Fine art print?

[haempe]

Thank you all for the input, gives me to think...

Cooperation between photographer and the printer is the idea I like most as a key to the term... will see, how to transfer this into practical work.

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

The intention of the difference between "fine art" vs. otherwise is lost on those who care little for the term, including those who simply use it as a marketing term.

 

[Roger Hicks]

The intention of the difference between "fine art" vs. otherwise is lost on those who care little for the term, including those who simply use it as a marketing term.

Dear Gabriel,

Indisputable. Not just "those who simply use it as a marketing term", either. Also those who imagine that 'fine art' is definable.

Cheers,

R.

 

[haempe]

The intention of the difference between "fine art" vs. otherwise is lost on those who care little for the term, including those who simply use it as a marketing term.

I care, that's why I asked... 😉

The intention is, what I'm looking for.

Or to be more precise, what expect the people, when using this term.

 

[DtheG]

Thank you all for the input, gives me to think...

Cooperation between photographer and the printer is the idea I like most as a key to the term... will see, how to transfer this into practical work.

Yes, if it is to mean something rather than anything marketing think will sell, then it must be much the same as with other types of artists' printmaking such as lithograph, screenprinting, engraving. If not done by the hand of the artist at every stage then at least the artist's eye should oversee everystage of the artisanal work.

 

[V-12]

i thought that fine art referred to the content of the image...?

This thread is about a fine art print, so presumably we have to assume the OP regards the content as meeting the criteria.

 

[icebear]

i thought that fine art referred to the content of the image...?

Just my $0.02:
Especially in "fine art" there is a huge emphasis on the technical aspects (exposure, printing, paper, limited edition, presentation etc.) that are not related to the actual content of the image.

A print of a seashell can this way easily sell for a couple tenthousands, if a collector wants to have that rare print, the content still is a seashell...

 

[FrankS]

But the value for the collector is in the rarity of the print rather than the content. I'm afraid the art world is FUBAR because of the profit motive. Just my opinion, sorry if it offends anyone.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Just my $0.02:
Especially in "fine art" there is a huge emphasis on the technical aspects (exposure, printing, paper, limited edition, presentation etc.) that are not related to the actual content of the image.

A print of a seashell can this way easily sell for a couple tenthousands, if a collector wants to have that rare print, the content still is a seashell...

But possibly beautifully lit and exquisitely composed. These are not 'technical aspects': content is not the same as subject matter.

Cheers,

R.