A Question About Curwen Studio
We received an emailed invitation this morning from the Curwen Studio to visit their stand at the Cambridgeshire Art Fair in June, and I was prompted to visit their website. After spending a quarter of an hour browsing around the site I couldn’t figure out what these people make. Their terminology is so garbled (intentionally so, it seems) that it’s difficult to discern exactly what they’re up to. Do they make hand-pulled fine-art prints? Do they make reproductions? Do they make both? Could anybody clear this up for me?
Here’s the link to their site: http://www.thecurwenstudio.co.uk/. If you follow up the links in the “Buy Prints” section at the lower right of the homepage I think you will see what I mean by “garbled terminology.” Here’s their text introducing their “Limited Edition Original Prints A-G:
Many people think this might sound like a contradiction – original print. It is important to understand that the artist selects a medium to create their artwork, whether it is a choice of paints (oils, water colours etc.) or a choice of print medium (lithograph, etching etc.) – each offers a different result.
What you should know is that the artist having made the choice then hand draws the image from which we print – a different drawing for each colour, making use of overlap of colours to create additional colours if so desired – it depends on the artist and how they like to work. This means that the print is the original, as it doesn’t exist in any other form. All materials from which we have made the print are destroyed on completion ensuring that it can’t be reprinted. The fact that there are a number of images in the edition doesn’t mean that there is any less originality in the image, also being hand printed there will be natural differences in each copy.
The artist is in full control of the printmaking process, selecting the paper on which we print and the colour of the inks used, hand mixed to their exact choice. All the materials used in making these prints are archival, ensuring that they will not fade over the years.
That mention of “oils, water colours etc.” makes me nervous if we’re talking about fine-art prints, which is what we’re talking about, if I’m not mistaken. This issue of just what they do and precisely what they call it would not be so critical if Curwen were not such a big and supposedly prestigious operator. Last year they celebrated their 50th anniversary with a display at the Tate Britain.
So, I admit I’m perplexed. Can anyone put me straight?
You are getting paranoid in your old age Mike!
- their whole operation is based around lithography, both traditional stone, and more modern plate material on a flatbed press and using offset lithography working from a more modern press style with a flexible plate.
they do make prints based on originals, but from the sounds of it they warp them enough in the processing that they aren’t blatant offset repros.
Nothing sinister here, move along now….
Check out their model press – how cool is that?
andy macdougall
June 16, 2009 at 4:37 am
Hi Andy,
Nobody ever accused me of not being paranoid! Nonetheless, the Curwen operation smells fishy to me–and I’m not the only one.
Perhaps it’s just a case of not understanding their printing procedures. I would like to see them explained better. There seems to be a of of mumbo jumbo in their website text, and it’s not clear to me if it’s just bad writing or deliberate obfuscation.
As for “warp them enough in the processing that they aren’t blatant offset repros,” what is that supposed to mean? Just enough manipulation to slip them through the definition filters?
Re: “cool model presses…” People who sell reproductions as fine-art prints always place a great deal of emphasis on their technology–which is, in fact, irrelevant, though it does manage to dupe some ingenuous types.
Mike Booth
June 16, 2009 at 5:25 am
hi andy
The problem with the text of Curwen is that, they are trying to say that just as we make a choice of medium to make an unprinted artwork, deciding whether watercolour, oil paint or drawing would be appropriate to achieve the idea, in the world of printmaking there are many choices of print process which have innate characteristics you can use to enhance your idea (i.e. linocut, etching,lithograph) or is just plan easier to use to achieve the idea.
unfortunately the curwen do more reproductions than real original prints just to survive but i do not see this as a good excuse, as copies of any existing artwork without taking the image further is not an original print; as it needs to be an idea conceived through the medium,we now have inkjet prints taking the roll of art reproduction media which is confusing enough for the general public as to what is and what isn’t an original work of art without splitting hairs to give a reproductions elevated status. I have found that most of the printers of curwen do not know how to make a stone litho print and any body that has done photolithography will know how easy it is to make a plate from reproduction film. the message is confused because they have been bending the classification of prints to suit their needs.
i think i am at risk here of becoming as garbled as their web site. Even as a printmaker i find the explanations difficult to follow and i know what they are trying to say because i already know how to do it.
at least they do original prints from time to time.
james
james hill
September 28, 2009 at 9:53 pm
I think James Is pretty off the mark with most things he talks about, It’s a case of someone who thinks he knows everything and he really should open his mind a little.
john wert
July 22, 2011 at 10:53 am
Dear John Wert:
I let your insults pass through our indecency so I could reply to them. I’m curious to know who you are and what makes you think you can insult people gratuitously here on Print Workshop Central. Or do you think your louche comments about James Hill add anything to the discourse? I would suggest it says more about you than it does about him. In short, please remember your manners. As for Curwen, I’m still not comfortable with the way apparently careless way they mix reproductions and original work. I would like to see that distinction more clearly drawn on their site. Maybe that’s just the compulsive in me.
Regards,
Mike Booth
Mike Booth
July 22, 2011 at 11:17 am
Where to start – firstly I apologise for not joining in this debate sooner.
I am sorry that the content of our website seems to confuse, it is certainly not intentional – we are just trying to explain in terminology that people from all walks of life can understand – the vaguries of the print world whether original or reproduction are difficult enough to comprehend.
We do not try to hide the fact that some of the work we sell or print, for our customers are reproductions, we offer a service for any artist and if they want to make a reproduction of their existing work, why not. I am a little confused about the term used above ‘warping’, this is something done in photoshop or the like. In the case of reproductions, we print as closlely as possible to the original work, but by its very nature the two will never be the same as they are formed from different media. We aim for an image that works in its own right as a lithograph of an existing work.
To answer James Hill’s misconceptions, we print more original prints than reproductions and all of our printmakers, past and present, know how to use all the lithographic processes. I have no idea how James has come by this misreprentation of our business.
We do our level best to provide our customers with the best possible explanation of the processes and prints that we sell, but when trying to cover all bases, it is not possible to please everyone all of the time.
Just in case I have misunderstood the comment above about photo polymer plates, these can be used for original printimaking as well as reproductions. For original printmaking the artist hand draws their separations for each colour in the same way that another artist might cut a lino block for each colour, building up the image in layers – it is not at all photographic and contains no trace of a dot screen. Perhaps, if you are confused you should visit the studio so that you know what you are talking about, all visitors welcome.
Jenny
Jenny Roland
September 15, 2010 at 3:49 pm