Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;User 67, post: 6874, member: 67&quot;]Do you think it is considered original lithograph?</p><p>No. You said so in your title. &quot;Lithograph Poster&quot;</p><p><br /></p><p>Printing terms can be confusing, and certain terms are abused. The Artist&#039;s lithos (Stone Lithography) are made on a stone, a slab of limestone that is ground smooth then marked with a crayon or wax. The stone is made wet to resist ink. It was the first process developed where the artist could actually paint right onto the print block rather than carve or etch into it.</p><p><br /></p><p>This process was adapted at the turn of the century to mechanical methods, photo-mechanical methods and machine printing methods using metal plates. Some of these types of printing were called Lithography, because the image was not carved or etched on, but used a similar resist method. Some of these methods have little or no similarity to lithography, but were called that because it sells more printed material. You often see &#039;litho&#039; or &#039;lithograph&#039; printed in the name on some early 3 color mechanically printed products.</p><p><br /></p><p>Unless you are an expert in the field of commercial printing the slight changes and developments in the machine processes will escape you. Grouping all of those printing processes under the heading of &quot;lithography&quot; has always seemed very deceptive to me because the quality can vary wildly and the different processes can have little to do with each other besides using paper and some kind of ink.</p><p><br /></p><p>A lot of dealers, and antiquers like to call any kind of large format poster or calendar print a &quot;lithograph&quot; when in fact an accurate designation might be more like &quot;printed on a 1980s era, Phillips 400 series XKZ Custom Color Match Pro, or some such title for a commercial printer which has nothing to do with lithography.</p><p><br /></p><p>Calling these types of prints &#039;lithography&#039; is hype. It is just wrong and deceitful. If the idea is to distinguish it as a &#039;quality&#039; poster print like you buy in a Museum shop, as apposed to a centerfold you tear out of a teen magazine, it is more honest to say, &quot;Quality print on heavy paper&quot;, rather then try to come up with some fancy terminology that doesn&#039;t fit the piece.</p><p><br /></p><p>Please folks, just get it out of your head: a poster print, a calendar print, ect. should not be called a lithograph, especially if the image on the poster is known to have been made by an artist who actually made stone lithos.</p><p><br /></p><p>Calling a pigs ear a silk purse doesn&#039;t make it one.</p><p><br /></p><p>You have a cut down Museum Poster of a Chagall. That&#039;s it. In a decent mat and frame it could be a pretty and decorative wall art. As is, it&#039;s a hard sell for a buck at a garage sale. If it wasn&#039;t cut down, if you held onto it for another 40 years in pristine condition, it <i>might </i>be worth something. And those are big ifs.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in