Giclee: Allpconline Company Blog
Wednesday, February 13, 2008
Clarifications about the giclee process
We keep seeing an author (who posts on many social media sites) whose mission is to disparage giclee as a valid method of fine art reproduction. His attacks on the process come from different angles and stem from a misguided sense he is an expert both in the giclee technology as well as the marketing of art in general.
First, he states that many giclee printing companies falsely claim longevities of 75+ years for the product. His point is that giclee printing has not been around for that long, which means it is misleading to state such archival properties. My response is simple: first, there are independent labs that have tested giclee prints under intense UV radiation as well high humidity and heat. This is the same accelerated process used by scientists for decades. It is good enough for the governments of most civilized countries, including the US, but apparently not for him. I can personally testify, as I have been doing this for 20 years, that we have prints made then that are as brilliant as they were the first day they were made. In contrast, we have photo and offset prints that have completely faded.
Second, he proceeds to say that giclee is just a fancy term for an inkjet print, nothing more; just a marketing hype. My comment? A car is called a car, right? Just as a KIA or a Porsche. They are both called cars...mmm, I guess you see my point....
Third, he says that if buyers think that purchasing a giclee is an investment, they better forget about it. The "inkjet" print will never have any value or appreciation. This is the most ludicrous statement: it is not the object quality that commands value, but its desirabilty: demand and offer. Does anyone remember the artist who canned his own escrement in a limited edition and the cans sold for a lot of money? He wanted to make a statement and it sure worked. If Leonardo had made limited edition giclee prints and signed them, don't you think they would be highly sought after?
You will read a lot of different things about giclee, both on the positive as well as the negative side. One thing I agree on is that there are some companies out there claiming they produce archival prints but in fact use Chinese made papers and canvas and cheap bulk inks. These are not giclees but cheap inkjet prints. So, how do you know whom to trust? Hard to say, as even if there was a standard for giclee prints, it would be difficult for anyone to make sure that what they receive is truly the finest quality made product. We state what we use, both with inks and papers; stay away from companies who do not. An example? They will just say "matte canvas" or "textured watercolor paper", without telling who makes it.
There is a lot more about the subject but needless to say, making giclee prints has brought revenue to both artists and photographers. Well made prints sell: we have about 200 active clients who can testify to this. Ultimately it is your choice to take the plunge and try to market more than your original art, which, once is sold, will not make you any more money.
First, he states that many giclee printing companies falsely claim longevities of 75+ years for the product. His point is that giclee printing has not been around for that long, which means it is misleading to state such archival properties. My response is simple: first, there are independent labs that have tested giclee prints under intense UV radiation as well high humidity and heat. This is the same accelerated process used by scientists for decades. It is good enough for the governments of most civilized countries, including the US, but apparently not for him. I can personally testify, as I have been doing this for 20 years, that we have prints made then that are as brilliant as they were the first day they were made. In contrast, we have photo and offset prints that have completely faded.
Second, he proceeds to say that giclee is just a fancy term for an inkjet print, nothing more; just a marketing hype. My comment? A car is called a car, right? Just as a KIA or a Porsche. They are both called cars...mmm, I guess you see my point....
Third, he says that if buyers think that purchasing a giclee is an investment, they better forget about it. The "inkjet" print will never have any value or appreciation. This is the most ludicrous statement: it is not the object quality that commands value, but its desirabilty: demand and offer. Does anyone remember the artist who canned his own escrement in a limited edition and the cans sold for a lot of money? He wanted to make a statement and it sure worked. If Leonardo had made limited edition giclee prints and signed them, don't you think they would be highly sought after?
You will read a lot of different things about giclee, both on the positive as well as the negative side. One thing I agree on is that there are some companies out there claiming they produce archival prints but in fact use Chinese made papers and canvas and cheap bulk inks. These are not giclees but cheap inkjet prints. So, how do you know whom to trust? Hard to say, as even if there was a standard for giclee prints, it would be difficult for anyone to make sure that what they receive is truly the finest quality made product. We state what we use, both with inks and papers; stay away from companies who do not. An example? They will just say "matte canvas" or "textured watercolor paper", without telling who makes it.
There is a lot more about the subject but needless to say, making giclee prints has brought revenue to both artists and photographers. Well made prints sell: we have about 200 active clients who can testify to this. Ultimately it is your choice to take the plunge and try to market more than your original art, which, once is sold, will not make you any more money.
