Choice of theme

My choice of theme was guided by a decision to work from nature (not from a photo) and my love for flowers. Practical aspects like availability of the model for close study were also relevant. I finally chose a pot of tulips for the simplicity and elegance of the flowers’ shapes, and remained fascinated by the visual pattern of leaves and petal shapes in my composition throughout the project.

Technical approach

I started with some sketches and detail studies in the sketchbook to get a feeling for what interested me most about my tulips, and then undertook some research to see how others had approached the depiction of tulips (see Blog post: Inspirations: Tulips in print http://ocaprintmaking1.blueconcretemoon.com/?p=1842) .

I particularly liked the painterly approaches in Julia Aires’ monoprints and the etchings by Josefina Hernandez and Louise Stebbing, whereas I found graphical approaches, eg. linocuts, less appealing. Consequently, I opted for a painterly approach in my project, in particular using monoprint for colours. I was also interested in collagraph, but knew I’d have to experiment and improve my technique quite a bit, as my prints in part 4 were not so successful.

My tutor had warned me not to choose a method I wasn’t comfortable with, so I was prepared to be open minded and try something else if it did not work out. But I wanted to develop my abilites with collagraph and so decided to give it a try.

The first step was to make a set of collagraph and experimental printing plates. Starting from a master drawing on the first plate, I created three collagraphs: The first was made from cloth with PVA glue applied in a different number of layers, aimed at creating tonal values from differences in ink retention of open vs. closed areas. The second and third were heavily textured plates made with sand, burlap and joint compound. All three plates were meant to be inked intaglio style, i.e. wiping away excess ink from the surface and printing with the ink that was left on the plate.

I also made a plate from corrugated cardboard for texturing monoprint backgrounds, and a hot glue relief on cardboard as an alternative to backdrawing the tulip contours.

Then followed an explorative stage to get to know my plates and my subject as it printed. I worked mostly monochrome, making painted and textured monoprints, collagraphs and styrofoam relief plates from the collagraphs. Next I experimented with multicolour and combination prints. I explored painted monoprints with wiped backgrounds in the style of Julia Ayres and tried overprinting monoprints with collagraph plates. I also experimented with denatured alcohol, sisal grass, strings and the corrugated cardboard plate for textures.

I used different kinds of paper (drawing paper, Thai Kozo, Canson, Strathmore, Lenox, Vellum printmaking paper) and compared the results of hand burnishing vs printing with the press.

The final series

After the experimental stage, I reviewed everything done so far in an attempt to identify the most interesting approaches and techniques for the final series of prints. I liked the monotype overprinted with collagraph best because it gave both strong colour and interesting texture to the image. For the process, I decided on Canson Edition paper, printed damp with the press.

Initially I wanted to combine prints from two of the collagraph plates, each one printed in a warm and a cool colour combination. But over the course of the printmaking, my preference switched to prints from the cloth/PVA plate, which I used to make a series of prints in 4 different warm vs cool colours.

Overall, I’m quite satisfied with the result and think that the prints are technically well executed and visually pleasing. I like the unusual colour choices I made and am happy that I was able to make successful prints from a complex collagraph plate. During the experimentation phase I had learned quite a lot about the techniques involved, so that in the final series, most of the technical glitches, like dampness of the paper, sequence of steps, registration and monopainting issues, were resolved.

Reflecting on the project as a whole

The project was a big one for me and I got quite involved, juggling with so many different approaches to my subject. At times I felt overwhelmed but in the end I managed to focus on what I liked best and produced prints of good quality.

With hindsight, I think I might have stayed more open regarding the subject. Very early, I locked in my choice of subject and viewpoint, and then explored the composition in various technical approaches. As a follow up, it might be interesting to develop a range of different views of the tulips and then make a series of prints in my chosen technique, with varying colours and maybe even varying paper sizes. The problem is again the time limit for completion of the level 1 degree modules, which requires me to finalize this module now, but I might get back to the idea at a future point in time. The relevance of this learning point should not be restricted to printmaking, because a more varied approach to a chosen subject would be a good strategy for me to adopt in other artmaking techniques as well.

I also felt a degree of professionalization in my practice developing over this final project. For example, in the final stage I had my paper prepared in advance – a number of sheets torn to size, placed at hand. I had my equipment all set out. I had a simple improvised registration technique that worked sufficiently reliable. I knew how to handly the Akua inks and special effects from combining intaglio inks with liquid pigment. Towards the end of the project, I felt very much in control of the process. Nevertheless, I tried to stay open minded and critical towards what I produced. This resulted in the decision to select all prints from the same collagraph plate, in different colour versions, rather than combining prints from two different plates.

Review of the course

I did this course as a voluntary add-on module to the painting degree and feel that I’ve learned a tremendous lot. This concerns not only printmaking techniques, but also how to structure the creative process and develop an idea into a printable motif. At some point, I felt restricted by the limitations of my materials. For example, I found that my favourite inks, Akua water-soluble intaglio inks and liquid pigment, did not work very well for painted monotypes. I developed a technique to create marks with a rough brush, but it wasn’t truly what I had in mind because it did not feel like painting freely with colours. Only now at the end I found out that a particular blender medium exists to address exactly this problem. I should have researched that earlier!

For the course as a whole, I’m pleased to see that I produced a large amount of interesting prints in a variety of techniques. It’s a nice feeling of accomplishment when I look at the gallery of prints, not only those selected for the assignment but also all the experimentation and sideways I took. I see the course as a guided introduction, both technically and into the creative process, and feel it’s going to be like a seed that will take more time and effort to bring out the full potential of what it initiated.

I see my shortcomings and that I was only partially able to respond to tutor feedback. One problem is that tutor feedback arrives at a time when I’ve already worked into the next project, my mind full of new stuff and ideas, and then have difficulties to set aside time to go back and review the previous project in light of tutor feedback. Other things in the feedback I understood and tried to take on board, but had practical difficulties with, for example with regards to drawing connections between what I do and what I see in artists works. Another big problem is my very limited time available, because I’m doing OCA courses on top of a full time job. All my time must be managed and organized productively, and that time pressure isn’t good for playful exploration which would provide the setting for creativity. Since I can’t change the situation for now, I will have to learn to be creative “at the push of a button” which might in itself be a valuable ability.

So there are still many aspects to develop further. For example, I think that I did not do enough sketchbook work, both regular drawing practice and using the sketchbook to work out ideas. My tutor also made me aware that I need to integrate the reception of artworks into my practice, but I struggle to do this because I’m very focused when I’m working. Currently I am alternating between studying artist works and developing my own stuff, with only the beginnings of mutual influence.

In the future, I hope that I can build on what I’ve learned in the course and continue printmaking. I’ll be taking the painting module next and maybe there’ll be room to integrate the two approaches. For now I feel somewhat exhausted because the workload of the course was intense, but after a little rest I guess I won’t be able to resist to get back to the printing press later on.

At first I was disheartened because I had put so many work in making the five plates and then making all kinds of combination prints. I did not know how I might arrive at a series with inner coherence fom what I’d done so far. Then I decided to take a more systematic approach and analyse why there the prints did not cohere and which were the successful bits in my prints so far.

As reasons why the prints did not look like an ensemble I identified

– different paper types with different surfaces and different hues of white
– different paper sizes: Some cut to fit through the press, others with varying margins
– a whole lot of different techniques applied in explorative fashion, i.e. somewhat at random
– experimentation with colour, sometimes successful and sometimes not, resulting in arbitrary colour combinations when a set of prints was placed next to each other

My conclusion was that I needed to address these points and develop a concept that integrated the most interesting and successful bits of my prints so far.

The first aspect was choice of paper. I wanted to use the same paper for my series, all cut (or torn) to the same size, which would provide a formally unifying characteristic. But paper choice depended on the choice of technique. For example, with the collagraph plates, I would have to use the press and dampen the paper, which worked best with medium to heavyweight printmaking paper. On the other hand, fine monoprint textures came out best on white drawing paper because of the very smooth surface. If I was to use a technique that required the press, I was at the same time limited to a paper format that fit through the press, which meant that the side margins could be no larger than about 2 cm.

With this in mind, I went through my prints and identified the monoprint and collagraph combination prints as my favourite technique. I also found the effects of warm vs. cold colours interesting. I liked Chine Collé as well, but it tended to soak up the ink of the collagraph overprint as if there was no overprint at all in those areas.

Finally I came up with a concept for the series of four prints. I wanted to use two collagraph plates, the cloth plate with tonal values and the joint compound plate with the cracked background. I wanted to print these over monoprint flowers with clean background. I also wanted to juxtappose warm vs cold colour hues. The paper I liked best for collagraph was Canson Edition (250 gsm) which is fairly bright and not overly rough so it would bring out sufficient amount of texture. It would also look good with the embossing effecs of the joint compound plate.

The two collagraph plates had the tulip image in mirror orientation, because I accidentally worked out my master drawing directly on the cloth plate and corrected the error by reversing the image for the other plates. I thought that including prints in different orientation would add an element of interest.

I planned to make 8 prints in total from which I’d hopefully be able to select four as my final series. I prepared four sheets of paper for the first plate, then somewhat arbitrarily started with the joint compound plate and a set of cool colours.

Monoprints with the joint compound plate

For the first print, I had dampened all 4 sheets in advance, and then began inking the perspex plate. After printing the first layer, I needed about an hour for inking and wiping the collagraph plate, and the paper dried considerably. Unfortunately, the collagraph plate misaligned after registration and I didn’t notice, so the print came out at an angle.

The print looked good nevertheless but I learned that I’d better ink both plates first, then dampen the paper, and then print both layers consecutively. I took great care to handle the paper with clean hands and subsequently tried to avoid unnecessary movements once the collagraph plate was placed on the monoprint, to avoid the risk of accidental misalignment. I also managed to work out the two pressure levels for my press and was able to reliably switch between the low setting for the thin perspex plate and the high setting for the 0.6 cm collagraph plate.

The next collagraph was printed onto a painted monotype, again with a cool colour choice. I had found my wiping of the collagraph background too thoroughly, compared with the intense tone of earlier prints from that plate, and so tried to apply more ink and wipe away less. This print had more background tone and registration was successful

The third monoprint was painted again, but I added medium red to the flowers and some yellow into the green for the leaves for a livelier effect. The overprint was in the same blue-black ink mix as before. This time, I inked only the background because I found the burlap texture less successful. I wiped the background still more gentle and the resulting print looked the way I wanted. From close and enlarged, the background cracks can be seen as embossments in the paper.

The fourth print from this plate was made in the same technique, but with a choice of warm colours. The painted monoprint used orange-red for the flowers and yellow-green for the leaves, and the collagraph background was inked in Van Dyck brown, then gently wiped.

I found the two prints quite successful and thought that two corresponding prints from the cloth collagraph would make a nice ensemble.

Monoprints with tonal value collagraph

Thinking through the prints so far, I wondered whether I could also integrate prints with dark background into the series. I had particularly liked the transparent black background and the blue coloured tulips in earlier prints, so went ahead with a corresponding monoprint. I painted the tulips with Akua Liquid Pigment into the dark intaglio ink, using the rejection effect between the inks to create white and coloured marks with the brush. The monoprint was overprinted with the collagraph inked in blue-black and wiped intaglio style. As with the previous plate, I wanted to retain some more of the ink in the background area and therefore wiped thoroughly over the flowers and gently over the background.

The next two prints were made as painted monoprints with thoroughly wiped background, one in cool colours, the other in warm colours. I’m including the pictures of the monoprints because I found the change resulting from the collagraph overprint so stunning

By this time I began hesitating between two approaches: Making a series from two prints off each collagraph plate, or building the series from the cloth and joint compound collagraph only. Placing the two light background prints from this set next to the two of the earlier set, they corresponded nicely, but the ensemble was less interesting than I had hoped, compared to the three prints so far from this set.

I reflected what might work well as a fourth print in this set, and thought I’d like one with a coloured background, so I’d have two with coloured and two with white base colour. I wanted to stay with the warm colours to match two cool, two warm colour prints, and concluded that with the brown background colour, I’d have to choose a relatively light colour or the brown would sink in or look “dirty”. I remembered how I liked the warm yellow of the only multi-layer monoprint I made. I was unsure whether this would look good but wanted to give it a try.

I think the brown collagraph overprint has a stunning effect and completely changes the colour effect. I would not have anticipated this effect and find it very successful. As a result, I decided to stay with the second set of prints as my series for this project.

The series of four prints

I’m placing the four prints next to each other to show the ensemble effect. Of course I know that there would have been a million more possibilities to explore and compared to that, I might be judged of having made obvious choices. But I think this is a successful series of prints, technically well executed with interesting colour effects. I will discuss the potential I see for further development in the supporting statement in a separate blog post.

Multicolour monoprints

Two-layer painted monoprint and its ghost

I first inked the plate yellow, then drew into the ink with a stick to create some white lines and areas. Then I overprinted the plate with a painted monoplate, using the negative mask to protect the yellow background.

The yellow underprinting provides a unifying ground for the strong contrast between violet and blue-green. Subtle texture and colour effects result from the white areas in the underpainting. I liked the warm yellow colour. The ghost came out a bit weak but might work as an underpainting for other layers.

Backdrawing over monoprint

The first layer of this print was the ghost of a masked monoprint from a multicolour plate, hand burnished on drawing paper. Then a backdrawing was applied.

The backdrawing gives the print the necessary definition. I like the irregularity of the colours in the background and think it’s quite an interesting result.

Multicolour monoprint with hot glue relief plate overlay

This print was made from a loosely inked plate, then overprinted with the hot glue relief. The plate moved over the print which created partly double outlines. The resulting print is quite vibrant and lively.

Multicolour monoprint with backdrawing

The perspex plate was inked in transparent black, then painted into with Akua Liquid pigment in red and yellow. The liquid pigment rejects the intaglio ink whick results in white brushmarks with subtle hints of colour. The backdrawing was supposed to give more definition to the image, but the effect came out a bit weak. The lines are rather gray than black because I slightly thinned the ink with transparent base.

Texture monoprints

Textured monoprint with backdrawing

I placed synthetic wood shavings onto an inked perspex plate and printed this onto a sheet of newsprint, with the intention of texturing the plate for a subsequent monoprint.

After painstaikingly peeling of the shavings off the plate, I painted into the plate with green and red intaglio ink, using a brush to stipple over the surface. This printed as the first layer onto drawing paper, hand burnished. A backdrawing was supposed to give more definition to the tulip shapes, but again I found the effect too soft to be successful.

Monoprint with sprinkled background texture

The first layer of this print was a ghost of a tulip flower monoprint with white background. Then I inked the perspex plate in transparent black and sprinkled denatured alcohol with a toothbrush on top. I placed the positive mask on the print and overprinted it with the black plate. Finally a backdrawing was added.

The sprinkled background was a bit too weak and is hardly visible, but the technique might be interesting for future exploration. The alcohol dissolves the ink and creates spots in the plate which don’t print.

Multi-layer combination monoprints

Combination monoprint with masking, texture, chine collé and backdrawing

The first print was made on top of a light gray ghost from an earlier print on white drawing paper. I placed the positive mylar mask onto the print and draped some string over the entire area. Then I placed a plain transparent black perspex plate on top, turned it all upside down and ran the arrangement through the press.

Next I cut out tulip flower shapes from thin blue paper scraps and glued these firmly onto the print, using the brayer for pressure. Finally a backdrawing was applied.

I think this is a successful and interesting print, there are lots of elements I like:
– the unusual and unrealistic colour choice
– the dynamic effect of the light background lines from the string
– the backdrawing which is dark enough to stand out and has an interesting quality of line

The second print was made as a ghost from the above plate. I pulled off the mask and the string, then painted and splashed some denatured alcohol over the plate. Unfortunately the print came off too weak. I guess this was because I used dry paper with a rough surface (Arches text wove). Despite release agent and printing with the press, the ink did not come out dark enough, so the texture effects are only visible from close or in enlarged view.

A later overprint with a coloured flower ghost and a backdrawing improved contrast and definition, but the overall impression remained a bit too faint.

Monoprint and collagraph combination prints

Multicolour monoprints, wiping technique

The multicolour monoprints with wipled background became my favourite single-technique prints. They were made by inking the perspex plate over the transparent tulip drawing, either with a brayer (for plain surface) or with a brush (for brush textures), and then wiping away the entire background area with tissue paper and cotton buds. The interest comes from “insufficient cleaning” – there are still some ink remains which print as faint hints of background colour. I liked these prints so much that I resisted the temptation to add backdrawing.

Backdrawing over multicolour monoprint

This monoprint was made by inking the plate with the brayer, wiping away the background, and then applying a backdrawing to define the leaves and the flower petals.

Here is another monoprint, this time with the flower painted and printed on damp Canson Edition paper with the press. The left image shows the original print, the second is after a transparent black (gray) backdrawing was applied. The backdrawing is soft and can better be seen when the image is enlarged.

In both prints I like the backdrawing, but it’s hard to say whether the prints work better with or without backdrawing. This suggests that backdrawing doesn’t make much difference if it is as subtle as in the second print. On the other hand, it does change the overall visual effect. I think it adds a little strangeness to the print and moves it from a more painterly style a little closer to a coloured drawing.

Monoprint and collagraph

Finally I combined the monoprint flowers with the collagraph plates. For the first combination printwith the tonal collagraph, I chose  I chose one of the flower monoprints with wiped background. In the resulting print I did not like the colour spots in the background area.

Therefore I made the three subsequent monoprints with the negative mask or cleaned the background area very thoroughly. In these follow-up prints I also varied the colour temperature between cooler and warmer red and green tones by adding yellow to the green and orange-red to the blue-red base colour.

I wiped away much of the background ink from the collagraph to obtain a subtle background effect. The tonal values looked differently depending on whether the flowers had been inked with the brayer or with the brush. On the smooth colours from the brayer the collagraph print came out clearer, but I also liked the liveliness of the texture mix in the painted flowers.

Monoprint, chine collé, collagraph and backdrawing

The last print presented here was made in multiple consecutive steps:

– The plate was inked orange-brown, then tulips were painted into the inked plate with denatured alcohol to create white brush marks. This was printed on damp Vellum printmaking paper with the press

– The paper was re-dampened, then dark red and orange tulip shapes were cut out and placed as Chine collé onto the paper (for easier registration).

– The cloth and sand collagraph plate was inked in black for the background and green for the leaves, then wiped intaglio style. The print was made with the press. This simultaneously glued the tulip shapes firmly onto the paper.

– Finally a gray backdrawing was applied to improve the definition of the leaves.

The resulting print would certainly look better with a different choice of colour for the monoprint and collagraph layers. I think I made the mistake of mixing inks for my orange-brown, rather than using clean colours, so the result became a muddy base colour, which wasn’t improved through black and green overprinting.

On the other hand, I definitely like the Chine collé effect and despite the muted colours, the print has interesting visual qualities resulting from the textures. I think it was an important learning experience and future prints in this technique should come out better if I improve the colour choices.

Monochrome monoprints

Painted monoprint and its ghost

Hand burnished on dry smooth drawing paper (170 gsm), with release agent to improve ink transfer

Monoprints with textured background, using the positive mylar mask

Taking up the technique developed in part 1 of the course, I placed the corrugated cardboard onto the inked perspex plate and made a first run through the press to texture the plate. Then I used the plate and the positiv mylar mask to pull some prints. I aligned the mask with the outline drawing placed under the perspex plate, but it was difficult to handle the mask, as it was so thin and flexible and full of ink on one side.

1) Hand burnished print on dry drawing paper
2) Ghost on dry Thai Kozo paper (ca. 70 gsm)

3) Hand burnished on dry Thai Kozo paper. The thin paper captures fine details of the background without the need for a press or dampening the paper
4) Ghost printed with the press on damp Canson Edition paper (250 gsm)

I had the idea of later printing a second layer to colourize the positive shape, but actually didn’t because I found other approaches more interesting.

Using the masks with the press didn’t work so well because only modest pressure can be applied, otherwise the mask is squeezed and slides over the plate, making clean registration very difficult. The effects from the sliding mask may be nice as accidents, but I didn’t want to pursue that further.

Ghost prints from the textured plate and the mask

The ghost prints were made after the masked prints, having pulled off the mask from the perspex plate

1) The perspex plate itself
2) Ghost from that plate, on white drawing paper hand burnished
3) Second ghost from the plate, with release agent and the press on damp Canson Edition paper
4) Print directly off the mask, with release agent on dry drawing paper, hand burnished

Styrofoam relief prints

Collagraph plate 1 did not have much haptic texture because it was created flat with just layers of PVA glue, but plates 2 and 3 had quite a bumpy surface. I made impressions from the collagraph plates onto thin styrofoam sheets by running them through the press, which created a relief surface from which I subsequently printed by hand.

The third styrofoam sheet was incised by drawing through the transparent master drawing and working out the lines with the back of a brush directly into the styrofoam sheet.

1) Onto damp Canson Edition paper
2) and 3) Onto dry drawing paper

Cardboard collagraph prints

Further experiments with the cardboard collagraph

1) Perspex plate textured with the cardboard collagraph in a run through the press, then inked with release agent. Hand burnished on dry drawing paper

2) Re-inked and re-textured plate, then tulips painted into the ink over the transparent drawing. Release agent applied. Hand burnished on dry drawing paper.

I wasn’t overly satisfied with the results from the cardboard plate textures. Technically, the plate was difficult to handle and slid around when I ran it through the press on top of the perspex plate.

Painting into the textured plate didn’t look very interesting either as a monochrome print, although I liked how the brush marks transferred onto the paper. I guess the problem was the recurring issue with too much similarity between figure and ground: Same colour and similar texture characteristics and colour distribution within the texture.

Hot glue relief print

A simple tryout print in dark red from the hot glue relief plate, printed by hand onto dry all purpose paper.

Inking and printing the plate was cumbersome. Firstly, my rollers were only 1/3 as wide as the plate so I constantly smeared ink into the background where I did not want it. Secondly, I did not know how to register the plate because of the surplus area around the border line. I eyeballed but anticipated difficulties when printing in layers.

Prints from the collagraph plates

Plate 1: The cloth and PVA collagraph

I made a first print from the plate as a relief print to see whether any interesting relief texture would result, but it didn’t. So I proceeded to properly inking and wiping the plate, then pulled prints with the press onto damp paper.

I was quite happy with the results and found that the image came out nicely. There was an interestingly textured background and good contrast between figure and ground. The tonal values were not as controlled as I had imagined, but there was enough tonal contrast to make the flowers stand out clearly.

1) Plate inked with a brayer as a relief, hand burnished on dry Strathmore Printmaking paper (medium weight)
2) Plate inked deeply with a brush and wiped intaglio style: Ink stays in the rougher areas of the plate and was wiped away from the smooth parts. Then the plate was printed on damp Canson Edition paper with the press.
3) and 4) Same technique, same paper. Print and ghost from newly inked plate. For the ghost I used release agent to improve ink transfer.

Initial collagraphs from plates 2 and 3

Plate 2: Sand and cloth collagraph

Plate inked intaglio style, wiping away excess ink with tarlatan. Then printed on damp Canson Edition paper with the press.

The textures are deeply embossed and look interesting from close, but the overall impression confirmed what I had anticipated after the styrofoam relief print off this plate: The texture of tulips vs background did not have enough variation to make the tulips stand out clearly. Colour or a combination print would be required to obtain a clearer visual effect.

Plate 3: cloth and joint compound background

Multicolour inking, intaglio wipe, printed with the press on damp Canson Edition paper

I inked plate 3 in two and three colours respectively to improve the difference between figure and ground. I chose “cold” vs “warm” colour combinations for the two prints. I particularly liked the effect of the cracked joint compound layer in the background, which created both an embossement and an interestig colour texture.

Sketchbook studies

My intention was to try depicting my subject in a variety of media and from different angles. I wanted to see which aspect would capture my attention and interest the most. Apparently this was the visual rhythm of the 5 flowers and their leaves, and the simple but very elegant shapes. Drawing the green leaves was not easy at all. I tried to simplify a bit but did not work with any particular printmaking approach in mind.

I worked with oil pastel, graphite pencil and coloured pencil on white and coloured backgrounds. I also made a watercolour sketch and two charcoal studies. The charcoal studies were inspired by the tulip drawings by Lilian Westcott Hale which I discovered in my research on tulip depictions (described in the blog: ). I focused on tonal values and the figure/ground distinction. I tested the effect of light vs. dark figure before the background in three additional small charcoal sketches.

After the research and my initial sketchbook drawings, I felt unsure which technique I might choose for my subject. I liked the painterly approach in Julia Ayres’ monoprints and the two black & white etchings best, compared to the botanical and the graphical approaches.

I thought that monoprints might be the way to go, but also felt inclined towards collagraph. I had been somewhat disappointed by the results of my prints in part 4, at the same time felt I’d barely scratched the surface of the potential of that technique.

My tutor had warned me not to experiment with a technique where I had difficulties, because the aim of the final assignment was to produce successful prints. So I was a bit torn whether I could take the risk of getting nowhere with collagraph.

But I had one leftover plate from part 4, which I had made to explore a technique that’s based on different ink retention depending on the smoothness of the plate surface. I had covered the plate with a layer of fine jersey cloth and the idea was to add layers of pva glue to seal part of the surface so that some areas would retain ink whereas others would reject ink. Tonal gradations are supposed to result from varying numbers of pva layers – more layers increasingle close off the surface and retain less ink. Wiping such a plate means to clean the smooth areas which would then print as light values, whereas the rougher areas would print as darker tones.

The plate was quite large and its size pleased me. I decided to take a jump and try the collagraph approach.

Making the printing plates

The master drawing

I made a soft pencil drawing directly onto the plate. The surface permits erasing and redrawing. I aimed to indicate the darker areas which I would later seal with pva glue. This drawing would become my master drawing. Before proceeding to the pva layer, I transferred the design onto transparent paper for use in subsequent stages.

First collagraph plate

The pva glue was applied in several layers. I left out the darker areas of my composition, applied about 2 or 3 over the mid tones and about 4 or 5 over some light spots and the background area. Between layers, the plate had to dry for about 2 hours. Finally, I applied three layers of shellac on front and back sides, with 4 hours drying time in between. So it took a few days until the plate was ready to use. The shellac added a yellow tone to the plate. The final picture shows the plate after the first intaglio style print with dark, medium and light areas depending on ink retention of the surface.

Mylar masks from the master drawing

I transferred the drawing from the master transfarent onto a blue thin mylar sheet with black sharpie, then carefully cut out the shapes to retain both parts of the drawing as positive and negative masks. I had the idea of using them as masks in layered combination prints.

Second plate: Sand and cloth

Since the drying times of my first plate were long and I had more masonite boards in the same size, I thought it would be a good idea to experiment some more with textures for collagraph plates. I transferred my master drawing onto the plate with carbon paper. I used the negative mask and sprinkled sand onto a layer of PVA glue in the shape of the tulips.

Next I transferred the drawing onto a piece of burlap the exact size of the plate. I cut it out carefully and glued the negative shapes onto the plate for background texture. I applied several layers of PVA glue on top to smooth out the surface a bit. This plate was intended to print as an intaglio and I wanted to have it somewhat smoother to put less strain on the wiping tarlatan which would tear otherwise. The plate was finalized with 3 protective layers of shellac on both sides.

For reference I’m including the plate after the first intaglio print

Third plate: Cloth and joint compound

I made a third plate on masonite board, using the positive cloth for the tulips. I temporarily glued the positive mylar mask onto the cloth and applied a thick layer of joint compound with a spatula over the background area. The joint compound cracked during the drying process, and I found this was a very happy accident because the resulting cracks looked so interesting. After the plate was fully dried, I applied 3 layers of PVA glue to close the surface pores and another 3 layers of Shellac to make the plate water resistant.

I intended to use the plate as an intaglio plate as well. The picture shows the plate after one of the initial prints.

Additional collagraphs from cardboard and hot glue

For the fourth plate, I took up a technique I had tried out in part 1: Using corrugated cardboard to texture a monotype printing plate. I cut a piece of cardboard slightly larger than my printing area and glued torn pieces of cardboard on top.

The fifth plate was made with a hot glue gun. I came across stencil making with hot glue while researching scrapbook techniques for crafters and thought this might work as an alternative to backdrawing. The idea was to print a line relief onto an image. I decided to use a cardboard support, rather than making a free stencil, because I wasn’t sure if the glue stencil would be sturdy enough on its own. There were also some elements of the drawing unconnected to outlines, which I wanted to retain. Finally, using cardboard was practical because it spared me having to use a heat resistant working surface.

Technically, I transferred the line drawing onto the cardboard, retraced the lines with a sharpie, then followed them with a hot glue gun. The technique consumes quite a lot of glue and it takes a bit of practice to get at least moderately smooth lines. I reworked some areas to make sure the lines were complete.

Both plates were then sealed with three layers of PVA, then three layers of shellac on both front and back. They bent initially but over the course of applying the layers on both sides and drying time in between, they straightened out flat again.

Making all the plates took almost two weeks, despite working on several plates simultaneously, while others were drying. With the five plates, I would have lots of approaches to explore and lots of combination possibilities.

With hindsight, having all these plates created a breadth of approach that was hard to handle. It was also not possible to build on experiences made with one plate to improve subsequent plates. But I think it increased my chances of finding a combination of techniques that would result in successful prints.

Then I wanted to look around a bit how others approached the subject and did a google web search with ‘tulip print’ as my search term. Quite a few images came up and I selected several I liked. They represent a variety of different approaches. With a few exeptions, they were made from contemporary artist, with many contributed by craftmakers. I guess studying towards a painting degree I’m expected to search for “real artwork” but it’s not that easy to locate tulip prints by respected artists.

But actually, I do like what I found so far and find it inspirational already. I’m not yet in a position to know what I’m going to develop, and I also see the danger of muting myself by looking too much at what others have produced already.

Painterly approaches

I found two prints which I suppose are both monoprints, the first by Amy Akers, the second by Julia Ayres.

The Akers print reminds be a bit of Van Gogh paintings, because the lines are so fluid and irregular even for the harder materials like wood and ceramic vase. It gives a very lively effect to the image.

Ayres is the author of a monotype printmaking book and has much experience with the technique. The print includes a chine collé blockprint (the eye) which I think doesn’t very well integrate with the print as a whole. The monotype strongly corresponds to the tulip intaglio print below, maybe that plate was also used in the print. I particularly like the faint remainders of the red background colour from the wipe away technique.

In the ‘painterly’ section I also include these two etchings, the first by Josefina Hernandez, the second by Louise Stebbing. I think both are very exciting compositions with an unsusual viewpoint, the first by cropping and the second by using the wilted flowers as models.

The Hernandez print makes me think about collagraph prints that use different ink retention properties of various surfaces. The flowers would be a surface retaining much ink, whereas the light background results from a smooth surface which was wiped almost clear. This is apparently the same principle at work as in etchings when collagraphs are used as intaglios!.

The Stebbing print is quite different, and I don’t understand the technique. It’s a wonderful play with transparency, lines and shapes, very mysterious in effect and very atmospheric.

“Botanical” approach

I found a print by Sally Winters which reminded me of botanical drawings and watercolours by Elizabeth Blackadder, which I’m including here for reference. It’s in the tradition of botanical drawings, of which I’m including an example by Jacob Marrel (made c. 1635-45)

It’s not exactly what I’m interested in doing, but I still like it because it’s so delicate. Sally Winters’ print is an etching printed in colour . There are only only traces of a darker colour for outlines which creates the very fine style.

Winter presented some pressed flowers and another colour etching. I’m finding both very inspiring although I know it’s just too fine and delicate for me. I’m more at ease with a bold and expressionist way of working. But I do appreciate the visual qualities and in some of my tulip sketches I think there comes up something more sensitive and detailed that what I usually do.

Graphical approaches

Here I’m referring to bolder, black-and-white or restricted colour approaches that look a bit like poster prints. I guess this is the most frequent approach to linocuts, in particular single-colour linocuts. It promotes a stylized depiction that reduces detail and tonal values.

The first print (ted tulips) by Abigail Davidson is a linocut, but could have been made with stencils and looks a bit like the potato prints I used to make as a child. Nevertheless it’s nice in its simplicity and how it includes different stages of the tulip flower life cycle. The second print from “Anna’s Drawing room” impressed me by the loose cutting and the bold shapes.

It’s in stark contrast to the other two linocuts from Lapwing Printworks (left) and Rosamund Flowler right) with much more delicate and detailed cutting of lines, shapes and patterns. The Lapwing print has an interesting composition with a strong angle, although the cutting is a bit bland and not so interesting. The Fowler print reminds me of linocuts by Jacques Moiroud (as explored in resent research, see http://ocaprintmaking1.blueconcretemoon.com/?p=1819). I appreciate the technique but can’t help feeling that it’s overdone, there’s just too much pattern going on and this is a bit disturbing.

I also found a linocut of just the flowers with a pattern depicting the texture of the petals (published under the name Prionta Lionoile). It has the character of a detail study, but by enlarging it to take up the entire image space it becomes an almost abstract composition and the cutting patterns begin to create tonal values of light, medium and dark red. It is an interesting approach. I guess it works best on only a detail of the flower – in a group of tulips with leaves the image might become too busy overall.

Tulips in art and design

The initial google search was followed by a search on the collection of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, search term ‘tulip’. There came quite a lot of hits but most were not directly relevant for what I was interested in, for example more botanical drawings or depictions of tulips on vases or in rugs. I still found a few items I’d like to include here for a closer look.

Two drawings captured my interest, one is a study of tulips by Charles Demuth and the other a charcoal drawing of several tulips by Lilian Westcott Hale. At the time of writing this, I’ve done some more tulip studies myself. I realize that the Demuth studies are much looser that what I’ve done so far, but I seem to have been similarly preoccupied with the tonal values of leaves. Demuth apparently wanted to capture this in the watercolour wash. By contrast, I tried to capture this with hatching at first, then making colour studies with coloured pencil, and finally tried watercolour washes. Demuth’s drawing is looser and more impressionistic, whereas I tried to depict the shades the same way I saw them. I think Demuth’s drawing with wash is more sensual than mine are, but I feel still too preoccupied with analysing what I see before I can let go.

The Lilian Westcott Hale drawing inspired me to try out charcoal as well. What I admired in the drawing was the interplay of figure and ground, with white shapes before dark ground vs dark shapes before white ground. The light contours in the dark tulip shapes are intriguing. I tried to do something similar in my sketches but found it hard to erase the charcoal to obtain white lines inside a dark shape. I guess I was a little too impatient, it probably takes much more time and patient study to achieve the kind of results as seen here.

I even found one tulip print in the Metropolitan Museum’s collection, it’s an aquatint by
Joe Andoe. I do not particularly like the print, because I think it’s a bit kitsch with the stylized clouds in the background. Nevertheless I’m impressed by the simplicity of the flower shape which is enough to make it resemble a tulip.

And then finally, the tulip chair by Eero Saarinen which was really a surprise because I’m quite sure to have seen it already but have never been aware where it came from. Now having studied the forms of the tulips, I recognize its elements! It’s how the stem sits in the center of the flower, and it’s so smooth, straight and perfectly even in form. The green leaves have folds and wavy shapes that are really like the armrests of the chair. It similarity just makes me smile.

Web references (all accessed 6 April 2015)

Amy Akers, Pink Tulips http://www.artspan.com/art/2345921-98287/Printmaking/Giclee/Still-Life/pink-tulips.html

Joe Andoe 1993 Portfolio of 6 Aquatints: Tulips http://www.metmuseum.org/collection/the-collection-online/search/487026

Julia Ayres artist website http://ayresprintmaking.com/

Elizabeth Blackadder Irises watercolour http://stilllifequickheart.tumblr.com/post/3971525312/elizabeth-blackadder-irises-2010 )

Abigail Davidson https://www.pinterest.com/pin/363454632399481219/

Charles Demuth 1926 Tulips (watercolour and graphite) http://www.metmuseum.org/collection/the-collection-online/search/481640

Anna’s Drawing room http://annasdrawingroom.co.uk/2014/03/07/lobsters-on-a-postcard-please/

Rosamund Fowler – The tulip vase http://www.woodengravers.co.uk/gallery76_01.html

Josefina Hernandez http://www.josefinahernandez.com/printmaking

Prionta Lionoile https://www.pinterest.com/pin/165436986284139715/

Jacob Marrel ca 1635-45 Four tulips watercolour botanical drawing http://www.metmuseum.org/collection/the-collection-online/search/337769

Lapwing Printworks https://folksy.com/items/4002-Tulips?shop=yes

Eero Saarinen Tulip Armchair 1956 http://www.metmuseum.org/collection/the-collection-online/search/482088

Louise Stebbing at Skylarkstudios http://skylarkstudios.co.uk/index.php/prints/detail/49/

Sally Winter Etchings https://www.etsy.com/listing/77904353/tulips-a-botanical-etching-with-aquatint
Sally Winters Facebook Page https://www.facebook.com/pages/Sally-Winter-Etchings/352823438130241

Lilian Westcott Hale undated, Tulips http://www.metmuseum.org/collection/the-collection-online/search/10979 Charcoal