LOL, that made me laugh

A college of mine recieved flag 3 today. I'm still waiting for mine. This is the first one I've seen in the flesh and it's everything I expected and more. Can't wait to recieve them now!

Even for just office decoration pieces, these prints are incredible. There are no halftones throughout mine as speculated, the paper is incredible and the ink coverage is bold to perfection. It's incredible that these are in the condition that they are once you realize the age of these. I have no regrets, having picked up 3 myself.

Haha that's the problem. You don't understand who they are. They may be nobody to you it they are someone in the printmaker industry and to some of the finest artists of the century.


But finances remained grim and ULAE needed to find another outlet for making money to support their limited editions. At the encouragement of Bill Goldston, a student of printer Zigmunds Priede originally brought to ULAE in 1969 to work on photo-sensitive stones for Rauschenberg, Mrs. Grosman bought an offset press. Goldston convinced Mrs. Grosman that they would be able to produce high quality posters and books that could subsidize their limited editions. However, the artists were intrigued by the new equipment and it wasn't long before the offset press was used to create editions. Johns used it to complete "Decoy" in 1971. Dine used it for "Flaubert's Favorites" and Rosenquist for "Off the Continental Divide."

The next technical challenge became relief printing from wood blocks. For years Frankenthaler had loved the traditional woodcuts of Japan. In 1973 after seeing a woodcut show, she decided to try her hand at the new medium. With Goldston by her side, Frankenthaler's experimentation resulted in "East and Beyond." And "Savage Breeze." These prints are often attributed to causing the revival of woodcuts in the United States.

Because Goldston was the first printer to really dedicate himself to intensive technical experimentation at ULAE, he quickly moved into a leadership position. Impressed by his abilities, Mrs. Grosman encouraged Goldston to take charge of running both the studio and the business when her husband died in 1976. From that point, she guided him until her death in 1982 when he assumed responsibility for the business. By then, he was familiar with all aspects of ULAE and was ready to move the studio in a younger direction. He purchased different and larger presses, established additional studios, hired more printers and invited a new group of young artists to work at the studio.

No new artists had joined the ULAE "family" since the early 70s so Goldston approached a group of artists whose work he had seen around the country. He invited Terry Winters, Bill Jensen, Susan Rothenberg, Carroll Dunham and Elizabeth Murray. Their work was painterly and indicated a move away from the pop sensibility that dominated ULAE in the early years. The only aspects they had in common with their predecessors was that they were young, eager to work and had never made a print. The expanded range of equipment allowed prints to be made that were unimaginable in the early years -- three-dimensional prints, screen prints and photogravures. The 90s saw yet another group of artists arrive at ULAE -- Jane Hammond, Kiki Smith, Julian Lethbridge and Suzanne McClelland. The work of each was strikingly different from that of the other but they found a similarity in the need to work on copper, stone or aluminum.

In guiding ULAE's expansion, Goldston has maintained the sense of community and spirit always associated with the house on Skidmore Place. Only one artist is scheduled to visit the studio on any given day. Lunch is still served to the staff, artists, visiting collectors, curators and writers and prints are still shown upstairs at the house in a small attic room. The vision and determination of Goldston and the veteran artists and printers have sustained Mrs. Grosman's memory through their work and their own dedication to quality and the necessity of experimentation.

To be frank, I think you're delusional.

(1) They are clearly labelled on the reverse as facsimiles of the original prints
(2) There is a logo in the image to again signify that these are reproductions of the original print run
(3) As clearly stated on the ULAE website, the original intention in printing these was to create a facsimile catalogue
(4) ULAE provided further information that John's involvement was simply that he was aware of the project, which as I previously stated, was the creation of a facsimile catalogue, not "fine art prints"
(5) The project was scrapped and therefore, was not approved by any means, even as a facsimile catalog, let alone as "fine art prints"

Edit: fixed grammar errors

So what do you make of their superb quality, that they are produced on the same paper, process etc as the originals. That they were produced by the same hands that made the originals.

It's fine to point out they are facsimiles but you are ignoring a lot of other crucial information about the uniqueness of the project.

This deserves the micdrop

Everyone discrediting these is ignoring what those in favor of them are saying.

The person who made these prints and the originals I think.

Your wrong here which is why they are not originals. Jasper himself drew on and created the original plates which is stated in the video. That is like an artist using a brush to paint, these reproductions were created by one of the names mentioned as a printer and he created the plates not Jasper, his intent was copying much like a photographer or scanner would copy a masterpiece. This is why they are facsimile or copies. Yes the guy who ran the print through the machine could have been the same guy, but who made the Plates and how they were made is what clearly differentiates these from being an original. Jasper was a huge part of the original images and he created and painted these images on the plates. Thats an original. The facsmilie plates were never touched by jasper.
 

I don't have anything against you, but I think your conclusion here is ridiculous.

I'm sorry but simply stating "I'm a lawyer" isn't enough to sway my opinion. What cases in particular are you referring to and how are they specifically relevant to the discussion at hand?

As stated previously in this thread, ULAE provided further information regarding Johns' involvement in the project via email and it's clear that he did not "supervise" anything. They stated that he was "aware". And again, going back to intent, he was aware that they were producing a facsimile catalogue, not several editions of "fine art prints" as you so claim.

I don't think your comparison to Banksy prints is particularly relevant. Those are multiples of an original image, whereas here, we are discussing multiples of multiples of an original image.

That extra step, the very clear labeling on the prints, the lack of artist involvement, the lack of final artist approval, and the original intent make these anything but "fine art prints".

Jasper johns is a partner