Serigraph and original oil of the same composition
Bob Griffith
month overseas. The gallery had the original oil that we bought and also
serigraphs of the same piece. It was explained to us that the artist would
create the oil then use it as a model to create the screens (is that the
correct term?) for the serigraph technique. The oil we saw in the gallery,
but the serigraph of that piece we only saw in the artist's book. We saw
other serigraphs by the artist in the gallery. The most obvious difference
between the two forms was the oil being on canvas and the serigraph being on
heavy paper. To my untrained eye, the oil seemed to have more texture, but
the artist's technique did not leave very noticeable brush strokes. The
composition of the serigraph (in the book) and the oil (up close) seemed
identical.
To some extent we are just curious to find out more about the serigraph
process, but also, we are somewhat concerned about whether we are really
getting an original oil or a reproduction of some type that we do not
understand passed off as an original.
We assumed that the two different forms were so close in composition because
the artist uses the oil as a model to base the serigraph. Something like
tracing. We just noticed, however, that the size of the serigraph, as
listed in the artist's book, is different than the size of the oil, as
listed on the fax confirming our purchase. The serigraph is 50cm x 140cm
and the oil is 37cm x 127cm. That's about 5" in length and width.
Interesting that it is not proportional.
How can that be? Whether honest or fraudulent, I can not imagine why they
would be different sizes.
The other worrisome factor is that when we were at the gallery, there were
only two oils available from the book we took. When we called today to
purchase the oil we liked, we found out that now other oils from that book
are available. The explanation was that the new oils were away at an
exposition when we were at the gallery, but now they are back and available
for sell. Does that seem credible?
Is it typical for an artist to produce both oils and serigraphs versions of
all his/her works? Is it a concern that the oil is produced by a
reproduction technique or is it unlikely or impossible? Is the size
difference actually a practice to ensure us that the oil was not produced by
the same screens as the serigraph? How does the artist reproduce the
composition so faithfully at a slightly different scale / proportions?
Thank you so much for considering our questions. We look forward to
learning more about this subject.
--Bob and Lora Griffith
keith o'connor (tinmangallery.com)
It's difficult to tell without seeing
the original, but get your self a
reasonably strong magnifying glass to
view both the oil and the serigraph and
look for small dots. You should not find
dots.
Serigraph is a fine-art print making
process using screens, parts of which
are filled in so the ink cannot be
forced through onto the paper - that's
why you should not see the standard cmyk
dots. I have seen some great limited
edition serigraphs go for $1,000.00. I
have some serigraphs of a lower quality
in my private collection, they are
excellent at mimicking watercolour
effects.
Serigraphs are not normally cropped to
image size, there is a wide paper border
left around the image and this could
easily explain the size difference.
The bottom line is, If you are
concerned, take them to a gallery and
have them evaluated.
your humble servant
keith (the By Town gentleman)
Bob Griffith
--BobG
"keith o'connor (tinmangallery.com)" <ke...@tinmangallery.com> wrote in
message news:3B1A90D6...@tinmangallery.com...
Junie Buhg
>We assumed that the two different forms were so close in composition because
>the artist uses the oil as a model to base the serigraph.
Serigraphy is often referred to as silk screening. It's the
same process used to produce images on Tee shirts today.
It is a legitimate fine art printmaking process, like
lithography, that also has commercial applications. It's
perfectly legitimate for an artist to "reproduce" an oil
or other painting done in one medium in a print-making
medium that allows multiple copies to be made. There is
a great deal of confusion however between fine art prints
and photographic reproductions that are printed on
commercial presses. Fine art prints, including serigraphs,
that are the artist's "original" creation - ie: the artist
does the actual work to create the image - are considered
to be "multiples of the original" rather than reproductions.
>We just noticed, however, that the size of the serigraph, as
>listed in the artist's book, is different than the size of the oil
Perfectly legitimate, regardless of whether it's
a fine art print or a photographic reproduction.
>How can that be? Whether honest or fraudulent, I can not imagine why they
>would be different sizes.
It would be up to the artist to say why. Assuming
this artist has input throughout the process of
printmaking, it is the artist's decision what size
the prints will be. The artist may not want the
print to be the same size as the original, simple
as that.
>The explanation was that the new oils were away at an
>exposition when we were at the gallery, but now they are back and available
>for sell. Does that seem credible?
Yes, certainly. But your question begs more than
whether or not the explanation given is credible.
You should deal only with galleries that have an
established reputation - easy to check with the
Better Business Bureau, if you're in the USA.
Or by simply checking around by asking others in
the local art business.
>Is it typical for an artist to produce both oils and serigraphs versions of
>all his/her works?
It's typical for many artists to reproduce their
originals in a commercial "unlimited" edition of
prints, whether they be serigraphs (used for posters
generally) or lithographs (other newer printing
processes are similar - giclee is one for example).
Some artists may run off as many as 10,000 copies
of a work if they sell in a popular market place.
>Is it a concern that the oil is produced by a
>reproduction technique or is it unlikely or impossible?
There are now commercial processes in use that can
duplicate even the brush marks onto a canvas surface.
So you need to know the reputation of the gallery
representing the artist and you need to know something
about whether the artist themself allows their works
to be "replicated" by these new processes. Like the
book says, "there's a sucker born a minute" and there's
a scam artist born every second!
Craig Luce
Sounds like the serigraph described by Bob and Laura is a
photo-mechanical reproduction, not an 'original' serigraph which is
often hand-cut by the artist. There is precious little difference in
the originality of this process than in offset lithography, in the
aspect that the original oil is indeed scanned, then can be resized.
Over a hundred screens are often involved, *mechanically* produced. Go
for the original if you can, Bob.
Craig
http://art4med.artistnation.com