A discussion of Edition in the context of hardcopy prints of digital art

[William Overington]

I decided to start this discussion thread and wondered in which forum to locate it.

I consider that Share your work is the most appropriate of the forums available. I hope that it does not get moved please.

As it happens, upon starting this new thread the content of the thread that I started most recently was restored, soi, rather than clear it I have retained the image. Hopefully readers will post other images.

Here is the image and its original text. The text for this thread continues afterwards.

 

----

 

 

 

This graphic, newly made using Affinity Designer, is based as best I remember, on the design of the Colour Check page that I designed in 1977 and which was displayed on page 786 of the Post Office's Viewdata system. I saw it on a Viewdata equipped television set in September 1977. I do not know for how long that page remained on the Viewdata system.

Please note that the design, in the teletext and viewdata format, is using lowercase letters e in graphics mode in seven colours. The design included eight different control codes, each a number of times. These eight control codes were the Hold Graphics control character and seven control codes of the form Graphics Colour, where Colour can be any one of Red, Green, Yellow, Blue, Magenta, Cyan, White.

Although designed to look as if three semi-filled rectangles, red, green, blue are overlapping, the design needed to have each of the areas encoded directly in the appropriate colour.

William

 

----

This morning I received an email from an art gallery: not a personalized email, I receive emails from a number of galleries each as a result of my request to receive them.

Some are from original hardcopy art, some are of prints of original art, some are of printings derived from original art often in the form of blank greetings cards, but collectable too.

Anyway the email today offered as a "free with" an open edition print.

I had not known the term "open edition" previously and I wondered what precisely is the meaning in art.

I found the following.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edition_(printmaking).

So I am wondering how the concept of Edition works with hardcopy art where the art content has been produced digitally, such as art produced directly into Affinity Designer or a digital photograph or a digital photograph that has been applied in some way in Affinity Designer.

I have produced hardcopy prints of some of the artwork that I have generated using Affinity Designer, I used the online facility for photo greetings cards at the Papier website, which is possible as although the facility is marketed as for using a photograph to produce a card to send to someone else, as the print is from a jpg file and one can send the card to oneself. Staff at Papier have provded advice and support to enable me to do this.

So I am wondering if anyone produces artwork using one or more Affinity products and produces prints, either for sale or otherwise, and if so does anyone number them and sign them (in pencil or pen?) and possibly add something like a small sticker with a hologram on it for provenance of authenticity, or emboss the paper with a seal such as some certificates use or even specially watermarked paper, or some other method.

I am hoping to send for a print, in the form of a greetings card, of the above image, adding a note about it inside the card where the greeting is usually placed. I deliberately made the image the correct size and dots per inch to do that. My hope is to receive the card and to frame it.

Initially as a one-off full-field print.

How do people using Affinity Products feel about art that they produce please?

I wonder if people are just producing electronic versions or are people making prints, either themselves or by having it done by a print house, are the prints being printed on art gallery quality paper with archival inks, are they being signed and numbered, are they being sold, are holograms or other authentication being added?

Please discuss and talk around the subject, let the thread go where it goes without concern of being off the original topic.

William

.

[William Overington]

Many electronic images of artwork produced using Affinity products are displayed in this forum.

Do the producers of these artworks obtain one or more hardcopy prints?

If so, by what process please, how many and what is one with them?

For example, on one's own equipment, at a printshop, by an online service, or what?

What sort of paper and ink?

For example, put in a drawer, or a Solander box, or in a document pocket in a portfolio, or framed, or what?

Do people sign the print, even if it is just for their own single copy?

Do people produce certificates of authenticity?

Do people put the date on the print?

William

 

[William Overington]

No posts by anyone other than me in this thread yet, which has surprised me.

So I am wondering if people are neither printing nor having printed any hardcopy prints of their artwork, or are just not saying.

William

 

[Alfred]

1 hour ago, William Overington said:

No posts by anyone other than me in this thread yet, which has surprised me.

So I am wondering if people are neither printing nor having printed any hardcopy prints of their artwork, or are just not saying.

Perhaps there’s too much preamble about the specifics of the Viewdata image and about the concept of an edition in relation to hardcopy output of digital artwork. The real questions are raised towards the end of the original post:

On 12/26/2021 at 12:42 PM, William Overington said:

I am wondering if anyone produces artwork using one or more Affinity products and produces prints, either for sale or otherwise, and if so does anyone number them and sign them (in pencil or pen?) and possibly add something like a small sticker with a hologram on it for provenance of authenticity, or emboss the paper with a seal such as some certificates use or even specially watermarked paper, or some other method.

 

On 12/26/2021 at 12:42 PM, William Overington said:

I wonder if people are just producing electronic versions or are people making prints, either themselves or by having it done by a print house, are the prints being printed on art gallery quality paper with archival inks, are they being signed and numbered, are they being sold, are holograms or other authentication being added?

 

[Ali]

I'm not really sure what the thrust of this thread is, but it seems to me that the overarching theme is the imposition of some sort of copyright on digital images.

The only thing I'm doing with Affinity (Publisher) at the moment is creating digital signatures (watermark images) that I add to my photos using other software before sharing them online. However, I understand that sharing anything online incurs a risk, but as nothing of mine is going to command a million dollar procetag, I don't let myself worry about it.

[William Overington]

28 minutes ago, Ali said:

I'm not really sure what the thrust of this thread is, but it seems to me that the overarching theme is the imposition of some sort of copyright on digital images.

Thank you for your reply.

It is partly about provenance, rarity, and so on, but also about whether people are making hardcopy prints of what they produce using Affinity products.

Are images just being used in electronic format?

Are printed versions being produced as free-standing art or just as illustrations within a publication?

William

 

[Ali]

2 minutes ago, William Overington said:

.. about whether people are making hardcopy prints of what they produce using Affinity products.

I'm not, but I will be producing my own Christmas cards and a 2023 calendar for next Christmas (probably using VistaPrint). Nothing for commercial use, just as gifts.

[PaulEC]

16 minutes ago, William Overington said:

It is partly about provenance, rarity, and so on, but also about whether people are making hardcopy prints of what they produce using Affinity products.

Are images just being used in electronic format?

Are printed versions being produced as free-standing art or just as illustrations within a publication?

When I was working, (30 odd years in a theatre, then 18 for a legal firm,) much of my design work / photography was printed, inhouse and professionally. Since retiring virtually everything I do now is digital. The only time I print my own work is for Christmas Cards and a calendar. I don't really bother about copyright in the few images I post online; I always tend to upload smallish, low res images, and I doubt if they would be of much interest to anyone else anyway! I also do some writing which is normally kept in odt (Libreoffice) and PDF (APub) formats.  I have published a few KDP/Amazon books and also have a shop on Society6, mainly to keep my hand in! (They certainly don't make much money! 😁)

[William Overington]

That is interesting.

I have taken great delight in getting hardcopy printings made from my artwork and then framing them in frames from the supermarket (Tesco) that have been delivered with the grocery.

Although I am only a hobbyist artist I really enjoy seeing my artwork presented in hardcopy, printed using industrial quality printing equipment on quality card in greeting card format. I use the space inside the card where a personalized greeting usually goes to put a title, a description, my name and the date. Although that information is hidden when the card is framed the information is nevertheless enclosed within the art object that is produced. I now have a small collection of framed hardcopy printings, which is much better, in my opinion, than just keeping the printings in a box.

William

 

 

[walt.farrell]

One problem, as I see it, with having "limited editions" of something that was created digitally is how the artist or printer can guarantee that a limit actually exists.

With art where the original is ccreated physically, it's easier. For example, a wood-block or stone or metal plate can be defaced. A line is drawn through the image, and possibly dated and initialed by the artist or printer. At that point, no more images can be struck. And if a customer were to ask for proof that the edition is limited, the artist/printer can simply produce the defaced plate.

For images that started life as digital, that kind of proof is not available.

[William Overington]

27 minutes ago, walt.farrell said:

For images that started life as digital, that kind of proof is not available.

That may well be true.

However, for hardcopy printings of an image that was first produced digitally there is the possibility of having a custom hologram of which 2n are produced (possibly two for each of integers 1 to n produced) and then one is affixed to the harcopy image, on either the front or the back as desired, and the other is affixed to a certificate of authenticity. The artist might sign them as well. So if the artist got the hardcopy printings from a printer and the holograms from a hologram producer and then did the signing and the hologram affixing, then that would be one solution.

Once businesses are back at work I am hoping to find out how much such holograms cost. If it is within my budget I would like to try the process, basically for a learning experience. I have no idea of the cost. I can get a custom greetings card for £4.20 including it being sent to me in the Royal Mail, which would probably not have been possible until relatively recently, it would always have been large orders needed. So maybe there is a business that has it all set up such that I send an image, perhaps a relatively simple line drawn image and pay a fee that they can produce such a collection of self-adhesive holograms with little more effort specifically for my order than just clicking a few buttons.

William

 

 

[walt.farrell]

21 minutes ago, William Overington said:

there is the possibility of having a custom hologram of which 2n are produced (possibly two for each of integers 1 to n

What is the proof that only that number were produced? What is the proof that no more will be produced?

Your hologram idea attests to the authenticity of the print, but says nothing about enforcement of the limit in "limited edition".

That proposal sounds more related to the idea of an NFT.

[William Overington]

14 minutes ago, walt.farrell said:

What is the proof that only that number were produced? What is the proof that no more will be produced?

Your hologram idea attests to the authenticity of the print, but says nothing about enforcement of the limit in "limited edition".

From my own perspective, I would not want my original woodcut cancelled. In the context that if I were producing printings of original digital artwork then my own view is that although I might (but might not) go in for any one or more of signed printings, hologram authentication, numbering, I would not want to go for limited editions. I have the view that if someone likes the art that I produce to the extent that he or she would delight in displayig it in his or her home or office, then I do not want to restrict that opportunity by having a limit to the number of printings available.

William

 

[William Overington]

These appear to be unlimited edition print-upon-order framed printings.

https://www.papier.com/wall-art/art-prints/

and one can do one's own too

https://www.papier.com/photos/framed-photo-prints/

Although advertised as photo prints I expect that a jpg output from Affinity Designer could be used, as with the items advertised as photo greetings cards.

William

 

 

[William Overington]

I suppose that I might be able to get a framed print of something from my 2004 collection.

Though possibly not without some manipulation using Affinity Designer.

Please note, the email address mentioned is not in use due to being blocked up by spam at present.

Using Graphics and Fonts

http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~ngo/usinggraphicsandfonts.htm

William

 

[AdamStanislav]

1 hour ago, William Overington said:

These appear to be unlimited edition print-upon-order framed printings.

To me they appear like a major ripoff.

[William Overington]

50 minutes ago, AdamStanislav said:

To me they appear like a major ripoff.

Why?

William

 

[William Overington]

3 minutes ago, Hens said:

Copy/Paste

How do you mean please?

William

 

[William Overington]

They are designs from artists with whom the business has some arrangement.

They have some greetings card designs by artists from outside the business as well as some by in-house artists.

There are for both the greetings cards and the frammed prints, the print in the framed prints are printed on gallery quality paper with up to twelve archival quality inks and sealed.

For both greetings cards and prints one can either have a preset one or a custom one from ones own artwork or photograph.

Whether one likes the picture on one of the preset ones is a matter of personal choice.

William

 

[VectorVonDoom]

5 hours ago, walt.farrell said:

One problem, as I see it, with having "limited editions" of something that was created digitally is how the artist or printer can guarantee that a limit actually exists.

With art where the original is ccreated physically, it's easier. For example, a wood-block or stone or metal plate can be defaced. A line is drawn through the image, and possibly dated and initialed by the artist or printer. At that point, no more images can be struck. And if a customer were to ask for proof that the edition is limited, the artist/printer can simply produce the defaced plate.

For images that started life as digital, that kind of proof is not available.

Unless it’s a painting or drawing then you have to trust them when they say that they’re going to destroy the block/plate/screens, same with digital So it’s mainly about building a reputation for being trustworthy and doing what you say. You don’t need to destroy or delete anything of course, you might want to keep it for personal reasons/use, just don’t go back on your word and sell more.
 

Perhaps the easiest thing to do is to make an unlimited run rather than limited? Not sure if limited would generally give you better returns, guess that partly depends on your definition of limited is it 5, 10, 100 or 10,000. There are plenty of so called limited editions of things with fairly huge numbers.

[VectorVonDoom]

6 hours ago, walt.farrell said:

One problem, as I see it, with having "limited editions" of something that was created digitally is how the artist or printer can guarantee that a limit actually exists.

With art where the original is ccreated physically, it's easier. For example, a wood-block or stone or metal plate can be defaced. A line is drawn through the image, and possibly dated and initialed by the artist or printer. At that point, no more images can be struck. And if a customer were to ask for proof that the edition is limited, the artist/printer can simply produce the defaced plate.

For images that started life as digital, that kind of proof is not available.

Exactly how is destroying a woodcut etc easier than deleting a file? Or they could have more than one copy of the plate and deface one and show that to a customer. Anything that can be reproduced by whatever means faces the same problems. 

[William Overington]

21 minutes ago, VectorVonDoom said:

Perhaps the easiest thing to do is to make an unlimited run rather than limited? Not sure if limited would generally give you better returns, guess that partly depends on your definition of limited is it 5, 10, 100 or 10,000. There are plenty of so called limited editions of things with fairly huge numbers.

I remember seeing something once, I don't remember what it was, but it was seeking orders for a limited edition.

It then went on to claim that there were two traditional ways of having a limited edition. One was a fixed number and the other, used by them, was the number of people who subscribed.

So basically uit seemed that the offer was advertised and that when the offer closed that that many would be made and no more after that.

I know that for some people, who may or may not buy limited editions as an investment due to the limited number, value linited editions because they are limited.

For me if is a matter of whether I like the art, not whether it is a limited edition. I also tend to like the information content most, so a relatively inexpensive greetings card with the image is often fine for me.

William

 

[VectorVonDoom]

2 minutes ago, William Overington said:

I remember seeing something once, I don't remember what it was, but it was seeking orders for a limited edition.

It then went on to claim that there were two traditional ways of having a limited edition. One was a fixed number and the other, used by them, was the number of people who subscribed.

So basically uit seemed that the offer was advertised and that when the offer closed that that many would be made and no more after that.

I know that for some people, who may or may not buy limited editions as an investment due to the limited number, value linited editions because they are limited.

For me if is a matter of whether I like the art, not whether it is a limited edition. I also tend to like the information content most, so a relatively inexpensive greetings card with the image is often fine for me.

William

 

Yeah in theory it should just be down to if you like something however, for obvious reasons, people do value proper limited editions more highly. Some create both signed/numbered and unsigned/unlimited or less limited versions of the same work. Time limited doesn’t sound very appealing as a buyer unless it’s a very small window or if you don’t care that if it turns out to be not that exclusive in the end.

[AdamStanislav]

1 hour ago, William Overington said:

Why?

Because they are something any one of us here could create in two minutes. Indeed, some of them seem to be just public domain clip art. And to charge fifty pounds for them is undeserved.

[VectorVonDoom]

28 minutes ago, AdamStanislav said:

Because they are something any one of us here could create in two minutes. Indeed, some of them seem to be just public domain clip art. And to charge fifty pounds for them is undeserved.

If he can find people willing to pay £50 then why shouldn’t he regardless of what we think of it, good or bad? No different to the NFT space, it’s full of absolutely dreadful stuff but they get buyers. No one is being forced to buy any of it and there’s no minimum artistic talent threshold for selling or most modern art would fall at that hurdle. 
 

The other thing, talking generally, is you don’t basically say your work is rubbish for a number of reasons. 1. The old “if you’ve nothing nice to say be quiet” just think it don’t say it. 2. They may be beginners, unless they tell you you probably don’t know. 3. Not everyone is good but they enjoy it never the less, same as people who enjoy singing but can’t. Simply telling them it’s rubbish isn’t helpful and doesn’t help them improve, more likely to give up if anything. Constructive  criticism is a different matter.

As far as public domain goes, not saying this is, I’ve no idea, I’m pretty sure you can do whatever you want with it including making a profit from it.