Urban Art Association

i try and stick to originals now, although i am a sucker for adam neate, i also have enemy of promise by prefab77.

A piece of art for me is done by the artist and not by someone else. you cut out framing costs with canvases and they look much better. whats the point in having 20 prints in a portfolio when you can have say 3 cracking originals on your wall.

I would love to say that I have moved on to originals but financially it is difficult. I think that prints are the best way to access established artists, but unless you have pots of cash their originals are out of reach for most of us. This said newer and less established artists originals are great, if you like the image I agree that I would buy an original canvas, no framing costs, rather than the print.

Good thread. I think that the nature of the processes used by the early POW artists lend themselves very well to reproduction. A screen is effectively a stencil. As an artist I was surprised and a bit disappointed when Banksy started to produce edition-ed works on canvas. Essentially they are prints on canvas with spray paint. Artists now talk about canvasses as if they are more desirable - 100 prints and 5 canvases, but they just extend their method onto a different surface. The same stencil is used. These are referred to as original canvasses when they are not. Some artists now use the term a 'special' to indicate its unique. There appears to be a shift in the terminology to accommodate such a saturation of edition-ed pieces. Original one off pieces take time. For every good one that an artist may present there may well be a few sketches and botches. I don't think people really appreciate this. So print runs can not just be a way of making a greedy quick buck but a necessary means of income. Personally, I am keen to make unique pieces. By drawing with screen ink or pencil or by experimenting with colour I can ensure that no two pieces are the same. I love screen printing but try and view it for its aesthetical merit and not as a means of reproduction. A way of adding a mark. Why should paint not sit along side screen ink, along side charcoal and pencil etc. From an artists perspective its a real buzz when people buy the pieces that you took a chance on or had a real involvement in. The pieces you had to make for yourself. Meeting the buyers of these pieces can be a real treat. From a collector's point of view I guess McNuts is spot on, although the aesthetic of a good screenprint does stand up on its own regardless of how many are made. We have just started to collect other artists work and you can't beat the feeling of having something that is totally unique - bit worried though its addictive.

Think that there have been more hand finished prints this year in order to try to make print runs a bit more unique. Not sure that this has always made a great improvement to the print though with the exception of Vhils and Bast and one or two others.

Would love a few originals in the collection - a Shep Fairey HPM is high on the list but still after a print or two - Banksy barcode especially.

The best hand finishing I've ever seen was on my McAttee print - just fantastic.

The advantage of prints is that they allow you to get in cheap for your preferred artist, and because they have a lower price also allow you to get out without a major hit if you change your mind. In business terms the market is much more liquid for prints.

The disadvantage is that they are usually a kind of lame example of what the artist intended. There are exceptions like Bast, Supine and Faile who hand finish their prints and whose originals are basically prints in any case. But for the more 'painterly' artists like Neate, the difference is profounf.

The advantage of originals is of course that they are originals. And usually bigger. And have the potential to zoom up in value.

The disadvantage is that they cost a lot more, and can be harder to shift if the artist is not one of the hot ones.

Prints prices have been dropping, but those trying to sell originals that they bought at the peak are seeing much bigger losses.

None was taken... i realise it's a completely OVER saturated genre, but i think Juice 126's work and system studio work, (considering they've both been painting graffiti since 1984) is leagues ahead of alot of other stuff around at the moment...

but agreed not everybody's cup of tea...

it's like the whole stencil thing to me... they're were people doing it in the late eighties and doing it very well too. That's not to say there aren't guys doing good stencil stuff now... it's just that it isn't new by any means.

cheers for having a look tho, that was all I was asking really.
R/R

cos I'm a spakker!
basically

born and bred 37 years... hehe lots of brummy friends

I think it’s important to differentiate between printmaking as a conscious part of the artistic process and print reproductions.

If you’re confident in what you’ve bought, because of its artistic value rather than solely its commercial value, I don’t think you can go far wrong. That goes for prints or originals in my view.

never thought of the resale money aspect with an original, i find that the prints on my walls seem to change quite often but the originals stay