Talk:Monoprinting

I debate this article. monoprinting should mean a print that only can be produced once, hence the name - mono for 1.

Unless anyone can say otherwise

i agree. monoprinting is not the same as block printing or etching. each print is unique. theres also no mention of monoprinting in the article on printmaking.

Monoprinting means that there is one central image that is changed by color, or pressure of ink. It is never created the same way twice.

more??

this needs more added to it, maybe about famous artist or something. it seems a bit short —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.16.220.7 (talk) 18:39, 24 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Monoprinting, Monotyping?

What's the difference between Monoprinting and Monotyping? Bus stop 13:38, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Clearer now I hope. I'd forgotten about this article. It needs a picture.Johnbod 00:21, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for answering my question. I've been looking into it. I see the distinction. From a technical point of view the difference is slight. Bus stop 05:29, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, there is overlap, and despite what the first line says, some confusion is inevitable. But the "permanent marks on the matrix" is a real distinction, which unfortunately is not used consistently by all. I think the art historical world goes with monotype & the artist & dealer world more with monoprint. I don't know how old the term Monoprint is. Antony Griffiths in Prints & Printmaking, the standard intoduction, calls the traced ones monotypes & doesn't mention monoprints. Both articles need a bit more. Johnbod 11:39, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder if it would be beneficial to the reader and to Wikipedia to merge the two articles. There could be redirects from both terms to the article. I'm having trouble thinking what the article could be called. Monoprinting/monotyping? Monotyping and monoprinting? How about, Monoprint/monotype? I don't think the "-ing" suffix is necessary. The first sentence of such a merged article could point out that there is a distinction between the two terms. My reasoning is that the concepts are so similar that the reader should digest the whole issue in one reading. Bus stop 13:55, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure I'm in favour of that, not least because the title would have to go one way or the other - and/or article titles are generally not allowed. And I think since there is a difference it's better to have two, and explain the overlap. No-one ever seems to call Castiglione-type monotypes monoprints. Howard Hodgkin's prints are mostly hand-painted, by a printer/assistant, following a model carefully. Where they fit in I don't know.

I think you may be right about Warhol btw; there are others we could probably substitute. On the name, we should be consistent with the other techniques, which like Painting and Drawing are -ings. Etching, Engraving and Woodcut are unaffected of course, but there are screenprint, Lithograph etc. Johnbod 14:50, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, separate articles, but I would like to tie them together. I may try to add something to each tying it to the other.

As for hand colored prints, I don't think they are monoprints or monotypes.

Warhol used what I have heard referred to as a blotting technique in his commercial illustrations. Whether it was printing or not I don't know.

Also, the article mentions that lithography lends itself to monoprinting. I think that to use lithography for monoprinting would tend to be more burdensome than using either the relief or the intaglio printmaking methods, because the stone would have to be "re-etched" between changes. This would not be the same sort of straightforward altering of imagery as in the other two methods. Bus stop 16:08, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I was thinking of hand-finished/added-to lithographs (ie initially printed normally), but I don't know how common these have been. Take it out by all means. On the hand-colouring I suppose it is a question of degree & method. Johnbod 16:45, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wayne Rooney ?

Used by Wayne Rooney? Realy? 31.185.143.103 (talk) 20:49, 26 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Done It was vandalism. Now fixed. Eno Lirpa (talk) 12:18, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Dead Link

Under the section References, there is a link entitled " Photo of monoprinting Washington Printmakers' Gallery Retrieved March 25, 2011" which when clicked returns a "Not found, error 404"

Bdylan0505 (talk) 18:32, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed with this edit. >>BEANS X2^t 09:33, 19 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]