Prints from Plexiglass...

Chris' question about printing from Lucite plates instead of using traditional metal ones prompts me to call attention to one of my art mentors of years past, from whom I learned to print WATERCOLOR monoprints using MULTIPLE Plexiglass plates. Here is the web site that gives a brief explanation of the technique mastered by master printmaker Dennis Olsen:
http://nmaa-ryder.si.edu/collections/exhibits/ monotypes/olsenobj.html

I'd be happy to entertain any questions about this unique technique, which requires access to an intaglio printing press. But the only way to really learn it is by trial and error, and the best way is by attending one of Olsen's classes, either in this country or in Italy, where he teaches in the summer.

Some of your prints are colored (if I remember correctly) - have you tried using several different inks on the same plate?Or do you only use separate plates? I remember reading somewhere one could use oil based intaglio ink with water based relief ink on the same plate - have you ever tried something like that?

Cheers;

Chris

'Clyde S. Dale' < This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it > wrote in message

Of course it's a simple matter if you have a good saw - table or band. For the thinner stuff, I simply score it multiple times with a (scary words) box cutter type of utility knife then break it over a straight edge as you would when cutting ordinary glass. And like metal plates, it's essential bevel the edges of the plate in order to avoid damage to the blankets used in intaglio printing.

I don't know what that is.

Not the ones I did as engravings, unless you think of sepia colored ink as colored. Most of my color prints are done with other methods and required multiple plates and multiple press runs with all that implies for registration etc.

I haven't with the acrylic plates OTHER than when using multiple plates for watercolor monoprints. But there is no reason you can't do this with an intaglio plate. There is a term for it that I can't really recall correct spelling of - something like 'a la poupe' but that doesn't seem right either if you translate 'poupe' as 'poop' in English. In any event, whatever the term is, it means 'applying color to small areas of the plate using the finger.'

I haven't and I know of no reason you'd want to use different kinds of inks on the same plate. It's hard enough to ink each plate locally using this method, and get it to look right for each print run in the press. It's akin to making each print an 'original' since it's almost impossible to ink uniformly each time you print the plate.

There are essentially two schools of thought regarding 'printmaking:' 1. Do it by the book practioners who, because they often are master printers, need to have each print in the edition look as close to the 'artist proof' as is humanly possible with hand-pulled prints. 2. My own 'school of thought' which says that rules in printmaking, like in all of art, are there to be broken, thereby rendering the art experience playful fun (as opposed to the boring repetition of a master printer's job). I've never worried about whether all the prints in an edition look identical.

In the process of printing multiple plates, a la Dennis Olsen's watercolor prints, what is not said (I didn't see a reference to it) is that Olsen USUALLY prints the last plate with an oil-based grey-shade of ink in order to add the darkest shadowed areas to the print. Three watercolor plates are followed by one oil-based ink plate.

Because he prints from four separate plates (yellow, cyan, magenta, grey) there is the problem of registration. That's taken care of by having each plate fit snugly into a 'frame' made from the same thickness of acrylic as the plates. It seems a misnomer to call his prints 'monoprints' in the same sense that prints made from one pass through the press are 'monoprints.'

Intaglio prints that go through the press but one time don't need subsequent registration, and therefore the process is much simpler to the finished print. Sorry if this seems to have gone astray from the notion of printing both water and oil based inks on the same plate. If it works for you, and you are happy with the result, that's really all that matters, IMO.

You don't mean 'etching' - or do you? If you're etching the Lucite, I'm curious what you are using?

You might simply try rolling ink onto the 'raised' part of the plate with very little pressure on the brayer. If that doesn't work, try printing the engraved detail in one pass, followed by a re-inking with a roller and making another press run - which means 'registration' considerations.

I didn't think the watercolor would work after inking since there is virtually no way to get all the oil off the plate after inking with the oil base ink. I doubt that qouache will work any better for same reason.

Speaking of monoprinting - not engravings:

Getting watercolor to 'stick' to acrylic can be tricky, even in the best of circumstances. To ease that chore, one needs to learn to use 'ox gall' and other wetting agents. And it helps if the acrylic is a particular kind that has some toothiness to it, like frosted acrylic. This is not a concern when using oil-based inks. I'll see if I can dig out my old studio notes on the particular brand/kind of acrylic used for watercolor prints.

Speaking in general:

The beauty of working with clear acrylic as a printmaking plate is that the transparency allows all sorts of flexibility when creating an image from overlapping plates. You can stack the plates on a light box or hold them against a sunny window in order to 'register' the images of multiple plates before printing. That's how Dennis Olsen gets all four plates to work as one to create his images - he uses a light box with all four plates stacked at times to guide the application of color to each plate in turn.

In fact, if you don't mind the image being reversed when it's printed, you can COPY any image drawn on paper by laying the acrylic on top of your drawing as you scribe (or paint) the design into (onto) the acrylic. It's a great way of turning a photogaraph, for example, into a printed 'engraving' - albeit with the image reversed. If the image needs to be correctly oriented, then all one need do is have the photo or drawing printed on paper in reverse before doing the engraving. For example; you can scan the image into your computer and reverse it, then print the reversed image onto paper for use as the 'pattern.'

Whoops, not 'etching'; I think 'engraving' would be a better word. I'm using a drypoint needle, and/or whatever else comes to hand. Sandpaper might be useful for an aquatint substitute...

I know, and given my chaotic work habits, techniques requiring registration are pretty low on the option list...Though I would suggest doing it in the opposite order (relief first, then the intaglio part

It's funny, clearing the acrylic of unwanted ink was easier than clearing copper. But that may be because I don't polish my copper sufficiently (those bad work habits again ) while the acrylic is pretty smooth. But I also used too much easy-wipe, which lightened the lines unacceptably. I'll give it another try when I've thought it through better.

Enjoy your turkey (and football?). It's not a holiday up here

Thanks for the sentiment.

I did 'turkey out' indeed, but football I can take or leave. I don't have TV at home but of course it was on at my sister's yesterday to the Cowboys vs Dolphins game. I'd much rather watch the game today between historic rivals Texas vs Texas A&M, a college game, since I am a Texas-ex.

Good luck with the printing.