Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2012/12/22
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]On Dec 21, 2012, at 10:19 PM, Adam Bridge wrote: > Not that I'm in any way likely to create a limited edition set of digital > prints but can someone explain the rules? > > If you make a series of images from an original digital frame, are you > from then on forbidden from revisiting that frame again? It would seem to > me that you would be, but I just wanted to be sure. > > Thanks for any answers. If this is too off-topic I apologize. I'd think it helpful to consider the art print tradition from which the Limited Edition concept originated. Long before photographic prints prints were made from: engraved metal plates etched metal plates lithographic stones and carved wood blocks. The print processes required the prints were the same size as the plates, stones and blocks. As the plates, stones and blocks were developed by the artist/printmaker they pulled "artists proofs" to see how the work was progressing. The artists proofs were generally numbered with roman numerals. Once the artist/printmaker had considered the plate, stone or block complete An edition would be pulled. The edition was finite and numbered as 1/100 through 100/100 (or whatever other number the edition may be) The numbering offered a number of advantages. One could monitor how the plates, stones or blocks were affected by the print process. (edges were softened in copper, other soft metal and certain woods, wood grain would fill in, etc.) One could also monitor the hand inking process of the plates, stones and blocks. When photography (and serigraphy, and photo-lithography, etc.) came along things changed - it became much easier to produce "unlimited editions." The "art market" required "limited editions" - not the handmade process itself. Edition sizes "made by the artist/photographer" were limited only by the artists time;G not by the negative degrading with every "pull." This has all been debated for a long time - should a negative be destroyed? to preserve the "value of the limited edition?" Also consider: prints (limited or unlimited) made by and signed by artist. prints (limited or unlimited) made by others and signed by artist prints (limited or unlimited) made by others and unsigned It's all a bit of a conceit - though with some validity. If we all simply pulled one print which we thought to be the best possible rendition of any particular file and then destroyed the original digital file - obviously that would make that print extremely "rare." If on the other hand we made 1,000 of them - well - not so rare. Who cares? Galleries, museums, collectors and photographers who serve or seek to serve those "markets." How does one insure that no additional prints will ever flood "the market" during one's lifetime? or after one's death? Written contracts, promises and/or most assuredly - file (negative) destruction. Regards, George Lottermoser george at imagist.com http://www.imagist.com http://www.imagist.com/blog http://www.linkedin.com/in/imagist