Two Romantic Prints

I just got these two romantic prints, published by F.A. Stokes Co. in 1905.
I never heard of the man/company thus far, but have reaserched him and I understand he was famous for publishing quality art books. However, I couldnt find any data on single art prints.
I am especially curious to find the author of these prints.

 

King Charles Spaniel? Or Papillon? Or what? Might help in searches...

 

They're lovely, and it does look like they were well done.

 

How big are they? And are they single sheets or color prints attached to a paper backing?

 

Anna Whelan Betts

She did illustrations for books published by F.A. Stokes Co., as did her sister, Ethel Franklin Betts (sounds like daddy really wanted a boy).

 

Prints are 15 1/2 x 12in.
When I bought them they were framed in original frames, but I had to get them out of these because glass was shattered and they were very dirty. They looked like they have been burried in a pile of sand and the frames were squashed as if someone droped a piano on them.
They were framed properly with strong cardboard backing and back closed with another cardboard

 

Can you tell if they were cut out of a book?

 

Hi Bev!
I inspected edges and I dont see the signs of cutting.
They are too large in my opinion for a book.

 

I'm thinking they may have been printed a bit later - 1910-20. Anyone else feel that way?

 

Thanks MOS!

 

Makanudo, can you scan or photo an extreme closeup of a few areas?

 

Here is a scan. It is incomplete, because print is too large for my scanner

 

Unfortunately, that's still not enlarged enough to see what the print process might have been. Do you have a camera with a macro setting? It's usually represented by a little tulip icon. Or does your scanner let you scan at a higher resolution?

 

I'll make photos...
What parts do you need?

 

Thanks for the enlargements. It's hard to tell online, but I'm getting the impression that the print you enlarged is coated with a substance to give it the look of an oil painting, with a sheen and uneven surface. When you run your finger over it gently, do you feel a texture?

Also, in the center of the image below I think I'm seeing a dot pattern that's typical of photo offset prints. If you look under a loupe and do see dots throughout, then the prints are offsets (also called photolithographs).

 

Pat,
The paper itself has uneven texture, almost as if plasticised.
I took the loupe and I didn't see dots. It is very dusty and dirty and I am not sure how to best clean it.

 

Whatever that coating is, it does a good job of disguising the printing artifacts, which is probably a good part of the intent.

 

Ah, then the coating does tell me it's a print made to look like a painting. This type of coating allows prints to last longer when they're not framed under glass, too.

If there are no dots, than I think either the print is an actual lithograph or was produced using a continuous-tone photomechanical process. It could be from 1905, as is printed at the bottom, or it could be a reproduction from a later decade.

When you looked under the loupe, did you see lines in different shapes that looked like background patterns in different areas?

 

Pat P,
They were framed under glass. I am still holding on to original frames if that would help.
Under fingrers it is an even surface you cannot feel anything on printed or not printed parts.
Under loupe there are several straight lines in different directions.
Here are some photos made against direct daylight if that helps, also photo of the back.
If you want I will photo old frames too.
Thanks