Ender100@aol.com
Date: 01/05/03-09:49:59 AM Z
I've had good luck mailing papers jags that are high enough resolution for
reproduction ... they come out great.
Mark Nelson
In a message dated 1/5/03 9:43:00 AM, cweese@earthlink.net writes:
> I think the trick here can be to recognize the difference in media. If an
> illustration in the paper would be desirable, supply the paper with a
> reproducible print/file. Hand them a delicate gum print (aside from the
> risk
> of damage) and they'll produce a terrible piece of mush, or more likely
> reproduce a work from another artist in another show. Give them a nice
> snappy b&w and it won't, of course, give an accurate portrayal of the
> delicate original print, but it just might be a good strong image that
> brings people into the show where they can be pleasantly surprised by the
> subtlety of the originals. When I have a show I (or the galleries) send out
> press releases with strong, snappy inkjet knockoffs from my Pd prints and
> I'm delighted when the papers put a murky repro of my picture across a
> third
> of the arts-news page.
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : 02/21/03-10:44:16 AM Z CST