
The consistency of the ink mixture would have made my old print-making teachers cringe, but I forged ahead. Since I have no press, I planned to rub the print, using my favorite doorknob that I had for woodcuts. Since I was using real glass, I thought I should get a healthy coat of ink on it so I could transfer the image without needing to use much pressure.

Well, all the faces I made in the background mostly fused into unrecognizable shapes, but I had two that were pretty much intact. Once the ink dried (an eternity since it was so thick) I was able to doctor it a little with watercolor. I subdued all the goulish looking shapes in the background and put some subtle washes on the figures. Thus organized, the marks made some sense and I was happy. There's nothing like a print to put an idea across.
Next, I made a watercolor painting of the same subject. I like it, but it looks mundane compared to the print. It adds one more element to my already confused sense of myself as an artist. Does technical ability trump raw emotion? I don't know.
1 comment:
I like the print better. It is grittier, which I think is appropriate for the subject.
I had to laugh reading about your improvised tools and ink. Not funny really, but it just seemed so you. (I mean that in a good way!)
Will the Tides have any more print workshops? I missed the last batch and keep wanting to try it... 'round here, it's always expensive and reserved for art students. Hmph.
Post a Comment