the mass-produced advertisements were made. They may
have made reproductions directly from that, which would result in a
higher-quality, sharper print which they are offering as the "fine art
print." The "poster" may have been made from mass-produced advertisement.
Best thing is to call and ask them.
BTW, for the nth year in a row, I'm going to try to make the party (and this
time I may actually show up). Can you send me an email? The email address
on my post works, i.e. don't remove "spamtrap."
Paul Tauger
Patrick M Geahan
> So my question is, what exactly is a "fine art print" and how does it differ
> from a poster? Is the difference even noticeable once framed behind glass?
Yeah. When it's 'fine art', you can tell that the bulldog has a dead
man's hand. When it's a poster, you can just see colors.
--
-------Patrick M Geahan---...@thepatcave.org---ICQ:3784715------
Quote of the Week: "I probably won't start on the idea, and if I do it
will wind up being an unfinished project on my personal website featuring
pictures of my cat." rh2600 on /.
Veronique
And look at them in person, if possible. In addition to the print
clarity (which may or may not exists, depending on who's labeling what
"fine art"), the paper stock may be heavier or made of archival
materials ("acid free"), all of which contribute to the longevity of
the artwork.
V.
--
Veronique Chez Sheep
sydenhams chorea
news:bfke5...@enews1.newsguy.com...
You got a real job yet? No? I wonder why?
Jo.
Matthew Mazerowski
You might get one yourself, if you got your dumb ass out of that
computer chair and let some air get to your brain. Try standing on
your head and letting it drop from your butt to your head. It would
help if you'd stop wanking yourself over a newsgroup.
sydenhams chorea
news:e40696d8.03072...@posting.google.com...
> You might get one yourself,
Wash your mouth out, you filthy boy!
> if you got your dumb ass out of that
> computer chair and let some air get to your brain.
Hey! My ass is damn cute. It's genetic, and a by-product of running
80-100 k's a week.
> Try standing on
> your head and letting it drop from your butt to your head.
Oh, no. Sound too much like work.
> It would help if you'd stop wanking yourself over a newsgroup.
Idiot. I use Kleenex like everyone else.
Jo.
Jim Mowreader
In article <Xns93C0BE491F362Bi...@130.133.1.4>,
Caine <alecon...@btinet.net> wrote:
> What is the difference between a poster and a fine art print?
>
> 1. A poster is a reproduction of a work of art. A fine art print is the
> original.
Bull. They're both reproductions of works of art.
The difference is threefold: quality of the print job, quality of the
stock and how the print is handled after it's been printed.
When I print a fine art piece, generally the artist will stand beside
the press. He will inspect the color of each print, ensuring that it
meets his standards. (Women do the same things when they run fine art.)
We will run a certain amount of prints for the artist. At the end of the
job, he will collect the plates, the film and any extra prints we made
while setting the press up.
When I print a poster, we get the color right and print until we make
count, then print some more in case the bindery screws some up. We trim
them out, wrap them and ship them.
> 2. Original fine art prints are often printed with quality ink on
> archival paper. A poster is not and so will deteriorate quickly.
Concur in part: The paper is almost always better on a fine art print;
we run some Arches Rives watercolor stock, a lot of Strathmore Writing
System paper and quite a bit of French paper (named after the man who
founded the paper mill; the product comes from Michigan). Posters run on
glossy enamel.
The ink, OTOH, is the same stuff on both prints, and it has to be:
offset ink is typically formulated for the shop that uses it. My ink
won't run on a press in Raleigh because the water is different. Carolina
ink won't run in the North because the weather is different. My ink is
soy-based, contains special emulsifiers for PWC's water, and is slightly
thicker when it comes out of the can than an ink that runs in, oh,
Minnesota. When you start buying ink from a manufacturer, they send you
a chemist to set up their ink for your press.
> 3. A fine art print has the potential to rise in value. A poster will
> rarely do so.
Fine art prints rarely rise in value. This is one of the Great Myths of
Fine Art Prints. Some prints do--Timberlakes, Kincades, and other famous
artists--but Joe Snuffy's art prints probably won't. Basically, buy
prints you like because you're probably keeping them.
> 4. Posters are often printed in unlimited numbers. This lowers the value
> of the piece because their availability is increased. Fine art prints
> are often printed in a limited edition making prints affordable yet
> valuable.
Somewhat true. Some print artists are doing "editions" of their stuff.
Bob Timberlake is bad about this. His work is popular in North Carolina.
What he does to try to meet demand is editioning--this is print 565/1000
in edition 38. IOW, there have been 37,000 of these printed already,
which makes a Timberlake print basically a fancy poster. I don't think
Timberlake buyers give a shit--they like the picture, they want it on
their wall and buy it. They aren't buying it for any "resale" value
because if they resell it, it will be at a yard sale after they get
tired of it.
> 5. Be aware and inquisitive when purchasing prints because print
> techniques could be used for photo reproductions. Venues sometimes
> sell prints that are not original art, but are reproductions of
> paintings.
Prints ARE "reproductions of paintings." All of them. Without exception.
Because, you see, that's what "print" means.
--jmowreader