This variation of the process starts with an ordinary print. Cover this with
a transparent layer (glass, acetate, mylar, whatever - for convenience I'll
call this the plastic layer) which will eventually form a negative. You will
then need some inks of various densities ranging from straight fully opaque
down to just short of water clear. The number of steps is up to you and your
goals. With some practice you can just start with the black and dilute your
way as you go.
Paint on the plastic over the lightest portion of the print with the
blackest ink, the next lightest with the next blackest and so on. If done
perfectly (note the if) the print and plastic sandwich will look uniformly
black. Peel the plastic and voila you've got a handpainted negative.
You've got total artistic freedom and control over it. One big plus is
that it requires much lower levels of drawing skill to pull off. You can
combine this with whatever other cliche verre processes you wish.
If you have digital image manipulation available you can print your original
print at whatever levels of pixilization appeal. Even if you have no
intention of reprocucing the pixilization in the final result, pixilating
gives a good hint as to the density levels in the print for a guide.
If you are familiar with the work of the U.S. artist Chuck Close you may
recall that he did several paintings using pixilization. I don't know if he
did it strictly by eye or used some intermediate technology. He is certainly
good enough to have done it directly.
I have not done this myuself and I know no one who has. All I am claiming is
having read about it sometime in the past. However, the idea has always
intrigued me so if any of you try this experiment please report the results.
Please, no Shroud of Turin tie-ins.
E. Robkin
erobkin@uwcmail.uwc.edu