On Fri, November 5, 2010 11:47, Kim Mosley wrote: > It is my understanding that with etchings (like what Rembrandt did) they > are > more valuable with earlier numbers because the plate wears down. > Lithographs > are the same no matter what part they are of an edition (like > photographs). The behavior of contact-ink-transfer printing obviously varies with the method. I'm sure etchings and wood-blocks wear significantly within the number of prints relevant to edition size. I'm not sure that actual stone lithographs don't also have a significant wear factor. (Some artists deliberately confuse photo offset lithography AKA ordinary modern commercial printing with stone lithography.) -- David Dyer-Bennet, dd-b@xxxxxxxx; http://dd-b.net/ Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/ Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/ Dragaera: http://dragaera.info
