Back when our gallery had a frame shop, the only option to reduce reflection on artworks that needed glazing was to ask for Non-Glare glass. Although this was a poor solution, it was the only solution at the time. Non-Glare glass had one side sandblasted so any reflected light would be dispersed, making the reflection look like a blob of light on the surface of the glass rather than returning a harsh reflection. We refused to use this glass because to actually see the artwork properly. You had to place the glass directly on the artwork, otherwise it would appear like you were looking at it through fog, and it is never a good idea to have glass sitting directly on an artwork in a frame assembly. (1.) So to understand what products are available today and how they work, and sometimes don’t, following are some reflections on the problem of reflections as they relate to glazed artworks.
Today, the best way to handle the problem of reflection is to use a glazing material onto which an AR (anti-reflective) coating has been applied. This is a similar coating that is now used on eye glass lenses that allows you to actually see a person’s eyes and it all but eliminates glare from oncoming car headlights at night.
The AR coating is designed to disrupt the energy contained in light waves causing them to flow out of sync. Under most conditions, AR glass helps reduce reflections to the point that they are not much of a problem, but it does not eliminate all reflection issues. From my personal experience, the coating’s effectiveness is related to how well lit the artwork is and the direction of the light source.
This became evident to me when a client said she had a problem with reflection on an artwork in her living room. I suggested using AR coated glass thinking that that would most likely solve her reflection problem. I had the glass switched out and she called to let me know that the glass was still acting like a mirror. When I arrived to see what the problem might be, I discovered that, to my surprise, the artwork’s AR coated glass presented the exact same problem with reflection that the uncoated glass did. I noticed the room where the artwork was hanging and the dining room, across from the artwork, were both kept dark. At the opposite end of the dining room was a large picture window that was allowing a lot of light into the dining room. There was a door between the kitchen and the dining room she frequently used and as she walked through the two dark rooms, all she saw when she looked at the artwork was the reflection of the picture window at the far end of the dining room. I suggested that we turn on a lamp next to the artwork and discovered that the reflection issue was greatly reduced.
The takeaway of this story is that if an artwork has AR glazing and is well lit compared to its surrounding area, most reflection sources will be minimized and may not be noticed at all, especially if a viewer is focused on the artwork itself and not on the reflection source. In fact, I have often looked at artworks that have AR glazing and wondered why they weren’t glazed, only to discover on close examination that they were. If an artwork is underlit compared to its surrounding area and there is a lot of reflection, don’t be disappointed, it is just how the AR coating works. The solution is to either put more light on the artwork or reduce the amount of light in the surrounding area compared to what is already on the artwork.
Overhead lighting also helps to reduce reflections compared to lighting with lamps that are at the same height as the viewer. If you are standing beside an AR glazed artwork and there is a lamp on the opposite side of the artwork at the same angle and distance away from the artwork you are, you will see the lamp reflected in its glazing. With overhead lighting, the viewer would have to be looking up from the floor to see the reflection of the light above. AR glazing does have its limitations, but considering its old alternative, Non-Glare, it is a panacea.
As I mentioned in our last blogpost, When to use UV control glazing, the folks at Tru Vue have a good helpdesk and their technical department can answer most any glazing related framing or installation question. Their help desk number is 708-854-2700 and their email is firstname.lastname@example.org.
I know of no circumstance where it is good for a glazing material to be in contact with an artwork on paper. If there is no other framing choice than to have the glazing material in contact with the artwork, it is better to use Plexiglas rather than glass. Quick changes in temperature and humidity can cause glass to fog over, even on the inside of a frame assembly. If this happens with a work on paper, especially if the glass is in contact with the artwork, the paper can absorb the moisture creating a perfect environment for mold to grow, the paper to be stained, pigments to react adversely, or wrinkling; none of which are going to be good for the artwork.
Have you ever had a framer tell you that you can protect a work on paper from fading just by putting UV (Ultraviolet) protective glass or Plexiglas on the artwork? Even though your framer is normally the one that suggests when to use UV control glazing, what they tell you may be truthful without being accurate regarding its effectiveness in your situation. So, here are some suggestions on when to use uv control glazing to prevent artwork fading.
What your framer should have said is that depending on where a work on paper is hung, UV protective glass and Plexiglass can help protect it from fading. Ultraviolet light is the most damaging part of the light spectrum to fugitive pigments on paper and other materials that are prone to fading, like fabrics and furniture. High end UV protective glazing material is rated to block up to 99% of the Ultraviolet rays hitting an artwork’s surface. Just remember that UV may be the worst part of the spectrum, but it is only a small part of the spectrum that can cause damage. A greater issue is the overall amount of visible light that is hitting the artwork and the amount of time it is getting hit. Think of it as slow or fast fading.
• Little light over an extended period of time = slow fading
• A lot of light over a short time = fast fading
If a work on paper was to be hung in a lightless closet, with properly controlled temperature and humidity that is never opened, it does not matter if it has UV protective glazing or not as it will not fade, at least not from light exposure.
If a work on paper is hung in a bright living room with big curtain-less picture windows looking out over a lake that reflects light into the room, even with UV glazing and protective windows the artwork will fade over time and the paper will darken. In the trade, when referring to the darkening of paper by excessive light, an art dealer would say that the artwork has been “light struck.”
For most light sensitive materials, light damage is cumulative and irreversible. So, what are the best ways of minimizing the effects of light damage to an artwork on paper?
Museums have different regiments they follow regarding the amount of light exposure each work on paper can have. Each work is normally evaluated to determine how sensitive it is. It is then assigned an allowable exposure schedule, amount of time it can be on view, and a maximum allowable light level for the duration of that time. For example, a sturdy work might be allowed to be on exhibit for 4 months at a specific light level and then rest for two years, or for 6 months at that light level and rest for three years. A more fragile work may require lower light and less time on view.
Don’t Panic! The Museum protocol I have just described is designed to meet the museum’s charge to protect what they have collected or are exhibiting. Your clients want something they can hang on the wall and enjoy for the next 20 years. So, to accomplish this goal I suggest the following:
• For works on paper that you or your client consider valuable and want to last as long as possible, definitely use UV protective glazing as it greatly reduces the most damaging aspect of the light spectrum.
• Hang in rooms with minimal light during the day like hallways or bedrooms that are not in continuous use and are normally kept dark.
• Keep lights off when rooms are not in use.
• If an artwork is hung in a room that has windows that allow a lot of light into the room during the day, add blackout curtains to the window that can be closed when no one is using the room. Codes for new buildings in most areas require that windows block a lot of the light coming in for reasons of energy conservation. This can greatly extend the life of curtains, rugs, and furniture as well as the art by reducing the amount and intensity of light entering a room and therefore slow fading.
• Have blackout fabric covers made for the artwork in rooms that window curtains are not an option or skylights let light in that cannot be blocked. They can incorporate a weighted rod at the top that can be draped over the top of the frame with the fabric hanging over the front of the artwork. This will allow quick access to works when you want to view them and they can remain hung indefinably without overexposure to light.
• Keep these works out of often used bedroom bathrooms and kitchens. These rooms often are subject to high humidity and temperatures, and other issues with that I will address in a future post. They are also rooms that would normally be well lit and where you would not normally want artwork that needs protective covers to keep them from fading.
• Place UV tube covers over your fluorescent lights. Of the three main light sources in homes and offices used today – Fluorescent, Incandescent, and LED – Florescent light, for the same amount of lumens output, is the most damaging because it produces the most UV light.
• If LED lights are producing the same number of lumens as your incandescent bulbs do, they are causing an equal level of fading to your works on paper.
One of the main manufacturers of conservation-grade UV protection glazing is Tru Vue. They have an excellent highly informed and well-educated customer support staff. If you need clarification, again no pun intended, as to whether UV protective glass and Plexi will work in a specific application, give them a call.
Tru Vue help line: Phone: 708-854-2700
Note: Not that it is my field but I was informed by the folks at Tru Vue that one of the most frequent calls they get is from signature collectors who have used their products and have had their valuable signatures fade from being out on display in rooms that have too much light. Their glass was doing what it was supposed to but many framers are often not aware that UV glass alone will not stop fading, it only helps to slow it down. The recommendations I have made above should help with this issue. Another interesting thing they said is that often, ink signatures seem to fade very quickly to a certain point and then the fading process seems to slow. So the maximum amount of damage happens in the earliest part of their exposure.
One of the most common questions asked by new clients when they purchase a find print from me is “What does that fraction mean on a fine print?” They are referring to the fraction, often written in pencil, most commonly found at the lower-left bottom edge of the image or platemark. I have written three short essays to hopefully bring a little clarity to the subject. I have also provided a link to a glossary of terms related to the editioning of fine prints.
An overview of the things that you may find helpful to know regarding the modern editioning for fine prints and what the fraction, found in the margin under the image, actually refers to.
Part 2 :
A short case study regarding the editioning of a series of old master prints by Albrecht Dürer (German, 1471 – 1528) called the Apocalypse.
An overview of what I found when I was trying to determine what fine print publisher or which artist was the first to use a fraction to describe the print number and the edition size that is now the universal format. I cannot say I found the first, but I did find an 1895 reference point that will be a benchmark to beat in the future.
A link to a glossary of terms related to types of proofs and related nomenclature. You are welcome to download this Word file and keep it as a reference.
Note: In conveying the information below, you will see that I have qualified almost every example I have used related to editions or a fraction’s numerator and denominator. This is because in every case described below, in the 40+ years I have been dealing with fine prints I have personally run across exceptions, but they are rare.
Part 1: Numbering and Edition Overview:
After a number of prints have been produced by or for an artist, it is a standard practice to use a fraction to identify both an individual print and the number of like prints the artist has declared that will then constitute an “edition.” With few exceptions, this fraction is written in pencil beneath a print’s image at the lower left or lower center margin by either the artist or the publisher. There are several misconceptions as to what the numerator and denominator of this fraction mean related to the edition of fine prints and I hope the following information is helpful when looking for fine prints for your clients.
Because written definitions of what the numerator represents are often imprecise and ambiguous, they can easily lead someone to erroneously believe that the numerator indicates the sequence in which the prints of that edition were printed. (i.e. if the fraction written on an etching is 5/25, this would indicate that this print was the 5th print pulled off the plate in a total edition of 25.) In truth, this number does not relate to the print’s printing sequence but is only a cataloguing device, a way of identifying print 1 from print 2, etc. The odds of this print being the 5th one pulled from the plate is, for various reasons, more than 1 in 25.
It is most often the case that the earliest prints off a plate, stone, or block, depending on the technique used, are often considered by collectors and curators to be better and therefore more desirable impressions than those printed later. This is due to the wear and tear on the matrix from repetitive printing. What is almost in all cases not true is that the numerator of the fraction can tell you if a print was an early impression or not; only its superior quality compared to other impressions of the same print can do that.
The Denominator of the fraction relates to the total size of the artist’s declared edition of like prints. The term “like” prints is important here as it means that the only thing that is different about each print when the edition is finalized is the numerator of the fraction. Everything else, the paper type and size, the inking of the matrix, and the way it is numbered and signed are all the same. It is important to remember that the denominator just indicates the size of the allowable edition, it in no way substantiates that editioning was completed after its size was declared. It is often only the print documentation from the press that produced it, the artists print log, or a well-researched catalogue raisonné that can enlighten one as to how many prints were actually printed of an edition.
It was popular, in the case of well-known artists like Joan Miró, to have their press print multiple editions from the same plate or stone. For instance, Miró would sometimes authorize a second edition on a different type of paper. So, you might see a print by Miró on Arches paper in an edition of 250 in one place and the same print on Japan paper in an edition of 100 somewhere else. Miró would sometimes authorize a special small edition of a print to be published that was in every way like another edition except that instead of numbering the edition in Arabic Numerals, it would instead be numbered with Roman Numerals. The takeaway here is that there may be more than one edition of a print. This usually does not occur unless the artist’s market is big enough to absorb multiple editions.
With most any known declared edition, there are additional like prints called “prints outside of the edition.” Conventionally, beyond the edition defined by the denominator, a certain number of prints will be printed that will be designated as Artist Proofs. They are like the edition in most every way except rather than being numbered with a fraction, the letters “A.P.,” (épreuve d’artiste in French) or a variation thereof, are written instead. The number of A.P.’s varies with how many the artist wants to have printed but it is rare that they exceed more than 10% of the total edition size of like prints.
Again, in the case of Miró and other printmakers who were well known in the latter part of the last century, another type of print designation was used initially in Europe to boost the number of prints outside of an edition. On occasion you will see prints, instead of being inscribed A.P., inscribed “H.C.,” (Hors de Commerce) or a variant, that means amusingly “not for sale.” Prints with this designation can be found occasionally on the market but they were originally intended to be gifted and not sold commercially.
There are other print edition designations that I will not go into here as the chances of running into them while looking for art for your clients is unlikely. Below is a quick history of editions as they relate to old master prints and to the earliest usages of the fraction to indicate edition size. If you find that you have a question about something on a print that you don’t understand, send us an email with an image and we will get right back to you.
Part 2: Old Master Prints:
Albrecht Dürer (German, 1471 – 1528) was one of the world’s most famous and important printmakers. He produced a series of fifteen large woodblock prints based on, and called, Apocalipsis cum Figuris, known today as the Apocalypse. Outside of proofs printed to test the image and those that were printed to sell or gift, in 1498 the fifteen prints that made up the series were printed with text, some in Latin and some in German on the verso of each image, and bound. Prints that appear on the market today from this edition of books are described as “from the 1498 edition.” This series brought Dürer great fame and notoriety. Because of the popularity of the series, it can be assumed that he continued to print individual proofs from the blocks until he published another bound edition of the Apocalypse in 1511. After that series, where individual prints are now known as “from the 1511 edition,” the woodblocks were printed as the market demanded until they had worn down to the point that they could no longer produce acceptable prints.
Before Dürer’s time and well into the 19th century, the number of prints off a plate, stone, or wooden block was determined by either demand or the condition of the matrix used that allowed acceptable prints to be created. Today, we would call that an “open edition” because the edition size was not declared by the artist. In the case of Dürer’s Apocalypse, there are two actual editions from the same woodblock of each of the 15 Apocalypse prints and many prints outside of a known edition. When dealing with old master and 19th century prints, date of printing, quality of impression, condition, and notoriety of the image are directly related to the print’s value. In the case of these specific Dürer images, as well as many other old master prints, editions and other proofs can often be dated by the paper it was printed on and the watermark it may bear.
Part 3: When the Numbering of Fine Prints Became Popular…
Most likely inspired by the rare book trade, consensus leans toward the idea that it was the fine print publishers in 1890’s France that started numbering the prints of the editions they published. One of the best known and most important printmakers during that time in Paris was Toulouse Lautrec who was a prodigiously active Lithographer from 1891 to 1900. By using the catalogue raisonné Toulouse-Lautrec: The Complete Prints by Wolfgang Wittrock as a reference, a window is opened into the innovations and practices regarding print numbering and editioning during this period. Here are my takeaways:
• Lautrec signed a small number of his prints but although many of his prints are numbered, it is believed that he did not do this himself; they were most likely numbered by the publisher. In many cases, just under half or just over half of the prints were numbered. The number system most often looked like “No: X” and written in pen or pencil. In some cases, stamps were used to number the prints. It is not clear why only half of an edition was numbered as it creates a very ineffective inventory system. *1
• The states (prints that show developmental changes) and edition sizes of most of Lautrec’s prints are known but the edition size was rarely indicated on an individual print. In reviewing all the print entries in Wittrock’s book, there are only five times that a fraction was used to indicate both the prints assigned number and the number of prints in the edition. The first time a fraction was used on a Lautrec print was 1895 on half of the Pan French Edition of 100 prints of Mademoiselle Marcelle Lender, en buste, (Wittrock 99.)
*1 – Today, fine art presses will often publish artists’ prints by offering them studio space, possibly room and board while they are working, and then printing an edition of what the artist produces in exchange for a percentage of the edition. This way a press will have an inventory of prints by artists they respect, and the artist keeps the rest of the edition. It is known that most all of Lautrec’s prints were sponsored by the publisher and very few print editions were paid for by him. This may account for the fact that often, only about half of his prints’ editions were numbered by the press.
Part 4: A Glossary of Terms Related to Types of Proofs and Related Nomenclature
Back in 1989, a colleague named Frederick McElroy, who had a masters in printmaking, and I decided that we would create an exhibition that focused on both the connoisseurship and technical aspects of Intaglio printmaking. One of the dealers we work with in Austin Texas who owns Flatbed Press suggested that this glossary would be a good addendum to the article above.
You are welcome to download the glossary as a word file by clicking Here. You are welcome to print yourself a copy for reference if you like but if you quote any of these entries in a publication, please credit Fredrick W. McElroy and cite the exhibition catalog Connoisseurship and the Intaglio Print, 1989.
I want my presentations to look like they were pulled from the pages of a design magazine.
The fastest way to present an artwork from the FAE website is to place the FAE Live View target on the wall where an artwork is desired, select the artwork to be presented from ArtTracker (FAE’s favorites list), and then use the FAE Mobile App to show your client, using augmented reality, how the artwork fits the space. The App will allow you to capture the View, upload it and assign it to a Project in My Views and/or email it to another party.
Although the Mobile App is the quickest way to show an artwork in your client’s space, if they prefer to see presentations that look like they were torn from a design magazine, it is much better to use FAE’s Desktop App.
To create a View with the desktop app, you will need to place a Rooms target on the wall where an artwork is needed as you did with the Live View Target described above. Then, following FAE’s suggestions “For Best Results,” located on the second page of the Rooms target printout, photograph the room from multiple angles so the Rooms target is visible in each image. The images can be uploaded to FAE through the Mobile App or from the file up-loader in My Rooms, depending on what device was used to capture the images.
Once the Images are uploaded to My Rooms and you have added the artworks you want to see into your ArtTracker, you can now easily create a magazine quality presentation View to show how the artwork will look in the room.
View creation is discussed in detail in the blog post Anatomy of a View and there is also a three minute video available that introduces the basics of process. To make the View presentation as elegant as possible FAE provides a thoughtful selection of tools that make the View edit process creative and fun. The FAE View creation tool box allows you to:
Place a rudimentary frame around the artwork image and select its color from the FAE color palette.
Balance the lighting between the artwork that was photographed under controlled lighting and the Room that most likely wasn’t.
Drag and drop the artwork image to a different location on the wall and then drag and drop the artwork’s corners to adjust its perspective to suit its new location. Keep in mind that the proportional height and width of the artwork is only correct when it is centered over the target’s original placement in the Room photo.
Name and assign the View you are creating to a Project.
After each View is created, it appears in My Views:
The View can then be emailed, printed out, or cut and pasted into a power Point Presentation. All the Views can be filtered by Project and reviewed by clicking on the stack icon under one of the View thumbnails.
A PowerPoint can be saved as a PDF if it is to be emailed or shown on a phone, tablet or desktop to your client, or it can be saved as a PowerPoint file so it can be displayed for a group presentation. Below is an example of a Power Point presentation showing several layout examples.
It is fairly easy to differentiate between how a fine print, a limited edition print, and a giclée print are produced. What is difficult, in today’s art world, is to make a call as to which should be more valued and why.
So, instead of making outright pronouncements, I will suggest some, as was explained in the Pirates of the Caribbean, “guidelines” to use in thinking about issues of intrinsic value as they relate.
In the creation of a Fine Print, depending on the medium, an artist works on a metal plate, stone, woodblock, cuts a stencil or alters some other material to create a matrix (design). When ink or other pigmented material is applied in, onto, or through the matrix and then the image is mechanically transferred to a piece of, in most cases paper, a fine print is produced. In a fine print, the paper with the transferred image is the artwork, not an exacting copy or reproduction of something else. I certainly include photography as a fine print medium as it is historically produced through a captured matrix and manipulated to the artist’s specifications through the printing process.
The classic categories of print processes used to create fine prints are:
Historically, these were the processes by which artists were able to provide original works of art in a more democratic and less expensive manner to a larger audience than with paintings or drawings. Because each matrix is inked and mechanically printed by hand, one at a time, each print is unique. The artist may decide to produce one unique proof from the matrix or as many prints as the matrix allows. Fine Prints have always been of interest to collectors. If an artist becomes better known over time and their art appreciates because of collector interest, chances are their fine prints will follow suit.
Limited Edition Prints
From the 1960’s and well into the 1990’s artists discovered that they could produce a painting, watercolor, or drawing, and have it reproduced by an offset four-color printing press in large numbers to whatever size the press was capable of. Most of the editions created this way were large because of the initial set up costs but the price per print came down with every print produced. Editions were sometimes as low as 500 but most were between 1000 and 2000. An edition of 2000 would cost the artist around $2.00 a print. If they wholesaled a print at $10.00 to $20.00 dollars to a frame shop and the frame shop sold it to a client for between $40 and $100 and frame it for $150, they would walk away with a tidy profit. The artist would often sign and number each print to generate perceived value.
Most successful artists, those represented by higher end art galleries and having works acquired by museums, did not produce four-color offset limited edition reproductions of their artwork, but this type of print did provided a good income and exposure for many talented artists who did not achieve critical success with their original art. Other than the value of enjoying an image you like on the wall, the resale market for limited edition prints of this type is most likely through garage and estate sales, or eBay, and their selling price will rarely exceed their original purchase price.
As printing technology moved on, in the 1990’s, the ink jet printer attached to a computer provided a new way that artists could produce limited edition prints. The term Giclée was coined for high quality ink jet prints by Jack Duganne. Duganne worked for Graham Nash, of Crosby, Stills, and Nash fame, and Mac Holbert, the band’s road manager, who together started the fine art printing business, Nash Editions, LTD in Nash’s Manhattan Beach, California carriage house.
The term stuck and today, although technology has improved the giclée inkjet print to an exceptionally high level of fidelity and color quality, it is still used by many artists to make very high quality reproductive limited edition prints. Because of these attributes some artists, especially photographers, are now using inkjet printers exclusively to print their editions. Since these artists consider their inkjet prints to be the finished work of art, to distinguish their artworks from a giclée reproductions, some are calling their artworks’ medium “archival pigment prints.”
In inkjet printing, a specific black or colored ink is blown onto the surface of a piece of paper in small droplets. Their number and juxtaposition to other colored ink droplets determine the final color of each pixel that makes up an image. Because of the incredibly small size of each pigment dot, there is no determinable dot pattern that is the hallmark of offset four-color printing.
Although individual inkjet prints are more expensive to produce in large editions than on a four-color offset press, they have many advantages:
Inkjet color printers can work with as little as three ink colors but high-end printers can incorporate many more colored inks that allow more nuanced color and a thicker pigment density than four-color offset printing.
Higher quality papers can be used in inkjet printing than in four-color offset.
Because they are printed slowly one at a time, after they are proofed and ready to edition, inkjet prints are much cheaper to produce in a small edition. An edition of 2,000 might take an hour on a high speed four-color press but an edition of 1000 inkjet prints of the same size would take days on a high-end inkjet printer.
For me personally, artwork in its conceived state has intrinsic value. When an artwork’s medium is changed so it can be duplicated in large numbers for reasons of commerce, I am less interested in the copy, no matter how beautiful it may be in its reproduced state. Limited edition prints and reproductive giclée’s are certainly a blessing for those who cannot afford original art or are not interested in an artwork’s material or aesthetic aspects. They allow one to enjoy an image and fill a space where an artwork is needed. I have no doubt that there are many who would receive as much pleasure from a reproduction as I would get from an original.
I will caution anyone who buys a reproductive giclée or limited edition print thinking that it will turn out to be a good long term financial investment. The odds of this happening are not in their favor. Purchase only because you like the work or it fits your purpose at the time. The true investment in art is the privilege of living with it.
Everything You Ever Wanted to Know About Creating a View…
Simply Put, FAE describes a “View” as: An image of a room that incorporates an FAE target, over which an artwork image from ArtTracker, FAE’s favorites list, appears in proper scale and perspective.
As discussed in the previous blog post, Will It Work In My Space, the FAE iOS iPhone and iPad App using Augmented Reality technology can efficiently help determine if an artwork from the FAE website will physically and visually fit into a client’s space. This, along with its ability to be shared and saved in My Views makes it a powerful tool. However, the View that is created directly in the Mobile App will not be editable.
Although FAE’s Mobile App has the ability to wow, it is FAE’s Desktop App that sets us apart from any other fine art sourcing website. Instead of using the Mobile App’s Live View Target, the Desktop App’s Rooms Target is different. Also, unlike the Mobile App that merges the artwork and room images within the iOS device before it is automatically uploaded to My Views on the FAE website, the Desktop version uploads a room image that incorporates a Rooms Target to My Rooms on the website where they can then be merged to create editable Views.
After you have uploaded the room images to My Rooms, they are available for use in creating Views using the View creation page. From there, you are able to drop artwork images from ArtTracker, that automatically maintain their appropriate scale and perspective, over the target in any chosen room.
Once you have decided on an appropriate artwork for a chosen room, you will not only be able to drag the artwork off the Rooms target and drop it anywhere in the image, you will also be able to drag and drop each corner of the artwork separately to manually adjust its perspective to where it has been moved. The site also provides editing tools that enable you to add and change the color of a rudimentary frame, adjust the brightness of both the artwork and the Room, and create and/or attach the View to a Project/s.
The View you have created can be saved and emailed to a client or used to make stunning presentations which will be the subject of a future post.
In addition to a short video on how the Desktop App can help you show your clients exactly what an artwork from the FAE website will look like when it is installed on their wall, without incurring the associated expenses of trying the artwork out in person, below we have provided a detailed overview of the Edit View Page and how it works.
The Edit View page is divided into four sections:
1. View creation screen
2. The View edit and Project assignment console
3. View naming and command buttons
4. Project filtered film strips of Artworks and Rooms
No 1. The View Creation Screen
This is where images from My Rooms and artwork images from ArtTracker are merged. When an artwork and a room image are selected, the artwork image will appear over the target in the room image with a black frame around it and round anchors on each corner.
The anchors can be removed using the Anchor button on the icon bar at the top of the View Edit console.
An artwork image can be dragged and dropped anywhere on the View Edit screen. (demonstrated in upper right image)
By grabbing an anchor on a corner of any artwork image or the corner of the image itself if the anchors are turned off, it can be dragged and dropped to manually adjust the artworks perspective in relation to the wall it is on if needed. (demonstrated in upper right image)
No 2. The View Edit and Project Assignment Console
This is where the artwork adjustments are made:
• The icon bar
A. Shows center of target through artwork image on/off button
B. Corner anchor off/on button
C. Removes the frame around image button off/on
D. Return console to default state
• Add a New Project Button
• Available Projects to assign or remove from this View.
No 3. View naming and command buttons
• Preview button will show a large image of the view that is being edited in a pop-up window
• White text box to name the View (Mandatory before save)
• Save this View button
• Return to My Views button will return user to the My Views page
• Create Another View will allow a user to create a new view after saving without returning to the My Views page first.
No 4. Project filtered film strips of Artworks from ArtTracker and Rooms from My Rooms
(User must first choose a room before artworks are available)
• ArtTracker film strip with all available images. Can be filtered by Project like in example above.
• My Rooms film strip with all available rooms. Can be filtered by Project like in example above.
After a View is saved, it can be found in My Views. Each newly created View thumbnail will look similar to the one below. You can add or remove the view from Projects by clicking on the file folder icon or email the view using the letter icon. Although artworks can be shared in many ways, for privacy reasons, Views can only be emailed.
By using augmented reality technology, the FAE iOS App makes it easy for you to answer that question:
There are many ways to determine if an artwork will physically and visually fit a specific space in a home or office. After determining if the work will physically fit the space by measuring, and for those who are more visual cutting out cardboard to size, the best way to determine if it will visually fit is to try it. This method often takes a lot of time and money. It may involve approval paperwork, shipping and installation expenses, and any additional steps to return the artwork after finding out that it does not suit you.
Knowing these issues and what it takes to physically try an artwork, FAE has developed an iOS app with tools that allow you to see an artwork from the FAE website virtually in your space, without cost.
3. Place the target on the wall where you want to see the artwork.
4. Open the FAE App and Sign In to your FAE account.
5. Choose Live View from the main menu and then select Choose Art from ArtTracker.
6. Select an artwork you have placed in ArtTracker and then click the Live View button at the bottom of the My Art page.
7. Hold up phone to see the target through the screen of your device.
View the target through the screen of your phone to see your chosen artwork image superimposed over it rendered to scale and in perspective. Capture the AR image you see to create a View, name it, and then FAE provides the option to either immediately upload it to My Views, or to create a new Project, assign it to the new View, and then upload it to the website. It also provides the option for you to either email the View you have created from the app, or later from the website, to your designer, consultant, or significant other.
If you would like to view a video demo of how the FAE Mobile App works, click here. Since the video was produced, the app has been enhanced to allow you to create and name a new Project during the View’s upload to the website.
On May 31, 1911, Marjorie Evelin Johnson was born in Upland, Texas, a small town that no longer exists, in Upton County. Her father, a country doctor who worked for Humble Oil, constantly moved his family around West Texas to wherever Humble oil workers needed his services. Most likely from the stress of being in almost constant motion, Marjorie’s parents divorced in 1924 and her grandmother moved the family to Fort Worth where they lived in rental housing until 1938. Marjorie graduated Paschal High School in 1925 and that next year, at age 15, started working for Southwestern Bell Telephone Company. That same year, pursuing her childhood interest in drawing, Marjorie started studying art with Fort Worth artist, Mrs. G.W. Greathouse.
In 1934, while still working with the phone company, Marjorie decided to attended Texas Christian University. After taking classes at TCU for two years, she dropped out when Blanche McVeigh, a respected artist and printmaker who was a principal of the Fort Worth School of Fine Arts along with Evaline Sellors and Wade Jolly, was impressed enough with her artistic talent to invite her to enroll in their school. Under Jolly’s tutelage, she became a skilled landscape watercolorist. In the late 30’s and early 40’s she exhibited often with other prominent Fort Worth artists like Bror Utter and Veronica Helfensteller. As with many serious artists in the Dallas and Fort area during that time, she traveled to Colorado Springs to take classes at the Colorado Art Center in 1942.
In the latter part of 42, to do her part, Marjorie joined the WAVES and was sent to Norman Oklahoma for training in radio communication and celestial navigation. In 1943, she was assigned to Pensacola Naval Air Station in Florida for the next three years where she taught young airmen these skills and painted and drew whenever she had time off.
After WWII, she moved to New York City to attend the Art Students League under the GI Bill. In 1947, to be sure she could stay in the city, she took a job with New York Telephone and continued to take classes at the League through 48.
She vacationed on Martha’s Vineyard in 1950 and chose to capture her impressions of the island in pastel. She returned in 52, and this time chose watercolor, possibly more suited to the Island atmosphere.
She continued the artistic life in NYC and in 1950, met and married an experimental film maker and educator named Francis Lee. Marjorie’s artwork documents their vacations and trips out of NYC over the next 14 years with works from Minnewaska, New Rochelle, Carmel, East Hampton, and Woodstock in NY, Colorado, Glacier Park in Montana, and New Jersey.
After working for the phone company in NYC for 27 years, in 1974, she moved back to Fort Worth introducing her husband to life in Texas. Although while living in New York, she continued to show in important Texas and regional shows, retirement provided the opportunity to focus on her art. She started exhibiting with the Evelyn Siegel Gallery in Fort Worth and entering competitive shows all over Texas. Nine years after their move, Marjorie and Francis divorced and he moved back to NYC.
About the time Marjorie entered the Art Students League in NYC, she fell in love with color and was won over by Modernist art. During her vacations she filled drawing books with plein-air, almost fauve like, pastels and watercolors of ebullient trees, fast flowing rivers, and assemblages of hyper-colored rocks. Upon her return to the city, her favorite pastels and watercolors would often evolve into studies for oil paintings.
After she returned to live in Fort Worth, she started creating brightly colored collages, cut from home-made and commercial colored papers, repurposed watercolors, and often combined with watercolor washes, ink, and sometimes pastel. They were always bright in color and evolved over time from representational to totally non-objective.
Marjorie gave up entering competitive shows in 1984 and her last one-person show was held at Evelyn Siegal Gallery in 1994. She died in a Fort Worth nursing home on February 1, 1997.
FAE is pleased to offer artworks from William Campbell Contemporary Art, by painter and sculptor Richard Neidhardt (1921-2009). These artworks span decades of an accomplished career, and yet not one could be recognized for its date. Artist-cum-globetrotter, Neidhardt tapped into a distilled aesthetic that remains fresh.
Neidhardt was born in Chattanooga, TN, and served as a transport pilot for Pan American Airways during World War II. He earned his BA from the University of Tennessee at Chattanooga, his MFA from the university of Florida, and his Ph.D. from Ohio State University. He taught at Austin College in Sherman, TX, from 1967 to 1986, retiring as professor emeritus. He was awarded several grants, and his artworks are widely included in Texas museum collections.
His time in service as a transport pilot came to be deeply influential to Neidhardt’s artwork. He flew routes through Europe, South America, Africa, the Middle East and India, gaining a worldliness that informed his artwork throughout his career. Neidhardt processed these influences by distilling them down to their essence. He describes this philosophical geometry in his artist’s statement,
“Most of my earlier paintings were formal architectural and semi-abstract statements with little subject matter. This approach would evolve into mostly non-objective geometric explorations with shape and color. Increasingly, I became fascinated with subtle interrelationships existing between forms, colors, space and time. Simplicity and attention to edge became hallmarks.”
There is a rigorous analytical quality to Neidhardt’s paintings, which he describes as “the aesthetics of mathematics and the energy of color”. His paintings would often feature an underlying grid and a precise Mondrian-like application of color, perhaps owed to his 1953 Fulbright Award for research in the Netherlands. Neidhardt spent a year at the Rijksacadamie in Amsterdam, developing his philosophical geometric painting style.
Neidhardt’s world travel continued as he was awarded a 1973 Cullen Grant for Research in Egypt, a 1975 Richardson Grant for Research in Southern France, and a 1982 Richardson Grant for Research in Greece. It was in the 1980’s that he began sculpting in the round, creating bronze casts of wood carvings that synthesized architectural and artistic visual cues with a sardonic twist.
“They came from a side of me aware of being a fellow inmate of the earth with all of its absurdities, a possible justification for being a part of this great mystery. My output was prolific; many images were cast in bronze. I presented singly, conditions and attitudes common to mankind, and did so as simply and honestly as possible. The presentation is universal and generic, often a formal frontal stance with possible roots in Egyptian, Minoan and late archaic Greek sculpture.”
One such pan-cultural edition is Gothic Man, 1987, standing 8 inches with the help of several flying buttresses. The Gothic Man’s posture echoes that of a Greek kouros, less idealized. His architectural armatures enable him to stand taller, and at the same time keep him cemented in situ.
Neidhardt’s 1989 small bronze edition Golfer reads as a wry interpretation of a Pharaoh’s sarcophagus. The symbolic crook and flail are replaced with golf clubs, and Pharaoh’s headdress re-imagined as a golf ball and tee. The smoothed-down face quotes those of Minoan fertility totems. With this sum of references, does Golfer add up to a retiree’s kingly sendoff, or totem for a fruitful outing?
Neidhardt’s artworks have been shown in galleries and museums, in solo exhibitions at the Art Museum of Southeast Texas (1991) and The Grace Museum (2001). In 2010 Austin College memorialized their late professor with the exhibition “Richard Neidhardt: 1921-2009: A Retrospective of Sculpture and Painting”.
Neidhardt’s pan-cultural approach has seemingly immunized his artworks to the pitfalls of dated colors or trends. His paintings’ clean lines and colors have a perpetually contemporary energy. His sculptures are keenly arranged amalgams of classical elements. With his global visual language and “mathematics of aesthetics”, Neidhardt’s artworks have both humor and a timeless appeal.
Valley House Gallery is pleased to offer a number of early works by San Antonio artist, Jim Stoker.
Jim Stoker was born in 1935 in Nash, Texas, and reared in Atlanta, a rural town in East Texas. He received a BFA in Applied Art from The University of Texas at Austin in 1957, and an MA in painting, drawing, and printmaking from New Mexico Highlands University in 1962 where he studied with Elmer Schooley. Stoker painted throughout a teaching career which culminated in a 30-year tenure at Trinity University in San Antonio.
The Stoker works we are offering range from the early 1970’s to the early 1980’s, when he was teaching at Trinity University in San Antonio. Stylistically, in the early 70’s Stoker’s oil paintings tended towards representational landscapes with figures at work. His compositions often incorporated incongruous animals milling around the workers or the tools they used.
In the mid-70’s the subjects and style of his work changed to flat colorful interiors, resembling paper cut out collages more than paintings.
In the late 70’s and early 80’s, he and his wife would spend the Summers in Santa Fe, NM where he painted a series of paintings focusing on the architecture and its relationship to the natural occurring and the planted flora.
He later said of that time, “you used to see Hollyhocks everywhere in Santa Fe in the late 80’s. You would think it was the state flower there were so many. Now, you hardly see any when traveling around that area.”
His work became more representational in style and focused more on nature and the environment.
Jim and his wife Elouise are both naturalists who helped form the San Antonio, Texas chapter of the Sierra Club. Stoker’s efforts to protect the natural fauna and flora around San Antonio led to a series of paintings he titled No Place to Live:… The theme of this series pointed to the animals’ plight when humans are taking over their natural living spaces.
Jim’s current paintings primarily focus on the riparian zone of the Guadalupe river near a cabin that has been in his wife’s family for generations. He has created a unique technique he calls Confetti Splatter and uses it to place an underpainting for his naturalistic landscape compositions.
Visit FAE’S Artist Info page about Jim Stoke here. On FineArtEstates.com you can browse available artworks and read more about this Texas Artist.