EDIT:

I found this publisher that has a ton of Jasper Johns prints available at really good prices. I figured I'd share the wealth, post the link, and maybe one or two members would be interested. What I did not expect is the reception this thread has received. I love it! Great debate on both sides on what constitutes a "fine art print", people going all in on the set, and a dash of trolling that should be expected.

However, there has been some criticism about my motives, and accusations that I have misled some members. If any members feel that way, I sincerely apologize. I just wanted to clear some of this up in this initial post so that members just discovering this would be fully informed. Below, I have included a description of these prints, and the pros/cons of these editions from my standpoint. I urge all those considering a purchase to read it carefully in order to make an informed decision. Thank you!

From the publisher:

"Tatyana Grosman started Telamon Editions Limited in 1970 as a commercial venture of Universal Limited Art Editions. It was closed upon her death in 1982. Among her initial projects was a facsimile catalogue of Jasper Johns prints published by ULAE. The format for the catalogue was 22 1/2 x 17 1/2 inches and was to be printed in an edition of 300 on the same paper as the original limited editions prints. A hand fed offset pressed was purchased in 1971 to proof and print the project. 13 facsimiles were printed on the hand-fed offset press by Bill Goldston and James V. Smith under the supervision of the artist before 1982 when the it was abandoned for the complete catalogue raisonne published in 1993. Other than their size, the paper, color and printing sequence match the original edition. The facsimiles are not signed by the artist and the Telamon Editions Limited seal appears within the images to insure no confusion with the original editions. A short documentation for each image was printed verso. There is a limited quantity available."

Pros:

- Artist approved/oversaw production

- Direct from the publisher of the majority of iconic JJ prints

- Quality in the printing method and added bonus of matching paper stock of the OG editions

- Some of these are literally the same exact print as the OG editions ("Hands," and maybe one more?)

- You cant beat the price, I dare you to say that a $150 JJ print is highway robbery

Cons:

- Edition number is somewhat ambiguous (300-400 is the number provided to some inquiring members)

- Unsigned

- I do not believe these are recognized by any JJ catalogue raisonnes

IMHO a print approved/overseen by the artist is an authentic print of that artist. It may not be considered a part of JJ's overall body of work, but very few of us on this board can afford such pieces. I will be the first to admit its frankly impossible to "categorize" these prints. They are not posters, they are not editions, they are authentic prints produced for an AWESOME idea of a catalogue raisonnes in which the prints match the recognized editions exactly with the exception of the size. Can you imagine something similar with Banksy or Kaws? I'd kill to have every print in those artists body of work even if the size wasn't spot on.

Anyways, that's my two cents. If you want them, buy them. If you don't, please keep the conversation civil and if you must criticize those of us who found this to be a cool opportunity, please do so with intelligent arguments.

My one last request is that those who frame these, please post your pics in this thread. I think you could get pretty creative considering the size, and I'm very curious to see what everyone comes up with.

Oh and if you want a JJ print for $150, click the link below:

store.ulae.com/

Jun 16, 2017 23:32:12 GMT 1 Pattycakes said:

It's an offset lithograph facsimile i.e a reproduction what exactly arroyo trying to promote here

While that's kinda true, its not the whole picture. They printed these using the same technique/paper stock/ and image as the regular editions (the flag editions where small, like  only 10 or so) under the supervision of the artist. It was for a large format book project that never happened. To me, that's a "proof" as its a print created during the edition process (these were to be a portfolio edition of 300) but the whole project was scrapped.

I believe its important to understand the difference between a reproduction and fine art print. If the artist is involved in the process (approving proofs, choosing paper stock/technique, ect) then the work is understood to be part of that artist's body of work, albeit a print. A reproduction is simply a licensed image that is created with no input from the artist whatsoever beyond contractual negotiations. Most Dali prints on the market are technically reproductions, because he had no involvement in the creation whatsoever (lots of lawsuits ensued). Here, Johns oversaw the production and thus these are authentic prints.