Today's post is a bit of a beef. While dealing with artistic and creative people can always be an interesting and challenging experience, the new "digital" opportunities have created a bit of a monster with some artists.
That monster is the apparent opportunity for many of them to re-create their paintings when reproducing them in digital form. Because the form is as accurate as it is and because there is a color correction phase that can involve manipulation of the image - there is a great temptation to play. I have heard things like - "I always wanted to go back and make that area of my painting lighter" or " I just want to add some more light green to that leaf - then it will be how I had hoped the painting would turn out". This process can also be costly and I know of very few artists prepared to pay the price - yet somehow feel they can demand it. It is time to return to a more sane view of digital reproductions! They are still just a poor substitute for an original! A print is just a print regardless of the fact that you call it a "Giclee"!
Is there anything wrong with succumbing to the temptation to play? Well my opinion is two-fold. Firstly, if people liked your painting enough to want a reproduction -why are you messing with that? Secondly, if you want to create a "product" that does not represent your original, then name it something else and don't sell it as a print of the original!
Certainly the reproduction process is not perfect and I still believe that the best reproduction can never match an original, although to many people's eye it will look almost identical. Therefore when we make a reproduction, we are already saying to people that this is a copy of my painting only and it represents it - not duplicates it!
So to mess with it and create a whole new product is another thing entirely! As always - I would love to hear from you!
"Tuscany" image courtesy of my talented wife! See more of her work at www.dailytrekinart.blogspot.com.
