Re: Woodburytype Printing -- why it changed the world?


jewelia (jewelia@erols.com)
Fri, 19 Feb 1999 11:32:54 -0800


Woodburytypes: a few quite notes:

1) my way of thinking of this process is to compare it with "catering
services" rather than graphic arts -- i mean it is sort of the "jello-mold"
of photo and printmaking.

2) Woodbury is hard to do -- because of the pressure you need to form the
metal mold (from lead)--doesn't seem it would be hard to do because lead
seems so soft--so print size was sort of limited--but i suppose it has to do
with all the pressure you need applied to a surface and those square inches
are sort of exponentially growing as you increase the size of the image. to
make an image of say 5x7 -- special, very expensive presses really had to be
built for it--so art in this case wasn't adapting technology but was still
leading it along--as far as i know--no one has done it in recent
times--again it seems the press to make the mold is the biggest
problem--although you might have to reinvent some of the process too--seems
the press shouldn't be that hard to come up with--not to own--but these days
there must be some heavy duty presses around that could be adapted? sort of
a potential collaboration with a research or industrial org? anybody up to
the challenge?

the quick process run down -- you squished the lead on top of a photo-image
made in gelatin relief--ie made as in carbon "one-shot (layer)
process"--more or less--not quite the same needs and technique you know--use
this to make the lead mold(s)--squish lead on top of it. the mold(s) were
then used to cast the final image in pigmented gelatin--a simple press was
used to assist in this--the image was thereby cast in intaglio--that is the
gelatin on the paper had more depth and stood up on the paper--had the deep
shadows --like those a lot of traditional carbon printers strive for--some
might say better? though--but the real motivation was commercial production
of "high quality" photo images like, i think, for the most part--as in the
best of carbon --now is this photography or printmaking? and why should that
matter anyway?

at the time--more so soon after its invention--i think it is somewhat true
that the distinctions suggested in the woodbury question between
photography, graphic arts & printing, and the other arts too--were not well
as "much of a concern" as they became later -- i think with the later modern
art notions of purity of form that influence our vision of history that
originated early in the 20th century---you know straight photography marched
into the scene at the same time other "pure" movements were going on in
printing and painting. i'm this and you're that began in earnest ~ the 30's
putting both pictorialism and photo-seccession on the back seat--giving
birth to the much later alternative road--the modern art that reached its
obsessive height a few decades ago? woodbury -- this really is a much
richer history than this summary will be --- was an attempt to "improve"
gravure (or, out-there, was it something else?). gravure had become the
"queen" of fine art reproduction (soon more) at the time --- the sort of
idea that gave photo birth in the first place -- that printer Neicpe who
couldn't draw so good and tried to make another way that Daguerre "stole
ideas" from (i am trying my best to provoke an interesting conversation).

think of what went on behind and at the same time as Camera Work --- these
"intruding painters" came along--stole photo--and turned it into a photo
seccession -- following the lead of the Secessionists in Europe (a bunch of
"egotistical" painters who came along and told the academy to "GTH")
Steiglitz (AS) came back from Europe and within a few years--well he told
everybody in photo, especially (but never limited himself to that art form)
to GTH? anyway, camera work was printed in gravure --that is the best part
as tipped in prints -- and at the same time a lot of other fine art
"reproduction" had been printed that way-- but of course gravure work at
about the time of camera work--AS had a lot to do with this--gravure became
no longer seen as, or just as, a reproduction medium of say platinum
prints--but as its own cow --i mean an original fine art medium. now the
"american" photo-seccesionists were the first "friends of photo-" they,
being trained in academies that painting was it-- rebelled against their
"masters" and took up photo as a fine art medium--what we had were people
already considered artists deciding to work in the medium of photo and the
question of photo as an art form was resolved--this is also for you
patriotic types out there -- one of the (maybe one of the few) major
contributions of american artists to the "world of art" and so AS brings
ideas that were sentered but not limited to germany in europe to NYC and
subsequently he takes them to another step --photo--which has major
influences on photo most everywhere? then of course we all know that he
told photo soon after to GTH--likely well derserved because what was
happening was a lot like this list sometimes (them bickering photo people
just wouldn't let him be king ya know--a machiavellian divine comedy where
everybody....but the history of art you know has always been a good row to
watch from the stands)

but the next problem: all these "D..." painters--now they're evil-- were
stealing our photo away -- and lots of photographers as well as other
artists--suffered from a major identity crisis because of all the rich
eruptions within that were changing the rules all the time (like before
during the Renaissance) and decided to fix things by joining the science and
industry of modernism which strived to put everything in its orderly place
through a rigid system of classification (i can hear somebody rumbling out
there!). not everybody went pure straight silver-gelatin--some artists
became closeted --so to speak practicing their rituals in the dark during
the dark ages of alt phot until what --the 70's--when alt photo (i think the
term "alternative" comes from that era). So no more woodbury's and gravures
and platinums and gums--not in the salons anyway--and in fact it was the end
of the camera club & salon as the academy took back the rule of
art --rockefeller built his own moma palace to replace the clubhouse--
saying see what happens when you let them others....

so--in the 70's--these old processes came back to relieve some of us of a
bad case of silver gelation eye-strain. i did my only work in gum, cyan,
and van dyke back then--because somebody --a friend in chemistry slipped me
some of what i needed to make work when i had no money for materials --100
sheets of ploycontrast was a whooping $10.00 --a whole days work at $1.60/hr
for my art classes--i took it up earnestly turning in very bad prints for
all my art classes i recall and my philosophy and math courses too--my work
wasn't so well received though and none of the work exists anymore.
anyway--i think it is correct that when "alternative" was termed--it meant
alternative to mainstream fine art photography which was and had been for 4
decades-- The Silver Gelatin.

now, today, of course--silver gelatin has suffered a lot of set backs--i
mean these color prints (bad archival qualities or no) have had their Days
of Cibachrome -- and now there is this E-Media thing going on top--if you
want to become a photo teacher these days and have much chance at all at a
full-time 5-year teaching career (your methods will quickly become
obsolete--but it may be your only hope) -- it may be wise to focus on
digital--some of these "photo workers" come no closer these days to a camera
or a scanner than ed weston does anymore. and the entire field of
photography is undergoing a huge identity crisis right now --again--does it
never end--, as is art in general, the world, and even some alt people are
incorporating this digital thing into their work and i'm all confused like
others on the list as to what alt photo is alt to now -- and i think its
kind of wonderful that now i can talk to well--some also very confused but
interesting painters and printmakers too--we sort of take turns feeding each
other cheerios and art seems a little less like church to me--that's-- and
all of this-- is sort of how i see the big picture anywho.

so here we have a picture said in words cause digital technology ain't quite
up to the pictures on a list yet -- so i could call this diatribe here of
mine just "a work of art" and like all artists putting their work up to
see -- look if you like or if you don't that's fine--use that delete
button-can't hurt anything more than my pride--but what does that matter
really--others might chose to join in or correct me -- i guarantee you i'm
wrong about most everything precise and others are bound to disagree with
some or all i said and -- my goodness crit this piece o'work-- but seems
okay to me -- sort of the idea of a conversation -- i'm sort of queazy about
it but a little used to being called goofey cause that's the story of my
life -- maybe what always supposed to happen? -- or you could just go off
and be the honorable "nut-case" who recreates the woodbury process at the
dawn of the 22nd century---

i sort of wonder if the equivalent alternative these days--i mean the
equivalent activity to the dynamics of say the photoseccesion--what coud be
called the alternative of our day--might be the alternative space, internet,
and desk top publishing sorts of artists who leave the publisher out--anyway
that's sort of the way i see the contribution of woodburytype printing --
waalah! jewelia margueritta cameroon

ps--david--i of course agree it would be an interesting conversation and we
could form our own group discussion about photogravure--however there are
actually others on the list who might be interested in joining in out there
or at least reading what we might say--so perhaps we might be all better if
we talked about it in the open so others who have any kind of interest have
easy access to what we say--so why don't we do it right here--we could title
the subject photogravure---that way anybody not interested in gravure can
just go "delete" --seems easy to me--however, on second thought seems some
resistance to discussing gravure on this list beyond those straightforward
questions like where do you get the gelatin tissue--so perhaps we could just
talk about under the heading woodburytype--i'd be interested in knowing if
you work this way--i think i recall your name on the list--what do you do by
way of tint--screen, rosin, or asphalt

i'm just a new girl on the list block and i want to get a specialized press
for this gravure thing i have goin' on eventually--i want to set up one of
these presses in my basement--look here: www.weijin.com.tw/



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Sat Nov 06 1999 - 10:06:52