Digital BW, The Print

Harold-

I think this is foremost a question of artistic integrity. I have
absolutely no problem encouraging people to adopt and use best
practices, whatever the medium or media may be. If for no other reason
than it encourages a disciplined and well considered approach.
Personally, I believe in the power of the beautifully made object and,
in that context, there are no rules of the game.

With due respect (I highly value what you have contributed to the
digital printing community), I don't understand the appraisal/insurance
argument. Of course prints made on experimental or other "non-archival"
material can be appraised and insured.

I don't mean to ignore or trivialize whether archival is an issue
between any given artist and collector/gallery. Rather, I would suggest
that any artist who would knowingly compromise the integrity of their
process is on thin ice before they walk through the door.



Bill Kennedy
K2 Press
Austin, Texas

-----Original Message-----
From: Harold Jackson <harold@...>
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Mon, 18 Feb 2008 2:43 pm
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Permanence Ratings for Fine Art Media






Bill --



    Your post presupposes that an artist has a reputation.  What if he 
or
she is in the process of establishing a reputation?  And surely you're
not saying that a print made on newsprint can have the same lasting
value as one made on a material that has been demonstrated to last
longer?



    I suppose that I should have prefaced my remarks by saying that if 
it
is ones intent to gain acceptance by the collector market then it is
necessary to address the concerns of collectors. That is where Wilhelm
comes in.



   Certainly we, as artists, are free to print on anything of our
choosing.  However, if we expect representation of our work by serious
galleries and to be paid for our artistic vision then we must pay some
heed to the rules of the game.  Not to take anything away from your
work but, I doubt that there is anyway to assign a value to your
newsprint images that would be accepted by an art appraiser or,
insurance company.



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]







    




#AOLMsgPart_2_8b374b8b-e5a4-4aa9-a647-e4086c3fcc2e


#AOLMsgPart_2_8b374b8b-e5a4-4aa9-a647-e4086c3fcc2e


#AOLMsgPart_2_8b374b8b-e5a4-4aa9-a647-e4086c3fcc2e


________________________________________________________________________
More new features than ever.  Check out the new AOL Mail ! -
http://webmail.aol.com



________________________________________________________________________
More new features than ever.  Check out the new AOL Mail ! - 
http://webmail.aol.com

Bill --
   
  You and are in agreement more than we are in disagreement.  Remember, all of my comments were preferenced with the understanding that one is trying to break into that illusive, hard to define "collector market".  Of course there are many varieties of collectors. I'm sure that you are aware of this but for some background on what I'm talking about go to http://www.aipad.com/conservation/.  Again, I'm clearly not talking about someone of our aquaintance or a local company collecting our work.  I'm talking about dealers of the stature to do business at AIPAD every year. 
   
  And yes, there are always artists for whom exceptions are made (to address Tyler's point). But for those of us still in the process of trying to establish a market for our work printing on a material that is of questionable longetivity and expecting to sell it is kind of like hoping to draw an inside straight in poker.  It could happen, but the odds are against you.  
   
  None of what I'm saying has any bearing on whether our art should be guided solely by market considerations.  If your vision is best expressed on newsprint or toliet paper then, by all means, use whatever medium you choose. Who knows, someone, somewhere may fall in love with your work and start collecting it. Or not. Be true to your vision and see what happens.  After all, that's all that any of us can do.




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]