Aza
Artist
Junior Member
Posts โข 2,983
Likes โข 3,791
November 2006
|
High priced Giclees, by Aza on Feb 7, 2015 19:51:28 GMT 1, I have had my image printed at Staples and at a proper printers as a giclee.
Staples was ยฃ12 and the giclee was ยฃ33.
I will take some photos tomorrow in the daylight to show here.
Might show the difference between a 'proper' digital print on decent paper, versus a Staples poster print.
Although it still depends on the quality of my original image 
I have had my image printed at Staples and at a proper printers as a giclee. Staples was ยฃ12 and the giclee was ยฃ33. I will take some photos tomorrow in the daylight to show here. Might show the difference between a 'proper' digital print on decent paper, versus a Staples poster print. Although it still depends on the quality of my original image |
|
thomasmer
Junior Member
Posts โข 1,107
Likes โข 565
July 2014
|
High priced Giclees, by thomasmer on Feb 8, 2015 3:20:45 GMT 1, I've sat there and watched them drop out of the arse end of an epson, wouldn't pay more than $70 for one no matter who its by.
I've sat there and watched them drop out of the arse end of an epson, wouldn't pay more than $70 for one no matter who its by.
|
|
|
|
High priced Giclees, by maddoghoek100 on Feb 8, 2015 6:22:36 GMT 1, we are likely saying the same thing in most regards. buying a multiple is buying a multiple is buying a multiple. Everything else is all of us rationalizing the price we paid for that multiple. We can all agree that any multiple of any type is an attempt by an artist to maximize revenue or exposure for a particular piece of artistic expression. People pay a lot for an artist they like and less for an artist they dont. the image or the medium almost never has anything to do with it in the aggregate sales. Perhaps one or many people decide that X is too high a price for a particular piece, but on the whole if a piece is in the sweet spot for edition size and price for an artists current popularity it will sell, if not it will not. multiples sell based on the popularity of the artist, and scarcity or price of original works. They do not sell based on the printing medium.
My point with giclees is that it's a reproduction. The only time I can think of where a giclee makes real sense is with someone who is a digital artist or internet artist like say Petra Cortright. If they wanted a physical print of their work a giclee might make sense. But in most other cases it's just a photo of an artwork. It has no intrinsic value as art. Almost every other type of printmaking is a true original work of art.
we are likely saying the same thing in most regards. buying a multiple is buying a multiple is buying a multiple. Everything else is all of us rationalizing the price we paid for that multiple. We can all agree that any multiple of any type is an attempt by an artist to maximize revenue or exposure for a particular piece of artistic expression. People pay a lot for an artist they like and less for an artist they dont. the image or the medium almost never has anything to do with it in the aggregate sales. Perhaps one or many people decide that X is too high a price for a particular piece, but on the whole if a piece is in the sweet spot for edition size and price for an artists current popularity it will sell, if not it will not. multiples sell based on the popularity of the artist, and scarcity or price of original works. They do not sell based on the printing medium. My point with giclees is that it's a reproduction. The only time I can think of where a giclee makes real sense is with someone who is a digital artist or internet artist like say Petra Cortright. If they wanted a physical print of their work a giclee might make sense. But in most other cases it's just a photo of an artwork. It has no intrinsic value as art. Almost every other type of printmaking is a true original work of art. |
|
Wilson
Junior Member
Posts โข 1,184
Likes โข 1,213
November 2014
|
High priced Giclees, by Wilson on Feb 9, 2015 12:20:04 GMT 1, Looking at the production of Eine's Valentines Day X's it doesn't look like Eine himself has a lot to do with the process anyway. Art designed by someone and manufactured by another. 
Looking at the production of Eine's Valentines Day X's it doesn't look like Eine himself has a lot to do with the process anyway. Art designed by someone and manufactured by another. |
|
|
|
High priced Giclees, by Someones Brain on Feb 10, 2015 16:30:41 GMT 1, When I started collecting about 15 years ago I had a very strict "no giclee or reproduction" policy. I prefered screen printing and the (feeling of) craftmanship connected to it and it was that production process that differentiated the prints I collected from simple posters.
Yet, I only recently violated my own policy when Lazarides released the two latest Ian Francis prints reproductions of paintings ("Diner" and the other one) in November '14. And that's a double breach of my policy because it's giclee and (!) a reproduction. I received my print just now because of some shipping problems, but having seen it in person changed my mind a little bit. They almost feel (yeah, I tenderly touched me the print when I unpacked it) like they were screen prints.
A good giclee that's done with some craftmanship as well can be a great piece of art. I learnt that now. Though I still prefer screen printing just because it feels "right". But that's more of an emotional value than a rational thing (from a beholder's perspective).
P.S. I know nothing about the different profit margins re: screen printed prints and giclees. But that might partly be because it doesn't matter from a purely beholder's perspective, and that's the only perspective I have as a collector.
P.S.2 Maybe I was wrong and I bought a giclee before. I got a Kinsey print from BlackMarketGallery some years ago that might be a giclee, at least some parts of it. However, that also had a very high printing quality with screen printed parts and beeing a consumer, not a printer, I wasn't able to tell which parts were screen printed.
When I started collecting about 15 years ago I had a very strict "no giclee or reproduction" policy. I prefered screen printing and the (feeling of) craftmanship connected to it and it was that production process that differentiated the prints I collected from simple posters.
Yet, I only recently violated my own policy when Lazarides released the two latest Ian Francis prints reproductions of paintings ("Diner" and the other one) in November '14. And that's a double breach of my policy because it's giclee and (!) a reproduction. I received my print just now because of some shipping problems, but having seen it in person changed my mind a little bit. They almost feel (yeah, I tenderly touched me the print when I unpacked it) like they were screen prints.
A good giclee that's done with some craftmanship as well can be a great piece of art. I learnt that now. Though I still prefer screen printing just because it feels "right". But that's more of an emotional value than a rational thing (from a beholder's perspective).
P.S. I know nothing about the different profit margins re: screen printed prints and giclees. But that might partly be because it doesn't matter from a purely beholder's perspective, and that's the only perspective I have as a collector.
P.S.2 Maybe I was wrong and I bought a giclee before. I got a Kinsey print from BlackMarketGallery some years ago that might be a giclee, at least some parts of it. However, that also had a very high printing quality with screen printed parts and beeing a consumer, not a printer, I wasn't able to tell which parts were screen printed.
|
|
Deleted
Posts โข 0
Likes โข
January 1970
|
High priced Giclees, by Deleted on Feb 17, 2015 21:33:08 GMT 1, I dont care
Honest i dont
As long as its pretty
I dont care
Honest i dont
As long as its pretty
|
|
๐ธ