Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This may be better off in the fine arts forum. However I have to weigh in, I have seen some nice prints that are printed onto a canvas material and stretched like a regular canvas would be. Those look nice. In fact I have one.
I am a fan of prints. If you want to get prints of classic artists: van gogh, renoir, etc. There are nice prints to be had that you can frame for not too much money.
Buy original handmade art by the artist who created it. Giclees are really color xeroxes. They are true to the artists pigments thanks to technology, they are inexpensive to manufacture but they do not qualify as FINE ART unless they are digitally conceived and created that way by the artist and printed in tiny editions. The added brush stroke texture is just another inkjet perk. You do not have the original painting you have a digital copy of the painting. Copy's sell for pennies on the dollar when brought into the secondary market.
Buy original handmade art by the artist who created it. Giclees are really color xeroxes. They are true to the artists pigments thanks to technology, they are inexpensive to manufacture but they do not qualify as FINE ART unless they are digitally conceived and created that way by the artist and printed in tiny editions. The added brush stroke texture is just another inkjet perk. You do not have the original painting you have a digital copy of the painting. Copy's sell for pennies on the dollar when brought into the secondary market.
LOL, agreed. think if you grew up in a time before giclees this is the feeling. I see them as glorified poster art.
edited to add: I do have some in my house because of budgetary reasons! would way prefer originals.
A photographic copy of "The Potato Eaters," will look nice framed and matted on your wall. Don't be concerned with brush marks. Gallery owners are regularly asked the value of a piece of art someone owns. For some reason knowing the value seems important to some people, especially if they picked it up for practically nothing.
When I was in school, someone brought a picture of a famous painting to one of the art professors, asking him the value. They actually though it was THE painting instead of just a photographic copy. He said it was worth maybe 50 cents. They thought he was lying. He may have been since it was worthless.
I admit I am not very well versed in art but gaining an increasing appreciation of it ever since I visited the Van Gogh museum in Amsterdam. I was so impressed by "The Potato Eaters" that now I want to get a copy of this incredible painting for my apt. Now I want to ask you guys who are into art, is it better to get a "print" of the original or a oil painted imitation? What are the advantages and disadvantages or going either route? How authentic can prints look? Prints are way cheaper but I'm guessing the oil painted version, which is several hundred dollars, is much more "authentic"?
Get a good quality print. Oil-painted copies are just more expensive - they are not more, but less, "authentic".
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
