Japanese Prints

[kr555]

Сообщение от Tjutchev

kr555, please follow the discussion. Wladzislaw, when he wrote your message (to which I replied) thought it was "global" as you put it. It is clear from the context of the debate, he responded to postAmateur and that no doubt, wrote about the prints at all. Yes, and the subsequent postWladzislaw and, convinces us that he talks about the European prints, but not about the Japanese. As an example, he refers to an engraving of Cezanne.

No, I'm watching the debate, and just trying to get her back into a narrow specialized channel, otherwise we will all drown in it. Wladzislaw said here on this communication, which is just the first time it took to the side, because in Japan those days there were no prints made by the artist himself, he is in the best case could be allowed to monitor the process:

Posted by Tiutchev
If we are talking about something original prints are the ones that are made by the artist himself.

 

Сообщение от Tjutchev

But even if, as you suggest, "thinking about topography and talk only of Japanese prints, the concept of" lifetime impressions "are not meaningless, though, and finds Japanese-specific. Without a doubt, not only an artist but engraver and printmaker Japanese prints played a significant role in its creation. This is especially true of printers, who, after the artist had been discussed all shades of color, making the required number of prints (two hundred), ensuring coherence and harmony of the overall color score. Other words, the Japanese woodcut had collective method it is created. This means that the engraving could not be established without the concerted action of each of the participants in this process. And you will agree that the role of the artist in this process still predominant? I repeat, engravings created in coordination with the artist (although agree that it probably was not often), what is, is possible only with his life. For example, we know that the artist Katsushika Hakusan watched the process of creating prints. His engravings from the series "Thirty-six Views of Mount Fuji" was sold for a very considerable sum ($ 1.340.000), and influenced by the price, in this case, not so much the rarity of the print, but what was known creation date imprint: he was printed in a first half of the 30's. XIX century, that precisely when the artist created this series and could in some degree of control over the process of creating impressions. Other prints of the same image, but do not have precise chronology, had been sold much cheaper (about $ 150.000 - $ 500.000), despite the fact that sold five years after the sale of print, which has established a record price. This means that for the person who bought this print, it was essential it is that impression was created with the artist's life.

That's be honest, I do not know what it is guided by a man who paid entirely unreasonable money for this engraving. Intravital here a little, so please, exactly the same lifetime impression of 1830-1831 in excellent condition, sold at Christie's for $ 239.649, and this is his red price, and can be even cheaper to buy.
http://www.christies.com/LotFinder/l...0-21bf4862f9ad
I guess (on the photo is hard to understand) that he print, who left behind a million-plus, differed a unique preservation. Then it does not and can not be a firm price, such copies of the famous engravings in the state "like yesterday published" isolated and virtually priceless, but the price is determined only by fanaticism want to get it.

In general, the quality of prints is very much falls as overprint circulation. The first copies look awesome, the line thickness of hair, bright colors, perfect geometry. If the engraving was popular, it was printed for several years, and later during his lifetime impressions can not watch without tears ... All the same wood is soft, razdalbyvaetsya very quickly. So it is important that it was not just a lifetime, but the number of the very first printed.