Prints and/or Originals

At some point in time, every printmaker will engage in discussions 
 about whether a print is an 'original' or a 'reproduction'.

I found this short video from Crown Point Press in SanFrancisco
which discusses a Chuck Close exhibition
that includes photos, digital prints and tapestries of a set of images.

The video also discusses selling 'posters' as artworks.
Watch it and post a comment below to let me know what you think...


Antony said…
It's a good point she makes that the degree of artist involvement does seem to be a key factor in determining the monetary worth of prints in the long run. An excellent example of this I read about recently is the markets nuanced valuing of different grades of prints from Durer depending on how much he had to do with their production.

It's going to be interesting to see what happens with digital printmaking though. The digital printmaker's role seems inherently limited if they are just supplying the initial creative spark without so much scope for collectors to appreciate technical proficiency or admire innovative technique. But no doubt that what was said about screenprinting back in the day...