From a  recent email.... "I am studying photogravures and don't understand the difference between photogravure and photo-etching. Can you clarify this for me?"
Embarrassed not knowing the answer, I turned to Jon Goodman, who replied....

Photogravure is an intaglio printing process where a continuous tone image (photograph) is etched into a copper plate by means of a gelatin resist and an aquatint or screen substitute. The gelatin resist controls the etching in a manner that creates a true continuous tone rendering of the image being etched. It is a continuous tone ink printing process. There is no conversion of the “grayscale” into “half-tone” dots.  “Photo-etching” as the word is commonly used is an intaglio process where line or tone is created through what is essentially a black or white “half-tone” process. The etching process either etches the plate or not, there is very little (no) variability in the tone due to the uniformity of the depth of etch.  Gray tones are either created by converting them to “half-tone” or by etching the plate multiple times for varying amounts of time to create different depths in the plate.
The gelatin resist used in photogravure is essentially a “Carbon Print” that has been transferred onto a copper plate instead of a piece of paper. It is the act of the transfer that allows the gelatin to control the etching in a continuous manner. Since the exposed “face” of the gelatin is in contact with the copper plate the hot water development allows the gelatin to adhere to the copper in thickness that is in proportion to the amount of exposure received.  If a gelatin (or other) was simply coated onto the copper and then exposed (as in photo-etching) and developed (no transfer) it would be virtually impossible to render a long continuous scale of tones.

Thanks Jon! 

Posted by mkatzman at 09:02 PM | Permalink

While the focus of this site is traditional, I think Pieter Myers' comments are noteworthy.....
 
Photogravure enjoys a reputation for excellence in crafting the photographic image. Perhaps because it is a relatively new among graphic media, photogravure has yet to exhibit the freedom of expression that has become the norm in much older graphic techniques. Complicating this evolution, photogravure is a chameleon, encompassing many manifestations of printmaking, and is therefore hard to classify.  Since this confuses almost everyone in the art world, people tend to focus on what they know, i.e., beautiful prints of classic black & white images. As a result, publishers, collectors, and galleries tend to overlook much of the contemporary work being done, such as creative interpretation of the original image and, yes, color. So I would like to open up the dialogue and suggest that it might be time to update the definition of photogravure.
     I recognize that definitions are not popular in today’s ecumenical art world. Yet the blurring of the boundaries between media diminishes the uniqueness and identity of any of them. Because of this, some exhibitions don’t know what to do with photogravure, and interestingly, the American Color Print Society will not accept photogravure no matter how obscured the original photographic image may be. Should we care about this? And how far away from  “photographic” can a subject be before it is no longer a photogravure? Regardless of how you feel about historical purity, I submit that photogravure is uniquely suited to contemporary subject matter, social realism and (why not?) Pop Art.  In my own work I prefer to stay within the traditionally held definition of hand pulled copper plate photogravure in order to keep the integrity of the medium intact. But I am not comfortable with photogravure as primarily a purely photographic medium.  I like to balance the scale, and even tip it more to the graphic side by using a variety of darkroom and etching techniques. If the subject suggests color, I use color. Already I have lost the photogravure traditionalist. Perhaps “avant-garde photogravure” will remain a contradiction in terms. If this is the case, the medium may even be able to hold the line against the horrors of digital manipulation.
    I hope I have stirred up some discussion with these thoughts, but it is not the photogravure police we should be worried about.  The real battle is with all the mechanical reproductions sporting fancy names that masquerade as original prints.  

Pieter S. Myers
www.psmyers.com

Posted by mkatzman at 10:53 PM | Permalink

"I have been working in photogravure since the early 1970's when I viewed the first unveiling of the Edward Curtis' Prints in Boston, Mass. I had the privilege of reprinting the Edward Curtis plates in Santa Fe, NM in 2005. Holding the original early 20th Century copper plates was daunting. The plates had an ageless connection to not only a race of people and an American visionary but to a process that was considered the finest form of printing a photographic image. The early masters all had their images immortalized in this process. The experience led me to set up my own atelier printing limited edition portfolios.

In 2006 I was introduced to Photopolymer Gravure, the 21st Century evolvement of Photogravure. The process utilized contemporary chemistry and physics without the deleterious affects of acids and caustic chemistry; thus environmentally safe. Imagery and positive preparation are done digitally, ground asphaltum is replaced with stochastic screens and acid bath bite becomes a water wash out. Printing with an etching press and intaglio inks is the same as copper. The final print maintains the lushness and depth of tone of copper gravure while creating crisper detail and cleaner imagery. The evolution of photogravure in the contemporary polymer process facilitates the process for the artist wishing to create timeless imagery."

Jon Goodman believes that the digitalization of photography could be the demise of photogravure if an adequate and affordable digital alternative to preparing film positives from digital files is not incorporated.

With regard to the aquatint, traditionally a screen is created by ‘dusting’ the plate with rosin.  New ‘prefab’ screens incorporating stochastic technology however are available today further streamlining the process.  At Lothar Osterberg’s studio in Brooklyn recently, I was able to compare a traditional dust-grain print with a stochastic screen print.  Under a loupe, the traditional method is superior.  Without magnification, however, the differences were much more subtle.

It’s hopeful to believe that these advancements will ensure a healthy future for the photogravure process rather than chip away at the organic qualities that bring it to life.

Please feel free to comment on this topic…..

Posted by mkatzman at 11:14 PM | Permalink

Recently we were asked if the image below is of a photogravure plate.  We posted the question to some experts and here is what they had to say...

note: The image in 'blue' tone is simply the photograph of the plate 'inverted' in photoshop to illustrate a positive impression of the plate.

Continue reading "Is this a photogravure plate?" »

Posted by mkatzman at 09:11 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)

August 15- 19 2006

A 5 day intensive workshop covering the dust grain method of photogravure (Talbot Klic).

Continue reading "Jon Goodman Photogravure Workshop" »

Posted by mkatzman at 05:21 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)